T80BV

[LUCASWILLEN05]

This is interesting Can anyone shed further light on the status of the T80BV n the Russian army?

https://southfront.org/reactive-t-80bv-tanks-returning-in-service-of-russian-army/

Maybe we will see BF including this as an option for the Russians - I am sure here will be those who will  be celebrating that :-)

[IMHO]

A REALLY interesting thing would be to shed some light on the prospects of Armata having these massive upgrades to T-72 and T-80

[DougPhresh]

It got a bad rap after Chechnya but reading Zaloga's book, it's a misunderstood weapons system with potential. I wouldn't mind seeing it in CMBS.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

2 minutes ago, DougPhresh said:

It got a bad rap after Chechnya but reading Zaloga's book, it's a misunderstood weapons system with potential. I wouldn't mind seeing it in CMBS.

Arguably performance in Chechnya was at least partly to do with poorly trained conscripts and poor command decisions. It is possible he 2008 Shaposhnikov Reforms have addressed those issues at least to some extent. This however seems like an  upgrade to bring the T80 up to modern standards Possibly this may be a stopgap measure while the other developments are being worked on. Obviously the T-14 if it comes into service at all will need new production lines with all that entalls, In the meantime upgrade the T80s they already have to modern standards as the easiest and cheapest solution

Anyway, perhaps this gives BF a good enough reason to include some late  T80 models like the UD and the new BV version although we might all accept these will be rare beasts indeed :-)

 

[IMHO]

It's a popular misconception. T-80 was no more vulnerable than T-72 there. The myth of T-80 vulnerability was due to:

1. Higher fuel consumption and non-existing logistics back then
2. The need to toss to someone the hot potato of disastrous results of the first attack of Grozny

PS Many a winter ago I was lucky to buy an OFFICIALLY  published book with FULL results of internal MoD evaluation of all heavy weapon systems employed in Chechnya. Charts, full statistics, photos, attack schematics, tactics employed by rebels - all for less than five bucks. The circulation of the book was 300 copies and to buy one had to know which unmarked door to knock and "code name"  of the person who sold them yet it was quite an open text then. I guess it must have been slapped with secret status by now.

Edited May 17, 2017 by IMHO

[DougPhresh]

I think that it is fair to say that if T-80s were unleashed on Ukraine it would look very different than idling columns burning gas unguarded on the streets of Grozny.

[Ghost of Charlemagne]

On 17/5/2017 at 4:05 PM, DougPhresh said:

I think that it is fair to say that if T-80s were unleashed on Ukraine it would look very different than idling columns burning gas unguarded on the streets of Grozny.

Yeah, they didn't have any infantry support in Grozny did they? 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

2 hours ago, AtheistDane said:

Yeah, they didn't have any infantry support in Grozny did they? 

Indeed the issues in Grozny my have been more to do with bad command decisions, poor coordination, conscript crews and infantry supports.

the point is that the Russans seem to be updating their T80s to the most modern standards rather than replacing the whole flet. Rather like the way the US upgrades the Abrams. 

[exsonic01]

I heard that this program was suggested back in 2012 but cancelled.... Is this program reactivated again? 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

16 hours ago, exsonic01 said:

I heard that this program was suggested back in 2012 but cancelled.... Is this program reactivated again? 

Sounds like this may be the case. Given real world developments this seems to be a valid conclusion

[LUCASWILLEN05]

However there are also other possibilities. One must also consider that the Russians are very good at Maskirovka, hence we should not rule that possibility out. Nor however can we rule out that several things could be going on here and that all the above could be going on to some degree 

https://informnapalm.org/en/russia-amasses-decommissioned-t-72b-and-t-80bv-tanks-at-ukrainian-border/

[luigim]

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201705201053812234-poroshenko-t-80-tanks-donbass-war/

[exsonic01]

7 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

Sounds like this may be the case. Given real world developments this seems to be a valid conclusion

You mean, is this reactivated? Are there any other source than southfront? 

[LUCASWILLEN05]

1 hour ago, exsonic01 said:

You mean, is this reactivated? Are there any other source than southfront? 

I am not sure. You certainly seem cautios abut it - and you could be right.Perhaps right now we should say "may be reactivated" Let us see what we can both come up. I did do a quick search on artcles over the last month quickly coming up with the infonapalm article posted above but this might be something one might see in a Maskirovka, hence I would not regard this one as strong evidence for the BV program being resumed

I did however find this though I am not convinced in regard to the reliability of the source so we may need to continue rating this one with some caution until we can further corroborate however, if accurate it might give some indication at least 

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

[LUCASWILLEN05]

1 hour ago, luigim said:

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201705201053812234-poroshenko-t-80-tanks-donbass-war/

I would not place too much trust in Russian sources  like Sputnik although some of the information may still be accurate. Jusy consider that a "health warning" to regard all sources with a degree of cation - including any I might post! :-)

Nevertheless thanks for the input

[Thewood1]

Oh, I think we have definitely learned to be cautious withyour posts.

[HUSKER2142]

4 hours ago, exsonic01 said:

You mean, is this reactivated? Are there any other source than southfront? 

This rumor appeared unofficially from a journalist from a source from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation. The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation does not deny or confirm this rumor. After that, many informational agencies began to spread this information.

[luigim]

13 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

I would not place too much trust in Russian sources  like Sputnik although some of the information may still be accurate. Jusy consider that a "health warning" to regard all sources with a degree of cation - including any I might post! :-)

Nevertheless thanks for the input

I don't place trust on Sputnik but I place trust on what I see clearly... watch the video and you can see T80's in UKR digital camo.. they are being reactivated

[LUCASWILLEN05]

1 hour ago, luigim said:

I don't place trust on Sputnik but I place trust on what I see clearly... watch the video and you can see T80's in UKR digital camo.. they are being reactivated

That is fair enough. What I will say is that, when I took my History and Politics degree many yeas ago I learned that any source had too be treated with a degree of skepticism. You wisely distrust Sputnik which is Russian state owned and therefore likely to be a mouthpiece for Putin, They say the camera does not lie but you can be shown only what someone wants you to see

Given the evidence so far I think it is likely to be true that the T80 is being re-activated and upgraded to modern standards. Other armies will upgrade their older tanks in this way (such as the US Abrams) instead of paying the costs of a whole new tank. Most likely this is what is happening here

[Thewood1]

"Other armies will upgrade their older tanks in this way (such as the US Abrams) instead of paying the costs of a whole new tank. Most likely this is what is happening here"

Wow!  Thanks for that insight.  Armies upgrade older tanks.  I don't think anyone on this forum knew that.  Do you have a link that backs that up?  Boy, that Political Science and History degree is really paying off.

[Artkin]

I've never seen people act like children on this website outside of the Black Sea discussion. 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Probably the fallout from Chernobyl, or something. 

[Artkin]

I think you boys ought to diversify