Jump to content


Photo

History of Soviet tanks


  • Please log in to reply
6183 replies to this topic

#6121 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 16 June 2019 - 0433 AM

 

Was a prototype of the "T-74" ever built or did the concept never make it off the drawing board?  It'd be interesting to know more about such a vehicle, looks quite an advanced design.

 

I think I've seen a small scale model of the "T-74" before somewhere but I cannot recall where from.

This is as far as it went I think:

Bit of a shame really, it would have been a really interesting vehicle to have seen in the metal, something certainly quite unique to have on display at a place like Kubinka.

 

I've just found the T-14 Armata video (how it came to be by Red Effect) and I've spotted the hull of the screenshot you posted above.  So they got at least as far as the hull then.  I take it that the scale model of the vehicle may still survive?

 

And as for the Objekt 195 and "two prototypes"?  Hmm...I wonder what they're being used for now then?


  • 0

#6122 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Arakkis, Dune
  • Interests:Tanks, Art, history

Posted 17 June 2019 - 1629 PM

 

Was a prototype of the "T-74" ever built or did the concept never make it off the drawing board?  It'd be interesting to know more about such a vehicle, looks quite an advanced design.

 

I think I've seen a small scale model of the "T-74" before somewhere but I cannot recall where from.

This is as far as it went I think:

bvoJxcF.jpg

 

 

It is Object 299 from Leningrad.


  • 0

#6123 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Arakkis, Dune
  • Interests:Tanks, Art, history

Posted 19 June 2019 - 1023 AM

First combat employment of the T-64. 19-20 July 1992.

 

image007.jpg

 

image013.jpg

 

 

The first place of combat employment of the T-64BV was the battle for the city of Bendery, occupied by Moldovan troops.  On June 20, occurred the so-called civilian seizure of 11 T-64BV tanks of 59 motorized rifle divisions of the 14-th army which were on a long-term storage.  On the same day, hastily removed from the conservation tanks have already participated in the battle.  About this events -  https://btvtinfo.blo...of-t-64-19.html


  • 0

#6124 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 19 June 2019 - 1357 PM

Intriguing!

 

If anyone can remember Baryatinsky's book "Tanks in Chechnya", there were a couple of pictures in that book showing a T-64BV with the characteristic upturned turret on the hull on a bridge.  These two pictures created quite a discussion (sometimes heated) about the T-64 and if it had ever served either in Chechnya or in the surrounding area.

 

I wonder if those two pictures were taken in the same timeframe as the above images and video? 

 

I still have yet to find a copy of that book.  The pictures alone should make it worth continuing to look out for. 


  • 0

#6125 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Arakkis, Dune
  • Interests:Tanks, Art, history

Posted 19 June 2019 - 1408 PM

T-64BV?  No, maybe Js-3


  • 0

#6126 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WV, USA
  • Interests:tanks, driving, hockey

Posted 19 June 2019 - 1558 PM

Intriguing!
 
If anyone can remember Baryatinsky's book "Tanks in Chechnya", there were a couple of pictures in that book showing a T-64BV with the characteristic upturned turret on the hull on a bridge.  These two pictures created quite a discussion (sometimes heated) about the T-64 and if it had ever served either in Chechnya or in the surrounding area.
 
I wonder if those two pictures were taken in the same timeframe as the above images and video? 
 
I still have yet to find a copy of that book.  The pictures alone should make it worth continuing to look out for.

The pictures in that book were taken in "the approaches to" Bendery in 1992, but the tanks don't appear to be on a bridge.
  • 0

#6127 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 20 June 2019 - 1253 PM

 

Intriguing!
 
If anyone can remember Baryatinsky's book "Tanks in Chechnya", there were a couple of pictures in that book showing a T-64BV with the characteristic upturned turret on the hull on a bridge.  These two pictures created quite a discussion (sometimes heated) about the T-64 and if it had ever served either in Chechnya or in the surrounding area.
 
I wonder if those two pictures were taken in the same timeframe as the above images and video? 
 
I still have yet to find a copy of that book.  The pictures alone should make it worth continuing to look out for.

The pictures in that book were taken in "the approaches to" Bendery in 1992, but the tanks don't appear to be on a bridge.

 

Thanks.  


  • 0

#6128 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WV, USA
  • Interests:tanks, driving, hockey

Posted 20 June 2019 - 2133 PM

Gavin, actually it turns out that our own alejandro_ posted the two pictures from the book here. The road the tanks are on looks to be at ground level to me?
  • 0

#6129 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 21 June 2019 - 0827 AM

Gavin, actually it turns out that our own alejandro_ posted the two pictures from the book here. The road the tanks are on looks to be at ground level to me?

 

Yes those are the pictures I recall.  The crash barrier behind the tank/s must be what made me think if was on the bridge (or at least on the approaches anyway).


  • 0

#6130 Wiedzmin

Wiedzmin

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,335 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Russia, Leningrad

Posted 22 June 2019 - 0525 AM

105mm APFSDS from smoothbore vs T-62

 


  • 0

#6131 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WV, USA
  • Interests:tanks, driving, hockey

Posted 23 June 2019 - 2343 PM

Yes those are the pictures I recall.  The crash barrier behind the tank/s must be what made me think if was on the bridge (or at least on the approaches anyway).

