"61-Year-Old Tank Still Fights Everywhere" Topic

"Like the AK-47 but for tanks, T-54 and T-55s endure on battlefields around the world. Simple to operate and maintain, these decades-old Soviet armored beasts are still popular in small nations and with non-state irregular forces — a true "people's tank."

If a coup or fratricidal civil war breaks out in one of Moscow's current or former beneficiaries, there's good chances T-54 or T-55s are taking part

When Afghanistan collapsed in the 1990s, the Taliban and Northern Alliance coalition both inherited T-55s formerly belonging to the communist government. The tanks served in Yugoslavia's multi-sided civil war during the same decade.

Today, captured Iraqi and Syrian T-55s serve under the black flag of Islamic State and other rebel groups fighting in the region. For these insurgent armies, the 60-year old tanks are just as useful as far more modern designs such as the M1 Abrams…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Cheap, plentiful, and easy to maintain… As long as your opponent doesn't have better, they are quite sufficient.

Yep !! Stalin would be proud ! But as noted, if they go up against M1s, Leos, etc., they better have quantity and good crew training & experience, etc. … Like in WWII, Shermans vs. Panthers … Of course the men behind the weapons are an important factor as always.

Useful still but if facing any kind of modern opponent they would be death traps – unable to survive a hit and unable to destroy their targets.

Even facing determined infantry with RPGs they would be highly vulnerable.

With experiencedcrews versus opposing inexperienced ones, the T-54s and T-55s would probably do just fine. NOt so against opposing ones with similar levels of training and experience. See Zalgoa's Armoured Champion for statistics for Shermans with expereinced US crews fighting German Panthers in the new Panzer brigades during the German counterattack around Arracourt.

Chris

That is really is the bottom line … the crew training and experience as I said.

Considering that they still had T34/85s in the Balkans, not quite record breaking.

And while the models used in the '73 War were significantly upgraded Centurions handled the T54/55s rather handily.

But then as noted crew quality is a major factor.

Agree about the crew factor.

Amicalement
Armand

I have a bunch of these for playing Ogre with. They never seemed out-of-place on a future battlefield.

Trained crews in modern MBTs would have little to fear from even the most experienced best trained crews in T-55s.

If there are a LOT more T-55s then eventually the T-55s would win – but I doubt the T-55s would keep pressing forward when they are being knocked out at a rate of 10:1 or worse.

It is a much bigger difference than between a Panther and a Sherman or T-34.

I don't think any army operating T-55s today has well trained and experienced crews.

That said it is a very effective weapon when unopposed or only opposed by light infantry who lack modern LATW.

It is a much bigger difference than between a Panther and a Sherman or T-34.

The paradigm I was getting at there. Is generally, quantity vs. quality … and even that can be argued.

"Just as useful as a M1" Okay, you take the T-55 and I'll take the M1, see you in the streets.

I have any tank – you don't – pretty tough for you, especially without any AT weapons

The newest T55s have a 100mm ATGM (AT10 Stabber) to work with, I wouldn't discount them.

Sure, an Abrams with an American crew is going to ruin the day of a whole company of T55s. But put an equally well-trained crew in the T55 and turn them loose on Saudi, Iraqi, or Egyptian Abrams company and the Abrams are going to have a bad day.

And when the comparison is "have a tank" versus "no AT weapons", even an M113 is deadly!

It's a pretty stupid article from a pretty stupid website so it massively overstates the case to make it's point.

Who operating a T-55 have equally well-trained crews to the US? Israel? They don't operate T-55s as MBTs in their front line units any more and for good reason.

But the last post nailed it – if your opponents have no AT capability any AFV will be enough.

Along with old T-54, T-55s, etc., many in those regions do have RPGs. Maybe Not the "best" AT weapon. But it certainly has KO'd/damaged a lot of AFVs. If used properly in the right terrain and situation, etc. …

I'd posit that most of those T-55s seeing action currently aren't being used as 'tanks', but rather as mobile artillery / infantry fire support vehicles – though I don't discount them being used as 'tanks' if their commanders are pretty certain the other guy doesn't have much in the way of AT capability.

I saw something on the news. This Afghan fellow evidently has a T-55 that he rents out on a freelance basis to various factions.

In 2003 a unit of T-55 were reported heading south out of Basrah towards 3 Cdo Bde on Al-faw. We sent a couple of Troops of CII, which crossed the shat on M-3 Rigs then engaged and destroyed the T-55s befor the latter knew what was happening.

Tally Ho!

I think the best use of T-55s these days is to convert them into heavy IFVs like the Israelis and Russians are doing. A decent tank when matched against 90mm M47/48, it is utterly outclassed by modern Western MBTs. The troop quality difference would have to be HUGE for T55s to have a decent chance against M1A2s or Leopard 2A6s. The 100mm gun on the T-55 would require flank shots to penetrate the Abrams or Leopard 2 armor (and that assumes modern ammunition; 40 year old ammo would be useless). The Leopard 2 and Abrams would be able to engage the T55 at 3.6-4km; the T-55 would need to close to 1200 meters or less to reliably penetrate the *flank* armor of the Abrams/Leopard 2.

That said, the T-55 would be plenty effective against lighter stuff (APCs or IFVs) and would be able to penetrate the armor of Cold War enemies like the M60, Leopard 1 or AMX-30. They would, however, be horribly vulnerable to medium and heavy ATGMs and would be badly outraged by them and the M60 class tanks. The missile systems available for the T55 would improve their range against light stuff, but missiles are very expensive. A single combat load of 6 missiles will cost signifcantly more than the T-55 itself.

Check out Kharkiv Morozovs current upgrade,the T-55AG.Refitted with a 125 mm rapira with modern ammo and the ability to fire atgms through the tube, thermal imaging capability,
fast traverse turret motors,full applique and reactive suites,halon fire suppression system and a very upgraded engine package.