Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
In SBP it is already reflected that the T-80 can be a bug extremely difficult to crack open.
|
Maybe in SBP but not in today's reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
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.
|
To be sure T-80U is on par with T-90 except possessing better maneuverability. However now it is not any serious opponent for Western tanks present in SBP like Leo-2A5/A6. Its frontal armor can be penetrated by today's standard Western APFSDS ammo of M829A3, DM63 types from almost 2 km distance. On the other hand Leo-2A5/A6 and M1A2SEP frontal armor is almost impenetrable by outdated Russian tank ammunition. Moreover T-80U lacks thermal sight which is ridiculous these days.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
We in the West tend to underestimate Russian tanks.
|
And now that is very reasonable and very well founded assumption!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
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.
|
Not true. Leo-1 was not any huge milestone in tank development and it did not outclassed contemporary Soviet tanks. For instance T-62 tank was on par with Leo-1. It possessed very powerful 115 mm 2A20 smoothbore gun firing APFSDS rounds which could destroy Leo-1 easily at any practical distance during entire Cold War period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird
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.
|
T-72 origins are different. This tank was designed as a second-rate model intended for second-line formations and for export because it was simple and cheap. In short it was indirect T-55 successor and replacement! However main Soviet battle tanks of this era were much better T-64B and T-80B which constituted backbone of Soviet armored forces deployed against NATO in Central Europe. In sum T-72A/M worse than those two in mobility, FCS and armor protection. Only during time of Soviet Union's crisis and collapse T-72 was chosen due to being cheaper than T-80B/U as a mainstay of Russian tank forces. As a result it was modernized using T-80U's technology and this way T-72B and later T-90 versions appeared.