Russian article claims UKR Bulat's a failure

[John Kettler]

Using a link to a different article--and thanks to an English option--I found this attention-seizing article in the sidebar. Though the translation isn't the best, there is some real meat to it. Part of that meet is a statement to the effect the ERA not only isn't effective but damages the tank it's supposed to defend!  There is also a photo of a unmistakably dead Bulat. 

http://gurkhan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/blog-post_22.html

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited December 15, 2017 by John Kettler

[Haiduk]

2 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Using a link to a different article--and thanks to an English option--I found this attention-seizing article in the sidebar. Though the translation isn't the best, there is some real meat to it. Part of that meet is a statement to the effect the ERA not only isn't effective but damages the tank it's supposed to defend!  There is also a photo of a unmistakably dead Bulat. 

http://gurkhan.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/blog-post_22.html

Regards,

John Kettler

OMG! In third time here this ridiculos fake about "ERA, which destroys tank" from known T-64 hater GurKhan!

Well, maybe good that this moved to separate topic.

So about GurKhans approvals:

1. Bulat is failed project

BM Bulat was designed at the end of 90th years in order to improve combat capabilities of T-64B to T-80UD level. But economic crisis of that time didn't allow to release this project in full volume. MoD demanded to make upgrading as cheap as possible and designers offerd two variants - T-64BM1 (cheap upgrade) and T-64BM2 (more cheapest). Malyshev's tank factory after Pakistan contract acomplishing, almost stopped all works, so to support it, government decided to order upgrade about hundred ot T-64B into T-64BM. Yes, many specialists understood, that tank will have some problems (especiually with engine when mass significantly grew), but it anyway will better than older T-64B. NOBODY couldn't imagine that Bulat will fight in real! By this reason MoD rejected thermal sights and some other things, whih made a taknk more expensive. But in crisis years Bulat was a real achievment, because it "widely advertized", like wrote GurKhan. SInce 2005 to 2013 87 tanks were upgraded, 10 of them in initial "more cheapest" T-64BM2 variant (not represeneted in the game)

2.Ukrainian army refuses from Bulats

No. "Moving tanks in reserve" and "refusing" are different terms. Bulats can be useful in for example new tank brigade of new formation (14th TB now exists mostly on paper, but with real HQ). Many Bulats are now on Malyshev' factory in awaiting of repair, but factory still busy on BM Oplot-T for Thailand. 

3.  Nozh ERA is dangerous for the tank itself

Damned fake. GurKhan have posted photos of Bulats, which blewed up on mines with ammo detonation or which were destroyed by direct hit of MLRS or large-caliber artillery on statinary positions and shouted like idiot: "Ha-ha! Nozh suck! Stupid ukies made ERA, which blow up tank itself!"  

Photos, which he posted in own article:

This one was lost 21.07.2014 in Georgiivka village. During engagement with enemy tank he got HEAT shell from own vis-a-vis between turret and hull. There was a fire in tank and crew withdrew to village. They almost didn't try to extinguish fire and just abandoned own vehicle. When fire became strong and got ammunition it detonated and teared off the turret. Fragments of explosion also wounded two paratroopers on the checkpount nearby. 

This one was lost in 4th-5th of Sep 2014 in Dmytrivka. Base camp of several units, among them 1st tank brigade was hit by MLRS "Smerch" salvo. This tank tried to escape, but was hit with close explosion or with sub-ammunition of MLRS rocket. Left side of tank burned out with ERA blocks, of course. All three crewmen were killed. 

 

If Nozh so bad and dangerous, that Ukraine refuses from Bulat, how then GurKhan will explain that in new upgrade project of T-64BV this ERA will substitite old K-1, but will be mounted in K-1 containeres? And why he doesn't want to see real work of Nozh, like on photo below? 

Debaltsevo bulge. This BM Oplot got HEAT from enemy T-72 mod.1989. Crew alive, tank in service. Strange, but all ERA blocks didn't detonate like said GurKhan

Shyrokyne area. T-64B1M (Congo contract with improved placement of Nozh ERA) of "Azov" regiment. ATGM hit. Tank stil in service

So, single reason of future retiring (but not immediate) of Bulats is not "dangerous ERA", but 17-years old solutions and issues, tied with its.

Now developed new upgrading program of T-64BV, which for less money will increase capabilities of these tanks: thermal sight, new digital radio equipment, new improved optic, GPS navigation, Nozh ERA in K-1 boxes (easy repair in field conditions). First upgraed vehicles will be transfered  already in next year.

Edited December 15, 2017 by Haiduk

[John Kettler]

Haiduk,

Am very glad I said "claims" in the title! Very much appreciate your detailed discussion and refutation of the issues raised in the article. Have learned much from your posts, which provide information very hard for us in the West to come by.

Regards,

John Kettler

 

[Haiduk]

5 hours ago, John Kettler said:

Haiduk,

Am very glad I said "claims" in the title! Very much appreciate your detailed discussion and refutation of the issues raised in the article. Have learned much from your posts, which provide information very hard for us in the West to come by.

Glad to help  Of course, Ukrainain army and tank troops among it have many REAL problems, but not that, which claimed by Russian propagandists. 

Edited December 16, 2017 by Haiduk