Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
This video may be a bit overly patriotic in favour of the T-90, nevertheless it may hint at the right direction when claiming that the Abrams is overestimated.
In SBP it is already reflected that the T-80 can be a bug extremely difficult to crack open. It is smaller than Western tanks, and has quite some effective tough armour. That it already lays down fire on you with you still being out of gunnery range, doesn't make it easier. In SBP, I made it a habit to not engage T-80s directly and head-on, but to try to "out-tactic" them. Which is good advise with any modern MBT as opponent. We in the West tend to underestimate Russian tanks. That already started with the T-72 in the later years of it' appearance. The T-72 was the answer to the former Russian tanks being outclassed by the Leopard-1 in agility, speed, punch, precision, and armour. Maybe no other tank since world war two has been so dominant at its time like the Leo-1. What we often ignore is that the T-72 all in all turned out to be a worthy contender for the Leopard, despite its initial certain weaknesses. There must have been a reason why panic bells rang alive in Brussel when it entered the scene. Numerical superiority was not the reason, but toughness, and punch.
|
What is interesting to note as well, at least I find it interesting, is that the T-90 is in effect not an entirely "new" tank design. Instead, it is an upgraded T-72 (Russian designation T-72BM I believe..). So in this case, the Abrams is fighting latest T-72 and not the latest "new" tank design.
I'm not really sure where I sit here, of course being from the West I'd love to ride out in an Abrams. But doing research on the T-90 has me thinking it has some critical advantages to which the Abrams has no answer. Of course, a lot of this Russian "wonder defences" can be PR'd to death, much like the Abrams is PR'd to be impregnable.