"Which Soviet MBT... 1985" Topic

Hi all,

I'm shooting for gaming a Cold War goes hot for August 1985. Yeah,I'm original!

Now with the Cold War being over (?) and better information being out there what vehicle should I use for my Soviets?

I want to play with Cat A units and here's what I'm thinking:

Tank Division: T64B MBT, BMP2 MICV, BTR80 APC, and BRDM2 for the recce.

Motor Rifle: T72 (?), BMP1 or BMP2 MICV, BTR80 or BTR70 APC, and BRDM2 for recce.

Is that about right? Would '85 be too early for T80s? Did the Russians use the T72? I seem to remember that it was used in the motor rifle divisions. Was the BMP2 in use with the rifle squads or wasn't only in limited use.

I'm not looking for perfection, close enough is fine.

Can't really go wrong with T-64 and T-72.

BMP1 and maybe a few BMP2, BTR60/70/80

I have T-72, BMP1 and BTR 60s

No T-72 in GSFG or CGF.

No mix of BMP and BTR

Motor Rifle could have a mix of BMP-1 and 2 in different Battalions. (2 x BMP1 and 1 x BMP-2 Bns per Regt) AD Bn had 8 BMP-2, and a couple in the Recce Coy.
If you search my threads from a few years ago there is a read out of a MR Regt from an old training image of a barracks.

T80 coming into service, think 8GA had them first. At least 1 MRR had T-80 and BTR!

Tally Ho!

According to Wargamer Vault Russian Tank Division 79-84
Cat A
You can have T-62 or T-72 or T-64 or T-80 in the Tank Battalion of Tank Regt.
You can have T-62 or T-72 or T-64 in Tank Battalion of Motor Rifle Regiment.
You can have BMP-1 in Motor Rifle Battalion BMP
You can have BTR-60PB in companies in Motor Rifle Battalion BTR

Did the tank divisions only use BMPs?
Wouldn't BTR60s be in lower cat units?

Thanks for the information!

As Nick says, there were no Soviet T-72s in the main European area of operations. In 1985, the main tank type was T-64A/B, with T-80 coming into service, having already filled some formations. There might have been the odd T-62 unit still in place, though they were completely gone from Europe by the late 1980s.

So you'd only see T-72s in follow-on formations coming from the USSR proper (as well as some in Warpac service).

And as he says; T-80s could also be found in the Tank Battalions of Motor Rifle Regiments. They weren't reserved for Tank Regiments only.

Yes, the Tank Divisions generally used only BMP by that stage. Motor Rifle Divisions mainly had 1xBMP Regt and 2x BTR Regts, plus a Tank Regt.

Re BTR-60PBs: They were still the majority APC type when the Soviets finally pulled out of Europe, despite the introduction of BTR-70 & BTR-80.

However, they would be retained by the two BTR Motor Rifle Regiments in each Motor Rifle Division.

If I remember a MRR would have 2 x BTR MRR, 2 x BMP MRR and an independent Tk Bn.

A Tank Div 2 x Tank Regt and 2 x BMP MRR

A Tank Regt – 3 x Tk Bns, 1 x BMP Bn

MRR – 1 Tk Bn, 3 x MRB either 3 x BMP or 3 x BTR

Tanks in GSFG mid 80s, 3SA, 2 GT and 20 T-64, 8GA and 1 GTA T-80

Just confirmed on an image a BTR-60 BTR Regt with T-80.

NVA had one Div, I think, with T-72) "Flektern" gives a good run down on the NVA in a thread from a couple of years ago.

Tally Ho!

Go to Fft3 yahoo. Or Sh? There is a Russian, also lurking here btw, hello Vassili, from S.F…
He knows it all.
Almost no btr 80 but mix 60/70.

Divisions vary, receive equipment and commander decides how to attribute ( so much for inflexibility and standardization).
So you can have bmp 1 bn, bmp 2 bn, or probably more mixed ones.

Category has not so much to do with equipment as to peacetime manning.

For Tank divisions, T64s, maybe T62s, maybe T55s for poor old NVA, Polish etc units.

As above, no T72s on the Central Front.

I think Harold Coyle book Team Yankee is a good book to use. Its been 30 years and data is know to be wrong. So good luck with your cold wars, I'll bet its fun.

So the BTR80 was a late arrival? Oooops! Are they a more u!tra-modern vehicle then? I like the BTR60, and I thought it was gone in Russian service by the 80s and seconded to low readiness units and exports.

So cat levels didn't apply to kit? Could cat a units have outdated gear? Was that the deal with units in Afghanistan? High cats, but outdated gear?

Yes, as the above have mentioned, since we beat this to death on another posting about tanks in Europe, e.g. no T-72s for GSFG.

