Martin_B wrote: ↑
Mon Aug 28, 2023 1:16 am
jimbob wrote: ↑
Sun Aug 27, 2023 6:20 pm
EACLucifer wrote: ↑
Sun Aug 27, 2023 6:16 pm
Account's now dead. No reason to believe T-10 being readied, anyway, Russia's already using 1940s designed tanks in the form of T-54s. The only accounts I've seen taking this seriously are either gullible and prone to distributing misinformation, or ones that don't really try to assess the military side of things at all picking it up from the gullible ones.
In addition, there are 1940s designed tanks, or at least lineages that start in the 40s, that could actually be quite useful on the battlefield still if suitably upgraded with modern optics and add-on armour - the aforementioned T-54/55s, M-48s and Centurions all still have derivatives kicking about, and Vietnam has actually made quite sensible use of T-34-85s to defend its islands against China - the T-34-85 is obsolete, but could still kick the arse of any IFV, and because it has a pneumatic starter, it can be stored long term in a cave and just fired up if there's an invasion.
yes, very sus
https://twitter.com/Ukraina8648545/stat ... 48748?s=20
If you are going to bury it in a defensive formation, a workable turret with a 5-inch gun is pretty useful against any infantry or IFV. The Russians could just be bunging anything at the defensive works if they are struggling to get anything through the bottlenecks they have in their supply lines.
The problem with the T-10 is that it is very heavily weighed down by armour that isn't much use. The armour's all steel, but there's not enough of it to stop a modern kinetic energy penetrator, and modern High Explosive Anti-Tank Warheads can carve through immense thicknesses of steel, which is why ceramics, reactive armour and complicated combinations like Chobham armour are used on modern tanks.
You've got fifty two tonnes but only seven hundred horsepower to move it along. The Challenger 2 is sometimes criticised as slow at sixty four tonnes with twelve hundred horsepower (A Chally 2 is a dozen kilometres slower than a Leopard 2 or Abrams on road, but equal to them off road due to better suspension. By contrast a T-10 can manage about 25mph on road, which is about what a NATO MBT can achieve off road).
They are also heavy enough to possibly cause bridging and other logistics problems - a T-10 is about 10% heavier than Russia's next heaviest tank, the T-90, and 25% heavier than a T-72.
On top of that, they were pulled from frontline units in the mid 1960s. They will need massive upgrades of optics, sighting, fire control etc if they are to be rendered functional. About the only thing going for them is that they use a standard calibre (they share shells with 122mm gun-howitzers), but that's a calibre there's supposedly been some shortages in, so that isn't always a good thing.
As before, no reason to think they'll reactivate any T-10s, but just giving context on the vehicle for if they do, because we all thought we wouldn't see T-54s either.