- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Russia taking 70 year old t-54/55 out of storage to the front
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:03 pm to TigersnJeeps
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:03 pm to TigersnJeeps
Aren't most of us shooting ammo that was made at *least* 40 years ago, even further back if it's something like .303, a lot of 7.62x39, etc? I know it's not a tank round, but if you limit moisture, what's the problem?
You remember we're dealing with the country that invented the AK, which can be pulled out of a swamp after 10 years of rusting, and it'll almost always fire, right?
You remember we're dealing with the country that invented the AK, which can be pulled out of a swamp after 10 years of rusting, and it'll almost always fire, right?
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:07 pm to LemmyLives
quote:
They use auto-loaders, so three, right?
The T64 was the first Russian tank with an autoloader. The T54/55 has a 4 man crew. I wonder if these newbie loaders in their crews can match the 7-second go/no-go time for an Abrams loader.
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:11 pm to TigersnJeeps
quote:
How many of the anti-globalists have signed up to fight with Russia?
I think it's a fair question to ask as they ask the OTers if they signed up to fight for Ukraine all the time...
I would like to know what good purpose does it serve the people of this country for our government to be promoting the escalation of this war?
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:13 pm to Obtuse1
Didn't know that, I was steeped in 80s USSR info, which was heavy on T-65s and T-72s.
Motivated kid from east LA, vs. a conscript from Azerbaijan? We probably know the answer to that question.
quote:
I wonder if these newbie loaders in their crews can match the 7-second go/no-go time for an Abrams loader.
Motivated kid from east LA, vs. a conscript from Azerbaijan? We probably know the answer to that question.
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:21 pm to TigersnJeeps
quote:
but what is the quality of that ammunition? Has it been maintained over the last 50 years or just rusting in a bunker?
It’s Russian…… it way or may not work. And the stores of munitions that show up on the registry log in some logistics generals book May or may not have be sold for a kickback……
Posted on 3/26/23 at 6:58 pm to Matt225
Those T-55's have to get there somehow and they're heavy and this isn't Prime shipping ain't free. The US can afford to spend however many millions it wants on the missiles, Russia isn't in the same situation. Unless I guess China comes along and helps them out
Posted on 3/26/23 at 7:44 pm to tigerfan 64
There are quite a few of them still in service in the 3rd world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-54/T-55
Interestingly, America has produced over 2,900 Bradleys.
quote:
Do they have ammo/shells for 70 year old tanks?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-54/T-55
quote:
The T-54 and T-55 tanks are a series of Soviet main battle tanks introduced in the years following the Second World War. The first T-54 prototype was completed at Nizhny Tagil by the end of 1945.[3] From the late 1950s, the T-54 eventually became the main tank for armoured units of the Soviet Army, armies of the Warsaw Pact countries, and many others. T-54s and T-55s have been involved in many of the world's armed conflicts since their introduction in the second half of the 20th century.
The T-54/55 series is the most-produced tank in history. Estimated production numbers for the series range from 96,500 to 100,000. They were replaced by the T-62, T-64, T-72, T-80 and T-90 tanks in the Soviet and Russian armies, but remain in use by up to 50 other armies worldwide, some having received sophisticated retrofitting.
quote:
Extensive postwar investigations have suggested that the most crucial factor to win an armor battle is not the lethality of your cannon nor the thickness of your armor, but rather who spotted first and fired first. In this sense the Bradley enjoys an unarguable advantage with its day TV and direct view optics, automatic dual target tracking and two-axis stabilized head mirror. This holds especially true when its comes to night combat. Yes, late-war American and German tanks have some sorts of infrared night vision, but they were very primitive and by no means comparable to modern thermal imaging optics. In fact, WWII-era active IR searchlights will only make themselves more conspicuous on passive IR images.
This is interesting:
https://www.quora.com/M2-Bradley-vs-WW2-Tank-which-one-would-win
Bradley also outranges WWII tanks. WWII tanks lack means of rangefinding and have low first-shot accuracy. They can’t effectively engage targets on the move either due to lack of gun stabilization and computerized fire-control (Even the M4 Sherman, one of the first tanks to equip gyro-stabilizers require a short halt to fire). The average WWII tank battle distance is about 770 meters. The Bradley, on the other side, can reliably engage targets up to 3750 m with its TOW missile, which not a single WWII tank can withstand. It can also fire its 25 mm Bushmaster autocannon on the move with accuracy, a feature WWII tanks can only dream of.
Interestingly, America has produced over 2,900 Bradleys.
This post was edited on 3/26/23 at 8:10 pm
Posted on 3/26/23 at 8:02 pm to Gaspergou202
quote:
This stop gap measure will be hard on the crew even if marginally successful. I think they’re just going to get about a thousand poor Russians killed with no success.
As noted above, the T54's and T55's will be virtually blind, slow and massively out ranged by most any Western grade armor on the field. Chances are they won't see what killed them.
Posted on 3/26/23 at 8:34 pm to Gaspergou202
quote:
I would imagine that they see the approximately 250 T55s as cheap defensive tank destroyers.
They're just going to use them as mobile artillery, most likely to shell civilian infrastructure and housing. The 100mm gun on the T-54/55 wouldn't do shite to the modern reactive armor on Leopards, Challengers, or Abrams.
This post was edited on 3/26/23 at 8:49 pm
Posted on 3/26/23 at 10:05 pm to Lakeboy7
And from where did this 800 number come?
Are you just pulling that out of your arse?
Are you just pulling that out of your arse?
Posted on 3/28/23 at 10:08 am to Wildcat1996
AP News
Surfed back to Xi's visit to the Kremlin on the AP News hub on the Russo-Ukranian wat. No report there of WWII era tanks being rolled out by the Ruskies or the loss of somewhere between 800 and 2000 tanks by the Red Army.
Is this story BS or all of the AP journalists just failing miserably at their job?
Surfed back to Xi's visit to the Kremlin on the AP News hub on the Russo-Ukranian wat. No report there of WWII era tanks being rolled out by the Ruskies or the loss of somewhere between 800 and 2000 tanks by the Red Army.
Is this story BS or all of the AP journalists just failing miserably at their job?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News