Does the T-72B obr.1989g still uses the reflective sheets armor package ?
would not be surprised if T-90 still use it, but with different materials, thickness etc.
not T-72(monolite)/T-72A(sand) not T-80(monolite)/80B(sand,and this is 100 percent, i posted drawing of T-80B turret, no balls, just sand like in T-72A ) never had ceramic(only first experemental tanks that uses T-64 turret, thats all), it's not question about "soviets deployed tanks with best armor", soviets just deployed tanks with sufficient armor.
as far as i know T-64B have same turret as T-64A, just modifed to instal Kobra ATGM, and same hull armor, but there was T-64BV which have(and it was shown on the tank cutaway on tank repair factory) new hull front structure.
Well, almost...I was the first to include the unclassified report on the exploitation of the T-72B turret frontal armor in my article in the Journal of Military Ordnance several years ago. Beyond that, not much has been released...
I'm talking about information like "we fired M829 on T-72B from 1km distance, with striking velocity... and penetrated with after armor effect, it shown on witness plate.. photo N1" detailed info
something like reports about M48 vs small arms fire or A-10 vs T-62.
Wiedzmin; unfortunately, your information on the turret composite designs/materials doesn't make sense...at least not for production/deployed tanks. As I mentioned above, different configurations and composite materials were tried and tested in the early days (even years) of these MBTs, but it's a different story by the time they were put in harm's way. It also really doesn't make sense that the T-64B would be deployed to the GSFG protected by the same turret frontal armor that was carried by the T-64A that had already been in East Germany since 1976. Also, sending the T-80B to the GSFG with less capable sand-filled frontal armor would have been a bad move...the drawing you posted simply isn't acurate.