The difference between T-64, T-72 and T-80.

[John Kettler]

Sgt.Squarehead,

I played the first version of the game--against someone who'd heavily played it solitaire first and always had to be the Ogre. Same guy always had to be SS, the Germans, the Elves, etc. "Ogre moves. Ogre fires. Defender moves. Defender fires." Bloodbath after bloodbath, to the point where my temper flared. Eventually, I figured out how to win with a GEV heavy force. Next thing you know, SJG issues revised rules limiting number of GEVs allowed, followed by a Second Edition in which the GEV count was directly limited by available counters! Sigh. 

To get back to the OP, here's a good read on the T-80U forward. It's from Frank Prados's ArmorSite.

http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/T-80U.htm

WarIsBoring has a good article on the T-80, though with a title I deem a bit overblown. It gets into some of the technical issues in fair depth, including a vulnerability of which I was unaware but evidently cost the Russians dearly in Grozny.

https://warisboring.com/the-t-80-is-russia-s-most-overrated-tank-798b5ba54ff9#.lgz87jvrc

Tankograd has its typical in-depth coverage, in this case,  of the T-80. I hate reversed type generally, but this is even worse--pumpkin against dark gray brown. Not sure what "Gambol" is about. Can any Russian speakers help, please?

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2016/02/t-80-gambol.html

Update March 26, 2017 

I just read something shocking to me, and I wonder if it might be true of the T-90 series as well? The above says that the T-80 was actually behind the T-64B and T-72 in capabilities when it finally made it to the field, so two years later was replaced by the T-80B which had the Kobra CLGM--which could be fired on the move! Recall nothing on this from the threat docs I read as part of my military analyst job. This is major news to me, and I wonder whether the T-90 series can do the same thing? Would be willing to bet no Russian tank in CMBS can fire CLGM on the move. Can say for a certainty the only way a Bradley can fire ATGM with a movement command is via Hunt. It, of course,  is really Move slowly, Spot target, Halt and Fire.

End Update

The below may be the most exciting (not in a good way) tank drift video I've seen to date. It's a good thing high volatility combustibles weren't present! "Crazy Ivan" (of "The Hunt for Red October" sort) executed by a Russian tanker.

Whether somebody failed to properly secure this tank (as many think), causing to slide off during a turn or a tire burst on the lowboy during a turn (what the military is saying), either way this entirely separate incident didn't end well. To me, if it's properly chained down, unless, say, the trailer goes over an embankment as a result of a blown tire, I think the tank ought to stay with the trailer and no disaster occur. That said, I've never moved anything heavy on a lowboy.

https://www.rt.com/viral/345246-tank-incident-moscow-region/

Finally,

Since the T-64's been given so much grief over its "motorcycle engine" sound, I thought it might be worthwhile to show what the basis for that engine, the GRU purloined Chieftain 5-cylinder, sounded like as installed. That tank was fortunate to have stayed in service at all, considering the combination of an overloaded transmission (~15 ton weight gain over plan) and lousy engine resulted in a 90% breakdown rate early on. Am in no way sure this is the original power plant. Anyone know this particular tank to that level of detail?

Regards,

John Kettler

 

Edited March 26, 2017 by John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Sgt.Squarehead,

Missed the Edit window, but should've said the T-80 was behind the T-72A (not T-72) and the T-64B in terms of capabilities.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Artemis258]

On 3/24/2017 at 7:12 AM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

 

Is not stuck, is hull down, Tovaritsch. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

[John Kettler]

Artemis258,

Droll! Were that tank a ship, which it is, considering the first tanks had the name "landship," would say she (Russians use he) is down by the stern and listing starboard as well. Unfortunately for that tank, there's no ship's carpenter, and any pump the tank has (could have a bilge pump for leaks during fording) probably isn't going to fare well when fed mud.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited March 26, 2017 by John Kettler

[John Kettler]

Found this in my YT sidebar, and this thread seemed a good place for it. From a British show, with some very odd footage choices (IS-8 briefly), but much material I hadn't seen before.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Couldn't listen to the awful voiceover! 

[cool breeze]

I dont understand why the robot voice is so popular for vids like that.  Happy Easter!

[John Kettler]

Guys,

When I watched the video, I thought it was just an English guy doing the VO and didn't think much of it. But after reading what you said, I went back and listened to part of it afresh. then, it was glaringly apparent your characterizations were spot on. Can't believe I missed that the first time through, for now, it sounds a lot like anonymous. Wonder whether he stripped out the audio to keep YT off his back or simply to, in his mind, be cool and put his own imprint on the video. With my hears now attuned, the VO is indeed robotic, not to mention somewhat annoying.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Erwin]

Nah, it's just a boring English guy.  I had teachers who droned on just like that.

