With the proliferation of after market kits to correct the various foilbles of many of the Russian kits from Skif, Zvezda, DML/Dragon, I was wondering this, I have these three kits:
Skif's T-64B
Zvezda's T-72B
DML/Dragon's T-80 (3506)
Two part question. If I were a NATO tank commander, what would my Russian counterpart have to counter me MBT-wise (ie, what spec of the main players T-64, T-72, T-80)? I'm looking to "modify" my kits to mid-80s Warsaw Pact spec. SO really what I need to know is what conversions are accurate to mid-80s spec for each series above (T-64, T-72, T-80)? For instance I see AEF has numerous T-72 conversions (turret replacements, ERA, etc.), but they mostly seem to be for the export version of the T-72 along the lines of what was seen in Desert Storm (maybe?). And maybe the standard T-72'B' is what would have proliferated in the mid-80s (I actually don't know), but regardless, the Zvezda turret is the wrong shape so...? See what I'm getting at? Two part difficulty for me, what spec am I after to begin with and then who makes said conversion even if it is to replicate and correct the OOTB tank. Appreciate the responses!
Яusso-Soviэt Forum: Cold War Soviet Armor
For discussions related to cold war era Russo-Soviet armor.
For discussions related to cold war era Russo-Soviet armor.
Hosted by Jacques Duquette
Mid-80s Russian MBTs
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 12:37 AM UTC
Drader
Joined: July 20, 2004
KitMaker: 3,791 posts
Armorama: 2,798 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 12:46 AM UTC
This Osprey book by Steve Zaloga gives a snapshot of what was thought at the time
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title_detail.php/title=Q9044~ser=ELI
As do his various Concord books on Soviet-era tanks. They are worth getting too, since they're written with the benefit of more recent research.
http://www.ospreypublishing.com/title_detail.php/title=Q9044~ser=ELI
As do his various Concord books on Soviet-era tanks. They are worth getting too, since they're written with the benefit of more recent research.
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 01:49 AM UTC
I know back during the 1980s we had to be trained to recognize which variant we were up against. This was for intel purposes since the type of tank would help identify the actual unit. For instance, a T-72xx would have meant it was a Soviet or East German front line unit.
It's been almost 20 years and those former enemies are now allies. I don't think I've kept any of the identification information (which type tank was common to which nation or unit).
Additionally, it also depended on which part of the border your unit was assigned to guard. Units on the Czechoslovakian border would have faced different forces than the units in the north or along the Fulda Gap. So even within US forces, we faced different units and countries.
A BOAR (British) tank commander would have faced a different tank than a West German or US soldier.
It's been almost 20 years and those former enemies are now allies. I don't think I've kept any of the identification information (which type tank was common to which nation or unit).
Additionally, it also depended on which part of the border your unit was assigned to guard. Units on the Czechoslovakian border would have faced different forces than the units in the north or along the Fulda Gap. So even within US forces, we faced different units and countries.
A BOAR (British) tank commander would have faced a different tank than a West German or US soldier.
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 02:46 AM UTC
T-64 and T-80 were strictly Soviet tanks in the mid-80's.
T-72B would have been with E. German's, Soviets, and maybe the Poles? I think places like Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania were still mainly using T-55's and T-62's, although they may have been getting T-72's at the time.
T-72B would have been with E. German's, Soviets, and maybe the Poles? I think places like Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Romania were still mainly using T-55's and T-62's, although they may have been getting T-72's at the time.
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 05:58 AM UTC
So you could expect to be up against a T-64B and a T-72B circa 1985? So the initial "spec" I have for each above is correct for the era...though I think I've made a mistake...I have a T-64Bv with the reactive armor on it. Does it become a T-64B just by simply not mounting the ERA? And regarding T-80s...I have the standard non-ERA'd DML T-80 (kit# 3506) as well as their T-80U(D?--can't quite remember what's on the box) SMT-1989 or there abouts. The T-80U(D) is a later development I take it ("SMT-1989")? Is the turret on the standard DML T-80 correct or mishapen? And while I've seen detail kits/replacement turrets for T-72s, T-63s, and even the T-80UD(and UDK), I haven't seen one for the plain old DML T-80.
Red4
Joined: April 01, 2002
KitMaker: 4,287 posts
Armorama: 1,867 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 10:30 AM UTC
If you are planning going with any of the AEF stuff, be fore warned that you might go nuts with clean up, fit, assembly etc. Notorius for being extremely crude, warped, broken pieces, wrong pieces etc. I'd run the other way. While on the border from 85-89 the only armor I saw was the flynig kind, namely Mi-24's, and other gun ships. We were close to Plauen EG and I know they had 72's there. As to the variants, its anybodys guess. The Czechs even had different stuff. As Rob stated we had to know the variants to better determine what was headed our way. All of this was committed to memory, trouble is, that was 20 years ago and that knowledge of threats was dumped to make room for other threat system knowledge...go figure. Good luck in your search. "Q" 
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 01:22 PM UTC
Quoted Text
If you are planning going with any of the AEF stuff, be fore warned that you might go nuts with clean up, fit, assembly etc. Notorius for being extremely crude, warped, broken pieces, wrong pieces etc. I'd run the other way.
Really? That's good to know. Curious if this is a sentiment shared by others? I had initially been looking at their T-64B turret though was shifting towards the Accurate Armour T-64B upgrade kit. Now I'm aiming to get that from the wife for X-mas...though she now informs me I'll have to wait till after...X-Mas budgets and all...shazbot.
