MBT's

[Imp]

Not really surprised I remember the US testing mid 70s weapons against T-72s I think it was after the cold war & confirming what Britain & Germany had told them.
Think it was 3 tanks & they used all ground based antitank weapons & the A-10s cannon, result was all tanks damaged & impared but still battle capable when engaged frontaly.

[MarkSheppard]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE1U...youtu.be&t=106

Iraq has combined a T-55 turret with a 57mm S-60 Flak Gun chassis to create a sort of towed mobile turret (at 1:46 in video)

They've also combined a Humvee with the twin 23mm Weapon station from a BTR-94 (at 0:46).

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Things I have my eye on or another way of saying I'm txxxxxxg these...
Iran - It appears they have a new tank running around, and I would concur it's armed with a 125mm MG based on the Russian armor they already possess. It does look somewhat like the T-90MS though I wouldn't expect it to be of the same quality. The tank is named the KARRAR.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/augus..._12608161.html

Also...
They've improved their M60 tanks as well.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2..._51205163.html

Thailand - This topic lead Ukraine to get their act together to produce the T-84 OPLOT M that they had contracted to do.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/janua..._10501162.html

India - This next shows how long I keep my data and where I left off. This still needs some verification of the development and implementation of these reported improvements to to the ARJUN.
http://trishul-trident.blogspot.com/...-mk1a-mbts.htm

Belarus - This one of my "OWOO" bottom line is they get a enhanced and much improved T-72.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/july_..._11507161.html

Well you'll have to excuse me while "I hit the rack" one more to go. That "rack" is still more comfortable then say a "foxhole" you ground pounders use. But none of it is as good as the USAF gets!!

Almost forgot...

CIA - Consider this a bonus. And note the date as 2004 making this one of the newer released sources on this topic.
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingr...0001066239.pdf

Regards,
Pat

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Things I have my eye on or another way of saying I'm txxxxxxg these...
Iran - It appears they have a new tank running around, and I would concur it's armed with a 125mm MG based on the Russian armor they already possess. It does look somewhat like the T-90MS though I wouldn't expect it to be of the same quality. The tank is named the KARRAR.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/augus..._12608161.html

Regards,
Pat

You might find the following interesting as did I: "And the T-90 is tough. In a rare glimpse of the machine in combat in February, an American-made TOW anti-tank missile fired by rebel fighters hit a Syrian T-90 but appeared to only cause minor damage." Source: http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...he-world-17468.

And the following: "For all the videos coming out of the Syrian civil war, a one minute, 31-second clip of a U.S.-made TOW missile slamming into a T-90 tank got more attention than most. In the video uploaded in February, Russia’s most advanced operational battle tank met one of the United States’ main tank killers on the battlefield." Source: https://warisboring.com/what-a-t-90-...65f#.aeve4bu32.



"The Research Institute of Steel, a Russian company which makes reactive armor plates for the T-90, was pleased. The crew lived, according to Russian press reports, and the only visible damage was on one of the T-90’s two Shtora transmitters, which hanged limp in the photograph."

I take away that the Russian T-90 is a hybrid of a T-80 turret mounted on a T-72 chassis, so it should not be much of a surprise of an Iranian variant as they plenty of T-72's (or had). Furthermore, the real prize is the reactive armor, do the Iranian produce quality reactive armor, and finally, that Syrian crewed T-90's Shtora's electro-optical jammer either failed to jam the TOW or, it did not switch on when fired upon. Do the Iranians have capable ECM?

As Iran becomes more embedded with Syrian forces and Iraqi forces, what they put on the battlefield is of utmost concern.

=====

[RightDeve]

Originally Posted by shahadi

You might find the following interesting as did I: "And the T-90 is tough. In a rare glimpse of the machine in combat in February, an American-made TOW anti-tank missile fired by rebel fighters hit a Syrian T-90 but appeared to only cause minor damage." Source: http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...he-world-17468.

And the following: "For all the videos coming out of the Syrian civil war, a one minute, 31-second clip of a U.S.-made TOW missile slamming into a T-90 tank got more attention than most. In the video uploaded in February, Russia’s most advanced operational battle tank met one of the United States’ main tank killers on the battlefield." Source: https://warisboring.com/what-a-t-90-...65f#.aeve4bu32.



"The Research Institute of Steel, a Russian company which makes reactive armor plates for the T-90, was pleased. The crew lived, according to Russian press reports, and the only visible damage was on one of the T-90’s two Shtora transmitters, which hanged limp in the photograph."

I take away that the Russian T-90 is a hybrid of a T-80 turret mounted on a T-72 chassis, so it should not be much of a surprise of an Iranian variant as they plenty of T-72's (or had). Furthermore, the real prize is the reactive armor, do the Iranian produce quality reactive armor, and finally, that Syrian crewed T-90's Shtora's electro-optical jammer either failed to jam the TOW or, it did not switch on when fired upon. Do the Iranians have capable ECM?

As Iran becomes more embedded with Syrian forces and Iraqi forces, what they put on the battlefield is of utmost concern.

