Help support TMP


"In a Fight Between Abrams and T-90 Tanks, Victory ..." Topic


8 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2008-present) Message Board



695 hits since 19 Apr 2018
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP19 Apr 2018 9:56 p.m. PST

…Goes to the Better Crew.

"While the T-14 Armata might be Russia's latest and greatest tank, it still is not ready for service. In order to bolster the capabilities of the more conventional tank fleet while the Armata is being prepared, Russia continues to modernize its current "top-tier" tanks, such as the T-90.

Recently 40 T-90Ms, the latest variant of the T-90, were reported to be ready for delivery in the near future to combat units. Similar to the M-1A2 SEP v3, this is an upgrade kit that builds upon and improves the capabilities of the tank. It is unknown at this time whether the T-90Ms being delivered are kits being retrofitted to T-90s or T-90As. But how do these two souped-up tanks compare?

Unlike earlier generations of Russian tanks, the T-90M has practically every feature that modern Western tanks enjoy. While earlier tanks sometimes lacked an independent commander thermal sight, instead only having independent commander day and night sights, the T-90M mounts the PK-PAN independent commander sight. The gunner's sight is also thermal the now-standard Sosna-U module…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

28mm Fanatik20 Apr 2018 8:25 a.m. PST

The Abrams is superior, but the T-90 is what some people call the "80 percent solution at less than 50 percent of the cost":

link

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP20 Apr 2018 10:46 a.m. PST

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Lion in the Stars20 Apr 2018 11:31 p.m. PST

IMO, the most important place where the T72 is superior is fuel economy. Active Protection systems are nice, but being able to run for more hours/miles is more important in a mobile attack or defense!

Abrams suck fuel fast enough to restart the world economy…

28mm Fanatik21 Apr 2018 7:19 p.m. PST

The Russians tried gas turbine engines with the T-80 but found them to be too complex and costly to maintain.

If the T-90 relative to the Abrams is the 80% solution at under 50% of the price, then the Abrams would be, what, the 125% solution at over twice the cost of the T-90?

PMC31723 Apr 2018 1:30 a.m. PST

I think, if the Russians were to ramp up production of their modern equipment to WW2 levels, create a mass standing army with the professional ethos of Western forces, and radically restructure their society and economy to support this…

…then they would be a threat.

But, as they're not going to do that, I think we can safely say that T-90s are not going to be facing off against Abrams variants for a long time. If ever.

williamb23 Apr 2018 10:37 a.m. PST

T90s currently in use by Iraq and some in Syria. Egypt and Kuwait also looking to purchase them. Since Egypt , Kuwait and Iraq are already operating M1s both would be in the same armies. Very slight possibility of Iraq M1 vs Syrian T90 in areas being fought over.

28mm Fanatik23 Apr 2018 11:41 a.m. PST

I can see the appeal of buying T-90's. Like those Sprint commercials with the "Can you hear me now?" guy trying to get people to switch from Verizon where he asks "Would you pay double for only a 1% difference in network reliability?"

Not only are T-90's cheaper to buy, they're also cheaper to maintain.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.