Azrael

58 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

There were M4s made with improved cast dif cover. I think the M4A4 was the only version that didn't.

Ok thanks for letting me know, then it is really hard to tell which one it is. 

12 hours ago, EnsignExpendable said:

Exactly what I was thinking of, thanks!

 

Another question, is this an M4 or an M4A2? Is it possible to tell from this angle?

 

To me it looks like M4A2 Sherman. I mean looks similar to these
http://the.shadock.free.fr/sherman_minutia/sherman_types/m4a2/m4a2.html
http://www.pantser.net/wo2-france/w02-M4-ShermanIII.htm
And I am not an expert but shouldn't like M4 Sherman have "rounded" LFP, like this



Where M4A2 should have LFP angled like this

If I am wrong please do let me know

Just now, Mighty_Zuk said:

Wait, you mean they are ordering new-built, non-refurbished T-90 tanks? Because if that is true then it can show a great level of retardation. 

 

I suspected the RU MoD may have a strong lobbying group consisting of morons only, when people there started talking about how the Kurganetz was too tall (god forbid the troops actually have some room to straighten their backs and put their backpacks and gear), but how could none see through this?

They have ordered 30 T-90M tanks on "Army 2017" forum and now on "Army 2018" forum they have ordered 30 more. And apparently some will be brand new, not upgraded older T-90A tanks but made from "scrap".
Well some did talk how Kurganetz was not appropriate for Russian army, but apparently they have ordered a batch of them as well.

4 minutes ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

Indubitably. And yes you're right the T-90A is a superior tank to the T-80, and overall they are all pretty much trash by today's standards and the MoD doesn't see that they'll need to make the investment in their replacement at some point at least.

 

Welcome to the forum, by the way!

Well T-80BV tanks are now being upgraded to T-80BVMs and T-90s are being upgraded to T-90Ms. So they are slowly being upgraded. But Russia doesn't have T-90s in high numbers anyway so the upgrade time should not take long. But they are ordering brand new ones as well... So that is a good start if you ask me

Oh and thanks

11 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

It was indeed revolutionary for its time, but the Ivans driving the tank didn't need all this tech, they needed the glory of riding in no less than 3 main tank variants at the same time.

What they needed was something that they could produce in greater numbers, T-64 was superior to T-72, T-72 was a cheap copy of T-64 lacking some things that T-64 had in order to make it cheaper. T-72 was more suited for

"stereotypical" Soviet tank doctrines (spamming tanks on the battlefield) but in tank to tank comparison T-64 was undoubtedly better.

21 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

I don't know about Soviet-era competitions, I think the general rule of thumb was that T-80 was superior to all other T-tanks but accordingly expensive, while T-90 with welded turret was between the T-72 series and T-80 in effectiveness.

The recent modernization programs intend to put them all in roughly the same state in terms of firepower, situational awareness, night fighting capabilities etc. The T-90 though would still enjoy a more comprehensive protection suite.

 

EDIT: Oh and the T-64 was trash, *spit*.

T-90A (variant with welded turret) is superior to T-80 tanks. The turret is rated to be around 800mm effective (with Kontakt-5) while turret of T-80U with Kontakt-5 is rated around 600-650mm. And also improved gun, 2A46M5 (got upgraded with it in 2010, originally it had 2A46M4 while T-80U had and still has 2A46M1. Basically mobility is only aspect that you could say T-80 is superior to T-90.