T-62s perhaps (more likely to be in follow-on/reserve units I suspect), though T-64s would probably be much more likely for the best front-line units. T-80s just coming on line.

Generally, the BMP-1s and 2s would not be mixed in units, with the exception that you could see BMP-2s in the recon platoons with BRDM-2s, and a couple of BMP-2s attached in the weapons section of BMP-1 companies.

BMP-2s just being fielded in significant numbers around 1985, if reports I've read are accurate.

For the MRRs, I seem to recall one battalion being in BMPs (most likely BMP-1s still during this period), and 2 battalions in BTR-60PBs (or BTR-70s), with a "heavy" tank battalion (my term, not an official one) attached to them (40 tanks, instead of the usual 31 in a regular tank battalion – though apparently in this period, it appears a lot of tank battalions were increased in size, from 31 vehicles to 40 vehicles, due to anticipated losses while on the attack).

Yes, as mentioned, the BMP battalions are generally preferred, and assigned for the tank divisions/regiments, over the BTRs. ?They have more offensive power on the attack, with their guns and ATGMs.

If you want to play with T-72s, a lot of the Warsaw Pact units fielded them, as well as many upgraded T-55s also. They never switched over to the T-62s, since the cost was about double that of the T-55, for what was perceived to be little gain in capabilities, so T-62s should be relegated primarily to Soviet units (East Germany had a small number of them – one WRG TO&E provides for a company to be fielded, if desired, by the DDR). T-55s are/were more numerous, generally, than T-72s in the Warpac units, e.g. DDR, Poland, etc.

T-62s that were still hanging on by 1985 would have been exclusively in the armored units attached to motor rifles. Regardless of WRG TO&Es, the DDR only ever had one or two T-62s for evaluation.

Mid 80s – no mixed BMP/BTR MRR in GSFG, one or the other. With BTR the Arty Bn would be D-30 with the BMP – 2S1.

All this talk reminds me of being a youngster sat waiting for it to go mad!!

Tally Ho!

…and (a shameless plug) we can provide all of the above in 15mm ;-)

Nice one, Geoff!

Can't wait for funds to permit that.

Also, as a general guide, assuming some of the WRG info is correct (there are some errors, as noted above, plus others, e.g. T72 for Soviets, T74 tank, etc.), generally, they'd not mix older style APCs with newer style tanks, and vice versa, so you wouldn't see BTR-70s with T-55s in the same unit.

I also asked the same kind of question about 4 years ago, so there may be some information there that can be useful too:

TMP link

In Doberitz one MRR of 35 MRD, 20GA was equipped with T-80 and BTR60PB. A second MRR just down the road was T-80 and BMP. Image late 80s.

Tally Ho!

Great thread. With regards to BMP 1's, would they have been 1p's by then, or a mix? For the vanilla 1's, what sort of AT missile would be mounted in this period?

As I said division commander organised his vehicles mix as he wanted within TOE. Many variants.

MRR tank bn are 40 veh as they normally all detached for ops use to motor companies. So need the 13 per company as one coy goes to one bn
Each command tank co located with his commander counterpart.
So platoon cd tank is with coy cder, company ( sqn? Uk ) with bn comdr.

Different from post soviet org as some of you mix it up. As with everything all mods did not go everywhere at once.

Nick,

Were those div orgs a very late 80s/early 90s organisation?

We used to work on the basis of:

TD:
1x MR Regt (BMP)
3x Tk Regts

(This was allegedly being changed to 2x TR & 2x MRR at the end)

MRD:
1x Tk Regt
1x MR Regt (BMP)
2x MR Regts (BTR)
1x Ind Tk Bn (some divs – larger establishment with 4 or 5 companies)

(again, this was apparently being changed in 1989)

MR Regts each had an organic Tk Bn with 4x Tks per pl.

Tk Regts each had an organic MR Bn (BMP).

Jemimia Boyo!

Think mine is late 80s, will have to draw further back into my senile memory banks!

Tally Ho!

Yes Jem, I concour

found old faded notes, if only I had some of me old briefs about, but then the old slides would weigh a ton!

But your info is correct for early-mid 80s,

Tally Ho!

Just on the issue of what tanks were in CGF, I thought they did have some T72's, or is that nonsense?

All Soviet T-72s were based inside the Soviet Union.

You'd think Coyle of all people would know that, but why on earth did he portray all the Soviets in Team yankee as driving T72's?

When TY was written in the early-80s, NATO thought the T-72 was replacing the T-64. The confusion over later T-64 variants vs the T-72 at the time didn't help.

And all of our training used T-72 (OPFOR).

