![]() ![]() Moscow promised to build 2,300 Armata tanks by 2020, enough for about eight tank and motor rifle (mechanized) divisions. In June 2015, the Russian government unveiled the Armata, which was designed to replace older T-72B3 and T-80 tanks in the arsenals of the Russian Ground Forces. Production problems with the Armata, however, could allow the “Burlak” tank to take its place. The tank would be cheaper and easier to produce, while still being a formidable adversary to NATO forces.Ī “new” tank concept has surfaced in Russia, about 10 years after the country abandoned it in favor of the sleeker, newer-looking T-14 Armata tank.The Burlak builds on past Russian tank technology to produce a tank that has many of the same advantages as the Armata.Russia’s difficulty building new T-14 Armata tanks could provide another tank concept, the Burlak, with the opportunity to take its place.As with the loss of the T-90M, the incident suggests deep-seated problems in the Russian military. The ammunition caught and exploded, destroying the tank two other T-72s were also damaged in the incident. According to Russian news source Baza last week, Russian technicians in Belgorod accidentally set the T-72 tank they were repairing on fire. Incidentally, there is a worse way to lose a tank which Russia also demonstrated recently. Given that this is the tenth T-90M to be lost, it is not clear whether the hyped T-90M is any less vulnerable than earlier models, especially when used without any tactical sense. Russia’s Uralvagonzavod recently announced that it had made a fresh delivery of T-90Ms and that their factory was working around the clock to supply more. However, the distinctive downward-darting flame and smoke trail left by this type of munition does not seem to be visible on the drone video, so this explanation is also doubtful. In an alternative narrative, one analyst on Twitter says the T-90M was in fact destroyed by a top-attack smart artillery round, a type we first saw in July. He then hit an extremely small, moving target - the gun mantlet – resulting in the destruction of the tank. If he missed, the tank crew would return fire and kill him at once, as firing would make his position obvious. If the AT4 claim is correct, the shooter must have had extremely steady nerves to wait until the tank was within range, knowing that he only had one shot. a known vulnerability Russian Ministry of Defense This type of protection only works against RPG rockets with vulnerable fuses, not weapons like the AT4.Ī closer look at the protective 'skirt' around the base of the T-90Ms turret. There is a hint that the Russians know about the risk of shots to this particular area, with some images showing an anti-RPG ‘skirt’ around the base the T-90 turret. Either the system was not installed, or it was not used correctly.or it did not work. The latest Russian version is claimed to be so effective it can tackle not just low-speed rockets and missiles but tank rounds coming in at hypersonic speeds. This is similar to Israel’s highly successful Trophy system – no Trophy-equipped tank has ever been damaged by an RPG. The T-90M is supposed to be defended by Russia’s latest Active Protection System, which detects incoming rounds with radar and knocks them down with interceptors. The shot should never have made it that far. The gun stabilization system needs the barrel to be as light as possible, so the armor tends to be thinner here. The mantlet was identified as a weak spot in earlier Russian tanks. The Ukrainians claim the shot hit under the T-90M’s gun mantlet, the metal shield around the gun itself. It is normally called an ‘anti-armor’ rather than ‘anti-tank’ weapon because the small warhead is not (usually) powerful enough to breach the frontal armor of modern main battle tanks. AT4 is a pun on the weapon’s 84mm caliber it is an unguided weapon, weighing just 15 pounds, compared to 48 for the Javelin, with a range of 300 meters compared to the Javelins 2,000+. and Sweden, is a lightweight shoulder-launched anti-armor weapon. The Swedish-made Saab AT4, sent by the U.S. Ukrainian news says a Ukrainian soldier scored the kill with an AT4 anti-tank weapon. Two different stories are circulating, and both may be false. We do not know for sure what weapon destroyed the tank(s). It is possible Russia lost two of its prized T-90Ms at the same time. This also smokes badly, suggesting another kill. Basic T -72s cost about $500,000, the new T-90Ms reportedly costs around $4.5 million.Ī closer look at the video shows a second vehicle farther away hit at the same time as the first. Now it is playing exactly the same game with more expensive pieces. This is the lesson Russia failed to learn in the early stage of the war.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |