Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A T-72 for the 21st Century
StrategyPage ^ | October 8, 2006

Posted on 10/08/2006 6:19:14 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4

The Russian T-72 tank is the most widely used tank ever. Over 50,000 have been built. More than any model in World War II. Ironically, the T-72 was a stopgap design, intended to provide a replacement for the more advanced T-64, which was not successful. Production began in 1972, and the T-72 entered service in 1976. Compared to the earlier T-62 and T-64, the T-72 was successful. It was reliable, or so it was thought. But in 1982, Syrian T-72s went up against Israeli Merkavas. The Syrians lost badly. In 1991, Iraqi T-72s were helpless against American M-1 tanks, and M-2 Infantry Fighting Vehicles. But the T-72 remained popular. Partly because it was so cheap. Cold War surplus vehicles, in good shape, could be had for as little as $100,000. The vehicle was still popular because of its reliability. Most nations never expected to use their T-72s in combat, but it was more useful for them to be in running condition in peacetime, when they could control unruly civilians.

Another reason for the popularity of the T-72 is the large number of upgrades available. While the basic T72 was pretty unimpressive, a few upgrades could turn it into a much more formidable (and expensive) tank. For example, modern, computerized, fire control systems, with laser range finders and night-vision sights, and quality ammunition, transforms a T-72 into a very lethal system. While such a tank would still get blasted by an M-1, if the T-72 spotted the M-1 first, and got a flank shot, it could win. The T-72 is also a very mobile vehicle, about on a par with the famously nimble M-1. But protection is always going to be a problem. The stock T-72 is a 41 ton vehicle that is 23 feet long, 11 feet wide and 7.5 feet high. An M-1 is 62 tons, 32 feet long, 12 feet wide and eight feet high. The extra weight is mostly armor, and from the front, the M-1 is still very difficult to kill. To survive, a T-72 not only needs to accessorize, but requires a well trained crew. Most nations using T-72s, don't like to invest in crew training. But that's what makes the most difference in combat.

The T-72 is surviving into the 21st century because Russia's new T-90 was, again, a fall-back design. The T-80 was supposed to be the successor to the T-72. But like the T-62 and T-64 before it, the T-80 didn't quite work out as planned. So the T-72, with a much improved turret and all manner of gadgets, was trotted out as the T-90. At 47 tons, but it's still 23 feet long, 11 feet wide and 7.5 feet high. Same package, better contents. And with well trained crews, it could be deadly.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: armor; t72; treadhead
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
The FReeper Foxhole's TreadHead Tuesday - The Soviet T-72 Series MBT - June 22nd, 2004

I remember preparing to face hordes of T-72's in M-60A1's with 105mm guns that couldn't penetrate the T-72's front slope. We practiced retrograde from one terrain feature to the one behind it until we reached the DIP position.

DIP stood for Die In Place.

1 posted on 10/08/2006 6:19:14 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Sounds like the T-72 is the B-52 of the tank world. Just keeps on keeping on, mostly because it is used against in situations where capable resistance is unlikely.


2 posted on 10/08/2006 6:24:13 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Dancing through life like a street mime with tourettes syndrome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: snippy_about_it; SAMWolf; Delta 21; mostly cajun; archy; Gringo1; Matthew James; Fred Mertz; ...

3 posted on 10/08/2006 6:24:38 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4 (Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

That sentance could be more confusing. ;)


4 posted on 10/08/2006 6:24:50 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim (Dancing through life like a street mime with tourettes syndrome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Our M1 Abrams Tanks own these things.

5 posted on 10/08/2006 6:25:21 AM PDT by KoRn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
I've got something for the T-72: The A-10 is being upgraded to the 'C' model.


The newly designed A-10C “Warthog” made its first flight at Eglin Air Force Base Jan. 20.

6 posted on 10/08/2006 6:26:21 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity ("A litany of complaints is not a plan." - GW Bush, referring to DNC's lack of a platform on ANYTHING)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Russian motto: Make it work, make it cheap, make a lot.


7 posted on 10/08/2006 6:26:44 AM PDT by JoeGar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity

Wasn't there an announcement a few years ago that the A-10 was being phased out? At the time I thought that was an incredibly stupid decision by the AF. What happened?