=====

I'm curious to know what exact TOW version is that, aside from "US made....main tank killers", especially if its tandem-charged or not.

From the document "Lessons Learned from the Ukrainian-Russian War" (at the other thread), it seems T-90 is indeed mighty enough to withstand standard single warhead ATGM, but since tandem-charged warhead is quite a rarity on these theaters outside of the producer nations (let alone be used against them!), we can't be quite sure how modern MBTs fare against these specialized anti-reactive armor missiles.

I somehow believe modern MBTs would still not do well against modern anti-tank missiles, i.e with multi-charged warhead.

[Suhiir]

Then there's always the question of just where was it hit? Someplace that would have caused destruction or in a bustle rack?

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

Then there's always the question of just where was it hit? Someplace that would have caused destruction or in a bustle rack?

From the article: "We saw the wire-guided missile bob toward the T-90, which was parked on a crest between two low-slung buildings. Then the missile hit the tank’s turret with a tremendous flash which sent up a cloud of smoke. One of the crew members bailed and the video ended."

=====

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well I'll throw in my "two sense" here...
1. The T-90 pictured does not appear to have the latest version of the SHTORA Protection System on it which is now in a 2nd GEN and am not a 100% but possibly 3rd GEN currently or under development.

2. That TOW had to be a TOW 2A which was the first of the 2nd GEN TOW Systems.

3. The source (With our approval.) of supple was from Saudi Arabia which received in. never mind from one of my refs (Verified by SIPRI as well.)

"Saudi Arabia signed two foreign military sale (FMS) agreements with the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) in December 2013. The first FMS worth $170m covers 750 BGM-71 2B TOW missiles, seven Fly-to-Buy TOW2B missiles, 1,000 BGM-71 2A TOW missiles, seven Fly-to-Buy TOW2A missiles, and the support equipment.

The second FMS worth $900m covers 9,650 BGM-71 2A TOW RF missiles, 4,145 BGM-71 2B TOW Aero RF missiles, 91 TOW-2A Fly-to-Buy missiles, 49 TOW-2B Fly-to-Buy missiles, and the associated equipment."
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/tow/

Kind of obvious to me they received several thousand more advanced TOW systems and the BGM-71 2A is not a training missile because you can buy them separately and they'd be cheaper as well. The date of the sale and delivery to the Saudis and Syrian rebels makes this a "home run" to me.

Rest of the Refs...
http://www.businessinsider.com/syria...n-syria-2016-2
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sile-WINS.html

Regards,
Pat


Trying to beat the edit clock!! Was trying to find something quick on SHTORA and came across this on the incident being discussed. Read the next VERY CLOSELY if true, though I stand buy what I posted above, I don't know if I should leave it as "those dumb M..... and end it as you choose or just laugh!!!! SUHIIR already knows that answer, me being a retired "Bubblehead", yeah I did both.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...who-wins-15638

[shahadi]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Well I'll throw in my "two sense" here...
1. The T-90 pictured does not appear to have the latest version of the SHTORA Protection System on it which is now in a 2nd GEN and am not a 100% but possibly 3rd GEN currently or under development.

2. That TOW had to be a TOW 2A which was the first of the 2nd GEN TOW Systems.

3. The source (With our approval.) of supple was from Saudi Arabia which received in. never mind from one of my refs (Verified by SIPRI as well.)

"Saudi Arabia signed two foreign military sale (FMS) agreements with the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) in December 2013. The first FMS worth $170m covers 750 BGM-71 2B TOW missiles, seven Fly-to-Buy TOW2B missiles, 1,000 BGM-71 2A TOW missiles, seven Fly-to-Buy TOW2A missiles, and the support equipment.

The second FMS worth $900m covers 9,650 BGM-71 2A TOW RF missiles, 4,145 BGM-71 2B TOW Aero RF missiles, 91 TOW-2A Fly-to-Buy missiles, 49 TOW-2B Fly-to-Buy missiles, and the associated equipment."
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/tow/

Kind of obvious to me they received several thousand more advanced TOW systems and the BGM-71 2A is not a training missile because you can buy them separately and they'd be cheaper as well. The date of the sale and delivery to the Saudis and Syrian rebels makes this a "home run" to me.

Rest of the Refs...
http://www.businessinsider.com/syria...n-syria-2016-2
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sile-WINS.html

Regards,
Pat


Trying to beat the edit clock!! Was trying to find something quick on SHTORA and came across this on the incident being discussed. Read the next VERY CLOSELY if true, though I stand buy what I posted above, I don't know if I should leave it as "those dumb M..... and end it as you choose or just laugh!!!! SUHIIR already knows that answer, me being a retired "Bubblehead", yeah I did both.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...who-wins-15638

That's a lot more than two cents.

======

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don already well understands all this, he's just happy that I listened to him about year ago on (That post is out here somewhere.) of "breaking up my thoughts" as my brain tends to work quicker then my fingers at times over the years. Newtons 3rd Law I believe is appropriate here "that for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction." or if you will, = !

Because I understand the economics of weapons systems etc. I'll just say my "two cents" already includes the cost of inflation and project cost over runs.

Regards,
Pat