[cool breeze]

I'm pretty sure it's been audio edited to sound robotic.  Its especially apparent in some of the end words where it auto-tunes through like 3 or 4 tunes in one word real quick.  I think it's done to make some people think/feel they are getting such secret confidential information that the person recording it has to protect their identity to avoid retaliation.

Edited April 17, 2017 by cool breeze

[Erwin]

Yup, that's what some of my teachers were like...  

Edited April 17, 2017 by Erwin

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Did we go to the same school? 

[Erwin]

Latymer?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Guess not. 

[John Kettler]

Andy,

My brother Ed and I were in a big game and comics store yesterday for half an hour while waiting for the restaurant just down the road to open so we could have dinner. While there, he pointed out to me this great honking luridly colored game box for what I believe was Ogre Sixth Edition. From $2.75 in a plastic box, with a flimsy folded map and counters you cut out with scissors in 1977, to $49.99 now, with full color rules, stout die cut large fancy counters, special pearl dice and a huge counter tray--that's quite the change. But if you want REAL sticker shock, the Designer's Edition is  $175.00!  

On a more topical note, in an extraordinarily long talk about many things martial, the subject of the T-80 came up, so I mentioned the video I provided. He asked some more questions, which resulted in my doing some research to give him the short course on Russian Premium Tanks. The links follow that brief discourse.

The Russian Premium Tank tale of woe goes: Revolutionary, super complex and very expensive T-64 leads to partial technology transfer (too expensive to do all) to the radical turbine powered T-80, which has its own horror stories. The T-80 has some of its goodies ported to the T-72 derived T-90. Meanwhile, the Russians were hard at work (on the black project side of things) on the so-called FST-1 Objekt 640 "Black Eagle" and the super scary FST-2 sporting a full-blown 152 mm high velocity cannon, not that piddly thing on the M551 and M60A3. Said cannon was in an unmanned turret, with the crew in the heavily armored hull.  The latter tank was Objekt 477 Molot (Hammer) and was undone by the collapse of the SU and lack of funds to complete it. Care to guess where some of its feature wound up? Objekt 640 was the one that looked so much like the Abrams when it appeared in Soviet Military Power that the Pentagon caught a lot of guff over using scare tactics, based on a nonexistent tank but it was Objekt 477 which had western military and civilians practically incontinent, since it was covered in both defense periodicals and Newsweek in 1988. When I was in the business, we dreaded its eventual appearance, for we had nothing like it. As you can see from the writeup, Objekt 640 was pretty nasty in its own righ andt had ERA, APS and Shtora. It survived the Cold War and nearly made it into production--except it was T-80 based, and the T-80 was a turd. Like the wretched T-80 from which it sprang, Objekt 640 was also turbine powered. Russian experience with gas turbines for tanks was so awful they were categorically prohibited.

 

Objekt 640

 

https://aw.my.com/en/forum/showthread.php?96141-In-Development-Object-640-quot-Black-Eagle-quot

 

Objekt 477 and other goodies.

 

Танки «Бунтарь», «Боксер», «Молот»

 

http://survincity.com/2013/04/unusual-roscii-tanks-and-the-soviet-union-object/

Edited April 23, 2017 by John Kettler

[Erwin]

What's the address of the game store?

[Sgt.Squarehead]

JK, I am probably going to be building my 1/35 Objekt 279 over on Britmodeller in short order, I'll post a link if you want to look in, BM has some seriously talented modellers. 

[JoMac]

On 3/24/2017 at 3:47 AM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I remember Ogre.....I was a bit of a Steve Jackson Games fan for a while, way back when, I still have a sizable stack of GURPS & Car Wars stuff in the attic somewhere.

You do realize, Sgt.Squarepants, that only FASA's 'Star-Trek Combat Simulator, or its Evil Cousin TFG's 'Star Fleet Battles' was the real chit back when...Thou, I do faintly remember Steve Jacksons 'Car Wars'. 

Joe

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I have the original FASA Star Trek RPG, Deluxe Edition (with Combat Sim included) and a fair bunch of the supplements, but my first love was Chaosium stuff.

I am the proud owner of Ringworld RPG and a signed Ringworld Companion.  I have a draft copy of fifth edition Pendragon and a bunch of other rarities.....Yup, I am a semi-reformed RPG nerd and proud of it too. 