Agreed; the guard rail had me do a double-take when I went to check the book. :)
  • 0

#6132 Mr King

Mr King

    Fat Body

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,097 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Muppetville

Posted 24 June 2019 - 2306 PM

U56ih4s.jpg​


  • 0

#6133 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,749 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 25 June 2019 - 0317 AM

Was a prototype of the "T-74" ever built or did the concept never make it off the drawing board?  It'd be interesting to know more about such a vehicle, looks quite an advanced design.

 

I think I've seen a small scale model of the "T-74" before somewhere but I cannot recall where from.

 

The US Military in the early 1980's rejected the T72 label and affixed T74 to numerous Soviet AFV's. It was several years before they realised they were wrong and fell in behind the NATO (and correct) designations. Presumably they had some inside knowledge of the development process and put 2 and 2 together and got 22.

 

You can still find textbooks from the 1980's (Notably the Microprose 'Gunship' manual) that refer to 'T74'. But it was never used for a service tank.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 25 June 2019 - 0318 AM.

  • 0

#6134 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 26 June 2019 - 1240 PM

 

Was a prototype of the "T-74" ever built or did the concept never make it off the drawing board?  It'd be interesting to know more about such a vehicle, looks quite an advanced design.

 

I think I've seen a small scale model of the "T-74" before somewhere but I cannot recall where from.

 

The US Military in the early 1980's rejected the T72 label and affixed T74 to numerous Soviet AFV's. It was several years before they realised they were wrong and fell in behind the NATO (and correct) designations. Presumably they had some inside knowledge of the development process and put 2 and 2 together and got 22.

 

You can still find textbooks from the 1980's (Notably the Microprose 'Gunship' manual) that refer to 'T74'. But it was never used for a service tank.

 

Ahh I remember that game with a fondness, it was the first proper simulator that I'd ever actually tried having a go on.  Reading through the book, especially the part dealing with the various military vehicles, it was the first time I'd heard of a source called "Janes".  Life has never quite been the same since.  :D


  • 0

#6135 R011

R011

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,542 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 26 June 2019 - 1324 PM

I recall seeing Soviet tanks designated M1974 or similar back then. I can't recall now if they were T-64 or T-72.
  • 0

#6136 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,578 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 27 June 2019 - 1117 AM

I recall seeing Soviet tanks designated M1974 or similar back then. I can't recall now if they were T-64 or T-72.

 

I never did understand the point of the NATO designations (obviously its based on a year).  There were also FST-designations for MBT's as well I think?  The designation "M1974" seems to apply to the 2S1 Gvozdika 122mm self-propelled howitzer rather than a tank as such...unless there is another M1974 vehicle out there.  Very confusing but then just how aware of the different vehicle types was NATO way back then?  It must've been a full time job for more than just a few people trying to identify one vehicle from another.


  • 0

#6137 Harkonnen

Harkonnen

    Andrei

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,429 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Planet Arakkis, Dune
  • Interests:Tanks, Art, history

Posted 27 June 2019 - 1246 PM

Some more details about Soviet future tank project of 1980-s.

 

image011.jpg​

 

Soviet 80s Future tank projects. Object “ 490” , Object “490A” (Rebel), “490A” with 152 mm gun (Boxer). 


  • 0

#6138 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,060 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Teutonistan

Posted 27 June 2019 - 1654 PM

 

I recall seeing Soviet tanks designated M1974 or similar back then. I can't recall now if they were T-64 or T-72.

 
I never did understand the point of the NATO designations (obviously its based on a year).  There were also FST-designations for MBT's as well I think?  The designation "M1974" seems to apply to the 2S1 Gvozdika 122mm self-propelled howitzer rather than a tank as such...unless there is another M1974 vehicle out there.  Very confusing but then just how aware of the different vehicle types was NATO way back then?  It must've been a full time job for more than just a few people trying to identify one vehicle from another.

 


Most of the time quite simple really. It denotes the first time that NATO, (or BRIXMIS or other such source) has spotted a vehicle.

 

The FST-1 were just more or less good guesses about probable future soviet projects based on reports, stolen documents etc. and sightings of prototypes.

 

 

 

edit: how fitting that HArkonnen brings more light into these obyekts. :)


Edited by Panzermann, 27 June 2019 - 1655 PM.

  • 0

#6139 R011

R011

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 6,542 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 27 June 2019 - 2035 PM

The actual Soviet designations for many systems were not only not known at the time, they were not known until the end of the Cold War. Having identified a new tank, for instance, they needed to call it something until a more accurate name was available.

People were still commonly using WW2 German designations for some items, like the various models of T-34, until the nineties.
  • 0

#6140 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 52,749 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 28 June 2019 - 0214 AM

 

 

I recall seeing Soviet tanks designated M1974 or similar back then. I can't recall now if they were T-64 or T-72.

 
I never did understand the point of the NATO designations (obviously its based on a year).  There were also FST-designations for MBT's as well I think?  The designation "M1974" seems to apply to the 2S1 Gvozdika 122mm self-propelled howitzer rather than a tank as such...unless there is another M1974 vehicle out there.  Very confusing but then just how aware of the different vehicle types was NATO way back then?  It must've been a full time job for more than just a few people trying to identify one vehicle from another.

 


Most of the time quite simple really. It denotes the first time that NATO, (or BRIXMIS or other such source) has spotted a vehicle.

 

The FST-1 were just more or less good guesses about probable future soviet projects based on reports, stolen documents etc. and sightings of prototypes.

 

 

 

edit: how fitting that HArkonnen brings more light into these obyekts. :)

 

 

Yes, for example in the USMLM reports you can see reference to 'BMP M1976'. Which of course was BRM-1.


  • 0




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users