Tied Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Teid you're giving the T-62 way too much credit. The T-62 was a Russian M47, just bad and only medciore after the 72 revision. The tactics my friend, would make the difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaustianQ Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 The tactics my friend, would make the difference You might as well speak of separatists armed with T-34/85s, at least those don't try to suffocate the crew. If given a company of T-62s, by the end of 30 days I'd have 14 115mm SPGs and 14 APCs. Yes, I have a raging hateboner for such awful garbage, why do you ask? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well they do have one T-34-85... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 Well, i never saw a single T-62 in combat in Eastern Ukraine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 You might as well speak of separatists armed with T-34/85s, at least those don't try to suffocate the crew. If given a company of T-62s, by the end of 30 days I'd have 14 115mm SPGs and 14 APCs. Yes, I have a raging hateboner for such awful garbage, why do you ask? A fleet of 115mm guns on pickup trucks could probably handle most of Ukraine's tank fleet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 What are you having trouble with parsing? What you said is basically complete nonsense to me. The T-62 is not particularly comparable to the M47, the M47 has vastly different (less powerful) armament, the M47 was a very good tank (not jiving with your premise that the T-62 is ass), etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 I posted a T-62 modification for UAF, but they are not used. T-64BVs and T-72A/Bs are simply much better. Older tanks could have been used as firesupport vehicles for units that have old BMPs for this role. T-55/62 are better than BMP-1/2 IFV in fire support role. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaustianQ Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 What you said is basically complete nonsense to me. The T-62 is not particularly comparable to the M47, the M47 has vastly different (less powerful) armament, the M47 was a very good tank (not jiving with your premise that the T-62 is ass), etc. The M47 was supposed to have an increase in firepower, that ended up being rather disappointing - same as T-62. Both tanks were imagined as something else but ended up growing fat and nothing like original specifications. M47 is barely an upgrade over the M46, the T-62 is barely an uograde over the T-55. Neither were well used and both had short production runs for thier perspective nations. Both quickly became obsolete within 4 years of introduction. I guess the difference is the M47 got exported and people were able to turn it into a good tank (that no one bought). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted July 25, 2015 Report Share Posted July 25, 2015 The M47 was supposed to have an increase in firepower, that ended up being rather disappointing - same as T-62. Both tanks were imagined as something else but ended up growing fat and nothing like original specifications. M47 is barely an upgrade over the M46, the T-62 is barely an uograde over the T-55. Neither were well used and both had short production runs for thier perspective nations. Both quickly became obsolete within 4 years of introduction. I guess the difference is the M47 got exported and people were able to turn it into a good tank (that no one bought). I think you're creating parallels that don't really exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T___A Posted July 26, 2015 Author Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Yeah, the T-62 was meant as a cheap upgrade over the T-55 which reused parts from the T-55. I don't think anyone was disappointed with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted July 26, 2015 Report Share Posted July 26, 2015 Everyone except the Soviet Union, Bulgaria and North Korea but ya i dont hate it, probably because its so damn sexy i cant stay mad at it I do see his point but i dont know much about American tanks considering how amazingly fucking confusing their tank development is to follow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted August 10, 2015 Report Share Posted August 10, 2015 5th mobilisation wave results - how well/bad local military commissariats manage to complete a mobilisation plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted August 10, 2015 Report Share Posted August 10, 2015 I'm surprised by the high results in the East. I wonder what the actual plan was, broken down by oblast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter_Sobchak Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 Yeah, I don't see the comparison. T-62 and M60 make a much better comparison in my mind. In both cases, the USA and the USSR took their first generation medium tank (t-55 and M48) and upgraded it with a new turret, hull improvements and a new gun to create a second generation post war tank. Certainly, neither tank was perfect although I would argue that the M60 has had a more impressive service record. The Soviet Union was able to replace the T-62 as their front line vehicle much more quickly than the US since their generation 2.5 tank, the T-64, went into production while the US generation 2.5 tank did not (MBT-70). M47 is more comparable to the T-44, a stop gag until the much better T-54/55 came into service, same as how M48 replaced M47. Anyhow, the M60 was a better tank than the M48 in just about every way. I am not sure the same can be said for the T-62 versus the T-55. T-55 certainly provided more bang for the buck, as evidenced by it's vastly superior export success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 One of the huge issue's with the T-62 was its low rate of fire to me, which if anything spurred the adoption of autoloaders more than anything else Its not like we were going to stop up-gunning MBTs, or start making them huge, so an autoloader was a pretty pheasbile solution Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Collimatrix Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 5th mobilisation wave results - how well/bad local military commissariats manage to complete a mobilisation plan. How did they measure the districts' performance, and who did the study? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tied Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 Yuri, in the Kiev goverment printing room Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 I posted this in Ukrainian armor thread, but this is also belongs to this topic as well -That is very very interesting combat footage. It shows advancing LPR rebels taking fire in the middle of field, and later - a UAF tank 500 meters away, driving right into the middle of advancing forces. As i understand this was recorded in 2014. You must watch it, i am serious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 An optometrist's store in the Donbass: "80% discount for OSCE representatives on lenses" Sgt.Squarehead and LoooSeR 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Right Sector hard at work doing... something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Normally the procedure is to choke your chicken while surfing the web on your computer... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted August 14, 2015 Report Share Posted August 14, 2015 https://vk.com/typical_military?w=wall-39695140_1485611 This Vkontakte post claims that this is T-90 in Luhansk oblast, 2014, photos were made between Pridorozhnoe and Novoannovka. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnsignExpendable Posted August 14, 2015 Report Share Posted August 14, 2015 Hmm yes, the world's blurriest photo of a roadside marker, that's some Bigfoot level evidence right there. Tied 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted August 14, 2015 Report Share Posted August 14, 2015 Yeah, but green paint covering vehicle № is suggesting that something is not so simple. T-72B3s were in Ukraine (at least in Debaltsevo), after all... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.500ead743c175df1c0a99372a32d0fef.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.