Other than the look IIRC, a T-64 and a T-72 preform about the same

I have an old US Army poster from the period, the MBT is the T-72, mistake will happen!

Tally Ho!

When I was in the Army in the early 80s, the belief definitely was that the T-72 was the "next generation" Soviet tank and was to replace the T-64s.

And, of course, then there are reports of the Russian/Soviet "T-74" tank, which apparently is just an upgraded T-72.

The IT-130 was another figment of imagination too.

Maskirovka and

And as with many other " information" one could wonder about the amount of crap we've been fed with. Or were they so ( also) inefficient in collecting the right data?
You know it is like in crime investigations, the details that don't add up.

What if the soviet army was really a defensive army? For ex planning not to fight in hills that needed a gun depression, but at or near home which needs lower tanks? No need so much of air refueling too…
Not necessarily because their military were inept.

Frog,

A tank designed primarily for fighting defensive actions from hull-down positions would absolutely need good gun-depression (as NATO designs do and Soviet designs don't).

Soviet main tank gun ammo loadout was HE-Frag for suppressing dug-in infantry and ATGMs during the advance, rather than AP types for killing attacking vehicles while in the defence.

But keep fighting the power, man. Don't let pesky facts get in the way of your opinions.

Hi guys – really interesting thread, I'm currently figuring out the OOBs/TOE for Europe in late 1983 (Able Archer/Ryan gone hot), and this has helped but also confused me given some of the information I've already collected.

My main Soviet TOEs were described as being for 1970-84, so I'm not sure if some of the discussion above applies; if it does, some of my TOEs are just wrong.

Anyway, here are my questions for circa 1983:

- Did MRDs have independent tank battalions?

- Did the tank battalion in the MRRs have 4 tanks/platoon?

- Did the tank regiments in both types of divisions have organic MR battalions (or companies)? Or just TD TRs? Or no TRs had organic infantry (what my TOE says for the Soviets, except I have a Polish TOE that says their TD TRs did have an organic MR company).

This is making my head hurt figuring these things out, so thanks in advance for any answers.

Chris

- Did MRDs have independent tank battalions?

Yes

- Did the tank battalion in the MRRs have 4 tanks/platoon?

Yes

- Did the tank regiments in both types of divisions have organic MR battalions (or companies)? Or just TD TRs? Or no TRs had organic infantry (what my TOE says for the Soviets, except I have a Polish TOE that says their TD TRs did have an organic MR company).

The tank regiment TO&E for both MRD and TDs had an organic MR battalion. In reality, the Soviets had shortages of manpower and equipment, so many regiments, particularly in Cat B divisions, had only companies.

Excellent, thanks Cold Steel! Figuring out TO&Es is worse than doing taxes by hand…

Wot CD said, though I'd add that Cat B & C Divisions didn't necesarily have worse equipment or lower scales of equipment. The category related to the proportion of active troops to reservists on the strength – Cat A being virtually 100% full-time active troops and Cat C being mostly reservists. There were some low-category divisions around Moscow that were among the first to receive new kit such as T-80, which goes against the grain of most wargames lists.

Warsaw Pact nations' TO&Es could sometimes have marked differences to Soviet norms.

Who said they thought hull down was needed in their terrain? It might be why they did not change the ww2 policy, nothing else.

Seems I made a personal enemy here, looking like a pro soviet dove for him. Funny, always a first time.
Reminds me when a student with my pals reserve cadets, most being ultra right, passing for a leftie because I was not accepting their ready made ideas, and charged of militarism and crypto facism by the other students, compulsory fashionable lefties.

Curiosity and learning kills a lot of past truth.

Jc, you old commie lover!!!!!!

the combat indicator may be that their best kit and formations were based in the DDR, carried out mostly offencive trg and exercises, a lot of emphasis on assault river crossings, route clearance etc.

NATO trg mostly defence in depth, reinforce, counter attack (Except for the Germans who were generally assessed to have one plan – Nach Ost!!)

Of interest, an old colleague remembers watching a Polish exercise in the late 80s in which T-34/85 were used!

Tally Ho

Ouch ty!
Commie lover! Yes sure cooked enough with a lot of sauce to,mask the taste.

Again my feeling is they had enough of invasion and its trauma, in case of war better it be just off the border.
Any way a moot point as fortunately we did not taste the medicine. It is only a possible game and interesting, as we know more now than then.

Frog,

Nothing personal or political at all, it's just that I'm allergic to dingo's kidneys.

I'm so glad that you're curious and keen to learn. No need to thank me, but that's very kind of you.

Nick, the East Germans had their fair share of T34/85s at that time too, mostly restricted to their five reserve/training divisions