[JoMac]

9 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I have the original FASA Star Trek RPG, Deluxe Edition (with Combat Sim included) and a fair bunch of the supplements, but my first love was Chaosium stuff.

I am the proud owner of Ringworld RPG and a signed Ringworld Companion.  I have a draft copy of fifth edition Pendragon and a bunch of other rarities.....Yup, I am a semi-reformed RPG nerd and proud of it too. 

As this discussion went from semi-derailed to a Train wreck, so, then there is no harm in continuing this...

Dad, owned a Hobby-Shop in Northern Virginia back in the early 80's to early 90's...I remember some of what you mentioned, including 'D&D', Twilight 2K, 'Middle-Earth' Series (better system then D&D), GURPS, ETC, Etc, etc, and along with my interest in HO & Micro-Armor Table-Top Minis, ACW, Napoleonic's, etc, going to Conventions like 'Cold Wars', Historicon, etc...Those were the Good 'Ole Days of War gaming.  

Edited April 24, 2017 by JoMc67

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Yup, that list is a good summary of much of my youth. 

My attic's still full of the stuff, I've got some great lead figures too, there's an untouched Citadel Great-Spined Dragon (minus the box sadly for the resale value) and some lovely old Ral-Partha stuff up there somewhere. 

I can return to the subject of tanks at the drop of a hat though.....I'm literally surrounded by (kits of) those:

Then there's the kites.....I do like my toys! 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[John Kettler]

Andy,

Very much want to see that Objekt 279. Had no idea such a kit existed, but then, I haven't kept track. Ha! Here's a National Interest piece originally on War Is Boring, but I used it because the comments are informative in addition to the August 11, 2015 article.

This is Why Russia's T-80 Tank Is a Total Disaster

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/why-russias-t-80-tank-total-disaster-13550 

Not sure regarding the reality of this, but supposedly T-80BVs will be entering service this year. 

T-80BV Main Battle Tank to Enter Service in 2017

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/12/26/t80bv-main-battle-tank-enter-service-2017.html

Erwin,

Why do you need a store address (no game stores in your area?) when you can get the game directly from the manufacturer? Deliberately broke that URL, as you'll readily see. You can get one from Amazon for MSRP and less than $5 shipping, too. Of course, priority should always be given to CM purchases! 

sjgames.usual/ogre/products/ogre6e/

A couple of appetite whetters (okay, one fiscal nightmare included). Regarding the latter, this is 2013 pricing and is not the Kickstarter edition.
 

 

Regards,

John Kettler

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Those counters, at that price.....Oh dear! 

I have two of the (IIRC) three available 1/35 kits of Objekt 279, one (not terribly good one) from Panda (godawful ejector pin marks on each and every one of the single track links, all 288 of them), the other a much better kit from Takom.  I believe I have drawings of 279 stashed somewhere so I'll check the parts from both kits, see how they compare and use the best ones.....I'm pretty sure this will leave me an empty Takom box and a full Panda kit, but I could well be wrong.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[John Kettler]

Andy,

Upon closer reading, it dawned on me that the tank I thought you were talking about, Molot aka Objekt 477, doesn't match the Objekt 279. Consequently, I don't know whether you're saying you have an IS-8 kit or whether you made a mistake and wrote 279 when you meant to write 477. Please clarify so I know what the tank model actually is of, since I'm perplexed. Not saying an IS-8, which is a kind of Ogre ancestor because of the redundant tracks, wouldn't be cool, but I was expecting the T14 ancestor instead. Should also note that I didn't quite get things right earlier. I had dinner with one brother and called the other. All that material on the Premium Tank was written by me or dug up as supporting research following a very long call to my retired army Scout brother George. Haven't heard back yet, but he is a busy man. I imagine, though, that seeing what would've been FST-2 will get his attention. Was massively disappointed when Soviet Military Power didn't show it but FST-1 aka Objekt 640 instead. After a big buildup that the FST was going to be in SMP, and considering it was FST-2 which was really being talked about, my colleagues and I figured we'd be seeing FST-2 and were rather crushed when we didn't get it. Consequently, when just recently I finally got to see the real tank, it was a great and disturbing day. That thing was scary looking. Can only imagine the reaction when that beast was first imaged by US recon satellites and the imagery analysts specializing in AFVs got a look. I imagine a great deal of GI distress ensued, a condition doubtless worsened as the various pieces of the intel puzzle started coming together and the initial (likely terrifying) assessment was drafted and released. 

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited April 24, 2017 by John Kettler