8 posted on 10/08/2006 6:37:05 AM PDT by saganite (Billions and billions and billions-------and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JoeGar

And then draft many, many bodies to run them all...


9 posted on 10/08/2006 6:37:17 AM PDT by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim

The export version of the T-72B, the T-72S, is a highly upgraded variant with a new engine, a new suspension system and configured for mounting explosive reactive armour.

10 posted on 10/08/2006 6:39:11 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4 (Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: saganite
The USAF actually seriously looked at phasing out the A-10 but after the Desert Storm experience and operations in Afghanistan and Iraq they are getting major upgrades to keep them going as long as possible.
11 posted on 10/08/2006 6:39:50 AM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JoeGar
Quantity has a quality all its own. - Trotsky

And of course you can do that when you don't care how many of yours die as long as you kill enough of theirs.

12 posted on 10/08/2006 6:43:33 AM PDT by hometoroost (TSA = Thousands Standing Around)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JoeGar
Another Russian motto:

Better is the enemy of good enough.-admiral of the Soviet Fleet Sergei Gorshkov.

13 posted on 10/08/2006 6:50:38 AM PDT by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: archy

The Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau has developed a T-72 tank main armament upgrade package which envisages use of a 120mm gun and NATO-standard ammunition.

It is possible to fit the T-72 tank with a 120-140mm main guns; in so doing, the scope of required re-designing is rather small, as these guns have the overall dimensions similar to those of the guns 2A46, 2A46M and KBA3. The breech-part of the offered 120mm KBM2 gun with a quick-replacement barrel has a high degree of commonality with the breech-part of the original gun of the T-72 tank.

In order to be able to use 120mm NATO-standard fixed ammunition, the automatic loader of the gun is installed in an isolated self-contained compartment in the turret bustle. The level of armour protection of the automatic loader compartment is analogous to that of the Leopard and Abrams tanks.

The total allowance of ammunition of the tank includes 40 rounds, of which 22 are positioned in the automatic loader

14 posted on 10/08/2006 6:53:54 AM PDT by Cannoneer No. 4 (Either we bring them freedom, or they destroy us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

BTTT


15 posted on 10/08/2006 6:56:18 AM PDT by Matthew James (SPEARHEAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tijeras_Slim
Sounds like the T-72 is the B-52 of the tank world. Just keeps on keeping on, mostly because it is used against in situations where capable resistance is unlikely.

The BUFF would have held it's own even in "Global Thermonuclear War", the mission for which it was designed. I always thought about the only thing it really lacked was a long range air to air missile, for self defense of course. :) It could defend itself against many threats though. It would either jam their fire control, forcing any aircraft that still managed an intercept into it's own gun range, or just preemptively give ground based defenses a Hound Dog or a SRAM up their ... well you know.

16 posted on 10/08/2006 6:59:13 AM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: saganite
Wasn't there an announcement a few years ago that the A-10 was being phased out? At the time I thought that was an incredibly stupid decision by the AF. What happened?

9-11, and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The grunts love 'em, the bad guys hate 'em. Upgrading them is cheaper than buying something new, which isn't available right now anyway.

17 posted on 10/08/2006 7:01:48 AM PDT by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

I recall that Russian tankers couldn't be more than 5' 6'' because of the cramped conditions in the T-whatever. Know if that's true of the T-72 and later models?


18 posted on 10/08/2006 7:15:51 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (The hallmark of a crackpot conspiracy theory is that it expands to include countervailing evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite
The A-10 was going to be retired but the USAF reconsidered after seeing its performance knocking out Iraqi tanks. The other jets (F-16s most notably) couldn't do the mission. They can't take hits like the A-10 can.

The A-10 is undergoing an upgrade to the 'C' model now: New A-10C ensures Warthog's long life

19 posted on 10/08/2006 7:22:19 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity ("A litany of complaints is not a plan." - GW Bush, referring to DNC's lack of a platform on ANYTHING)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Thanks for the post. In 1983-5 my unit 3-12 Cav had M-60A3 Rise/Passive's and the M-1s were being fielded to the border Cav (2nd & 11th ACRs) first. In the mid-70s I was in an M-60A2 awaiting the hordes of Soviet T-62s and East German T-55s. and the T-64 was just being fielded.


20 posted on 10/08/2006 7:28:30 AM PDT by GreyFriar ( (3rd Armored Division - Spearhead))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson