How good is Russian T-90 tank?

What should be the perspective of T-90 tanks in an asian as well as in the world scenario?

whats ur opinion?

"North Korea would not be the first Asian country to have a variant of the T-90. As of mid-2000 India planned to acquire T-90 tanks, based on field trials that had already been completed. Russia had agreed to expedite the delivery at India's request. About 80 tanks were to be sent by April this year." - Asia Times

well well well, what do we have here. North Korea has a variant of T-90 tanks and surprise! "swastika India got them too".

perspective in asia? since am asian, you want your nation to be "feared" or "respected" swastika in asia? or be included in technologically advanced countries, i think not today dude, you merely importing almost the tech youve been using in your might. and youre really mass posting of your "INDIA is developing in its own way topics". you really proud of your nation military capabilty eh? thats good!

He's not mass posting..he's mas thread 'initiating'..a new concept to us members who are more used to digging deep into one topic..but IMHO in this way there's a sort of variety and it prevents the thread from degrading into a slugfest..the first few replies of any thread are always brimming with good stuff..its the later part which becomes all heated up and foul...

North Koreans got T-90's from the Russians??Im surprised to hear that..I wonder why the Russians would give them comparatively high level weaponry...

reportedly North Korea buys the T-90 (T-90SK command variant ???) from the russians and merely copied and exploit the capabilities of T-90 MBT for their new MBT, and use some of T-90s as well.

www.atimes.com...

www.navlog.org...

I admit that i have posted but a few more threads, but all are of different subjects, BTW don,t u ppl like diversity?

Is not comparison a good idea? i did not know NORTH KOREA had T-90.
also is not" North Korea developing in its own way"?[massive military spending while public r dying in famine]

As per ur question , here every foramites r proud of their of their own countries, even Paki's also.

Pakis have every right to be proud of their country...only your pride should not lead you into vicious arguements with other such proud people..Ive sen too many of those happen where the whole jist of the topic is forgotten...

T90 Tanks aren't that strong, but everything can be destroyed:

It's got a wide variety of weapons:
1 x 125 mm smoothbore gun
inline barr. AT + SA missiles
1 x 7,62 mm MG coaxial
1 x 12,7 mm AA MG
gun loading: a/m; stabilization: v/h; stowage: 43/28; coax.: 2'000;
AA- 300; elevation/depress.: 5'4/ 13'; type of rounds: APFSDS HE-FRAG HEAT Guided
A couple of well aimed stingers would do the job...
And also as you can see, the lower part of the tracks are unprotected, vunerable to an anti-tank mine.

[edit on 27-11-2004 by Nexus]

Originally posted by swastika
massive military spending while public r dying in famine]

it's so funny to see this from an Indian

[edit on 27-11-2004 by poirot]

T-90s are pretty nice. I don't know a whole lot about them but their anti-tank missiles give them an edge against older Abrams without such weaponry.

Heres a site I found having to do with the T-90;
www.fas.org...

India to purchase latest T-90s from Russia ASSOCIATED PRESS OF PAKISTAN NEWS SUMMARY (05-11-1999) India will soon purchase around 300 T-90 tanks from Russia for around Rs 10.50 crores each, for deployment in offensive formations in Rajasthan and Punjab by next year. T-90 tank will swiftly" kill" Arjun, the main battle tank developed locally after 25 years.

Is it just pure coincidence that Swastika posted a thread about the T-90 when India will be buying around 300 of them? These threads about India remind me of member from Iran.

Buddy u have no idea what ur talking about The new M1A2 Abrams Super Tank is equiped to handle the latest anti tank missiles, that is why its the best operational tank out there. Learn your topic before u open your mouth.

i doubt that the russians gave the N Koreans the shtora-1 countermeasures suite. that is a poerful peice of tech.
however, with respect to the T-90 itself, is a fairly powerful MBT.
equipped w/2nd generation ERA, HEAT Rounds/ATGM combo from a single 125mm turrent gives it the versatility for the modern battlefield.
although heavier and slower than the M1 Abrahms, it makes up for it w/ its relatively low cost and high survivability w/ a low silheoutte turrent.
in large numbers they would be nearly an unstoppable force, even for the US military moght if they had sufficient air cover to not allow americans air superiority...
against current and previous MBT's they are equal or better, including Leapords and Challengers....

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Buddy u have no idea what ur talking about

The new M1A2 Abrams Super Tank is equiped to handle the latest anti tank missiles, that is why its the best operational tank out there. Learn your topic before u open your mouth.

Are you refering to my post? If so I said "older" Abrams tanks. It is true that the new M1A2 Abrams can handle a T-90 without to much trouble but make sure you read the details in other peoples posts. BTW this is the first time I've seen one of your posts in a while, where were you?

Originally posted by MACROSVIII
although heavier and slower than the M1 Abrahms, it makes up for it w/ its relatively low cost and high survivability w/ a low silheoutte turrent.

The M1A2 is 68.7 tons and a T-90 is about 50 tons ... that makes the M1A2 18 tons heavier .. .. do you even know what you are talking about ?

And both tanks can reach up to 65 km/h making them equal.

I think the Russian T-90 would have the advantage, due to its ability to launch anti-tank missiles. capable of penertrating 800-1000 mm of armor, at a range of 4000 meters

Does anyone have anyidea how thick the M1A2's armor is, I can't find any info anywhere.

The T-90's (and other tanks) ability to launch missiles is overrated and not much of an advantage.

The AT-11B has a 4km range. 90% of battles take place at 3km or less, well within the Abrams firing range. 51% of the battlefields in Europe had a visibility of 800m or less. This is where the T-90 is decent, where it's penetrator actually works.

It can barely penetrate 800mm of armor. All varients of the Abrams have 1200mm+ of armor vs. HEAT on their turret front. The glacis and lower hull would be resistant to this attack, possibly disabling the tank but not destroying it.

The flight time of the AT-11B is 12 seconds to maximum range. In this time a Abrams crew can see the missile launch (with thermal, day sights, or the naked eye) and fire an aimed shot (2 if really good) at the firing T-90. The tank can also go into defilade, perform evasive maneauvers, and pop off smoke grenades. This makes the chance of the AT-11 hitting the target not good. Playing Steel Beasts, I have spotted tanks by their missile firing and killed them well before the missile hits me, of course this is just a simulation and not real life.

The T-90 has to stay exposed and track the target during this flight time. This is a big "HI I'm OVER HERE PLEASE KILL ME AND CALL DOWN ARTILLERY ON ME!!"

The T-90 cannot fire on the move with the AT-11B, this makes it good only as a defensive weapon. But it has to stay exposed to fire it.

All the while an M1A1 can fire an M289A3 with 960mm of penetration at 2km, this would blow through a T-90's armor kill the tank completely.

This is not to say, of course a well trained and well positioned company of T-90s cannot attrit an force of Abrams. The missile is just not as big an advantage as everyone says.

Armor for M1A2SEP
Turret Front: 960mm KE 1400mm HEAT
Glacis: 500mm KE 800mm HEAT
T-90
Turret front: 800mm KE, 1200mm HEAT (with ERA)
Glacis: 600mm KE 950 HEAT (with ERA)


[edit on 28-11-2004 by Kozzy]

[edit on 28-11-2004 by Kozzy]

I heard that ISRAEL was developing a very powerful tank[probably the best] , any info about this?

Originally posted by swastika
I heard that ISRAEL was developing a very powerful tank[probably the best] , any info about this?

The Merkava Mk 4?

Originally posted by Kozzy
The T-90's (and other tanks) ability to launch missiles is overrated and not much of an advantage.

The AT-11B has a 4km range. 90% of battles take place at 3km or less, well within the Abrams firing range. 51% of the battlefields in Europe had a visibility of 800m or less. This is where the T-90 is decent, where it's penetrator actually works.

It can barely penetrate 800mm of armor. All varients of the Abrams have 1200mm+ of armor vs. HEAT on their turret front. The glacis and lower hull would be resistant to this attack, possibly disabling the tank but not destroying it.

The flight time of the AT-11B is 12 seconds to maximum range. In this time a Abrams crew can see the missile launch (with thermal, day sights, or the naked eye) and fire an aimed shot (2 if really good) at the firing T-90. The tank can also go into defilade, perform evasive maneauvers, and pop off smoke grenades. This makes the chance of the AT-11 hitting the target not good. Playing Steel Beasts, I have spotted tanks by their missile firing and killed them well before the missile hits me, of course this is just a simulation and not real life.

The T-90 has to stay exposed and track the target during this flight time. This is a big "HI I'm OVER HERE PLEASE KILL ME AND CALL DOWN ARTILLERY ON ME!!"

The T-90 cannot fire on the move with the AT-11B, this makes it good only as a defensive weapon. But it has to stay exposed to fire it.

All the while an M1A1 can fire an M289A3 with 960mm of penetration at 2km, this would blow through a T-90's armor kill the tank completely.

This is not to say, of course a well trained and well positioned company of T-90s cannot attrit an force of Abrams. The missile is just not as big an advantage as everyone says.

Armor for M1A2SEP
Turret Front: 960mm KE 1400mm HEAT
Glacis: 500mm KE 800mm HEAT
T-90
Turret front: 800mm KE, 1200mm HEAT (with ERA)
Glacis: 600mm KE 950 HEAT (with ERA)


[edit on 28-11-2004 by Kozzy]

[edit on 28-11-2004 by Kozzy]

You seem to be a tank expert..where did you get info on the T-90 penetration capability and armor strength?..

I'm no tank expert, althought call me one all you want.

armor.kiev.ua... Armor estimates by Paul Lakowski most likely very accurate

www.fas.org... Some more basic estimates are there too

armor.kiev.ua... Infro on the AT-11

Originally posted by MACROSVIII
against current and previous MBT's they are equal or better, including Leapords and Challengers....

Not to rain on your parade, but I'd like to know how it would beat a Challenger. And, just as a reminder, the British army has operated and fought battles with Challenger II..

Originally posted by Kenshin
Does anyone have anyidea how thick the M1A2's armor is, I can't find any info anywhere.

Wow, isn't that strange....

[edit on 28-11-2004 by Cjwinnit]

The Russian T90 is not supposed to be put up against the Abrams, they're supposed to be against soldiers or other/weaker tanks. They can also employ fear into citizens if the T90 was to take to the streets.

No offence to Russia, but they do deal anyhting to anyone for any amount of money. Because they are such a large countyr, with lots of left over weaponry from the Cold War, they are selling it off to other coutnires that are in ened of such "technology".

Because really, the Russians aren't selling their best equitment, they're selling some of their worst...