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Friday, December 02, 2005 - 03:08 PM UTC
As I said elsewhere onthe net... 
To be totally honest, scuttlebutt between many of us FO types was this:
Soviets would invade initially with catagory 3 divisions (T-55/T-62 - lots of them) bolstered with some Cat. 2 Divs. (T-72 equipped) including large numbers of "allies" (Czechs, Poles, Germans...etc) and also use special forces in localized areas. This would be to use up valuable NATO ammo/fuel and to allow as big a shock to the system as possible. Most Catagory 2 units would be used to replace losses and the majority of Catagory 1 units (T-64/T-80) would be held until the first breakthrough, when they would pour through and run rampant with their best stuff.
Remember, this was the mid-1980's and the Soviets did have a solid advantage in Ground Support aircraft/helicopters and in heavy firepower artillery/MLRS.
And just for fun, using a army computer gaming setup, we tried a scenario similar to what i just described. Looses were high, but the Soviets ended up overrunning our positions...
So if you buy into the above (remember, this was all just scuttlebutt), expect T-55/T-62's in the initial assault, with some T-72 support.
Of course, Berlin probably would have been attakced by nothing but the best, so T-64's in the assault there.
To be totally honest, scuttlebutt between many of us FO types was this:
Soviets would invade initially with catagory 3 divisions (T-55/T-62 - lots of them) bolstered with some Cat. 2 Divs. (T-72 equipped) including large numbers of "allies" (Czechs, Poles, Germans...etc) and also use special forces in localized areas. This would be to use up valuable NATO ammo/fuel and to allow as big a shock to the system as possible. Most Catagory 2 units would be used to replace losses and the majority of Catagory 1 units (T-64/T-80) would be held until the first breakthrough, when they would pour through and run rampant with their best stuff.
Remember, this was the mid-1980's and the Soviets did have a solid advantage in Ground Support aircraft/helicopters and in heavy firepower artillery/MLRS.
And just for fun, using a army computer gaming setup, we tried a scenario similar to what i just described. Looses were high, but the Soviets ended up overrunning our positions...
So if you buy into the above (remember, this was all just scuttlebutt), expect T-55/T-62's in the initial assault, with some T-72 support.
Of course, Berlin probably would have been attakced by nothing but the best, so T-64's in the assault there.
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 01:06 AM UTC
So does anyone do a standard T-80 turret correction for the DML kit 3506? SP Designs has a T-80UD m 1985 turret though that has the ERA. I guess the quetion is, did the Soviets ever field the T-80 without ERA, say early in its operational career? And can one just take a T-80UD turret and not put the ERA on it and call it a regular ole T-80? Finally, who other than AEF does T-72 turret upgrades?
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 03:26 AM UTC
Well, if you are willing to wait, Sergej is working on a T-80B turret. Not sure when it will be out, but it will be for the DML kit. He is currently working on it and mulling over it, but is still somewaht debating over it because of the hull detail problems. I think, in the end, it will see the light of day.
Also remember that on those T-80 designations, the Mxxxx numbers indicate when said vehciel was put into production. T-80UD M1985's were around SOMEWHERE in 1985 + and if the Reds had wanted to go to war, I am sure they would have found there way into the mix rather quickly.
Kontact-1 ERA was in use in 1984/85, so the -V designated tanks would have been available.
Here is a link to help My T-80 research.
Also, on a side note, has I been looking into invading Western Europe at the time, and I had the bag of goodies the Reds had, i would have found a quick and simple way yo get as much ERA on all the tanks in my arsenal ASAP before a invasion. Those ERA blocks really blunted the effectiveness of HEAT warheads and that was the primary Anti-tank weapon to deal with the Red Threat. So the idea of large numbers of T-55's with ERA seems plausable, but not historic.
Of course, I don't think the borders were ever fully prepared for invasion, much as the western side never was prepared to invade. (different equipment would have been set-up or on the lines.)
Also remember that on those T-80 designations, the Mxxxx numbers indicate when said vehciel was put into production. T-80UD M1985's were around SOMEWHERE in 1985 + and if the Reds had wanted to go to war, I am sure they would have found there way into the mix rather quickly.
Kontact-1 ERA was in use in 1984/85, so the -V designated tanks would have been available.
Here is a link to help My T-80 research.
Also, on a side note, has I been looking into invading Western Europe at the time, and I had the bag of goodies the Reds had, i would have found a quick and simple way yo get as much ERA on all the tanks in my arsenal ASAP before a invasion. Those ERA blocks really blunted the effectiveness of HEAT warheads and that was the primary Anti-tank weapon to deal with the Red Threat. So the idea of large numbers of T-55's with ERA seems plausable, but not historic.
Of course, I don't think the borders were ever fully prepared for invasion, much as the western side never was prepared to invade. (different equipment would have been set-up or on the lines.)
Red4
Joined: April 01, 2002
KitMaker: 4,287 posts
Armorama: 1,867 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 03:58 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextReally? That's good to know. Curious if this is a sentiment shared by others? ....If you are planning going with any of the AEF stuff, be fore warned that you might go nuts with clean up, fit, assembly etc. Notorius for being extremely crude, warped, broken pieces, wrong pieces etc. I'd run the other way.
If you do a search here for AEF I'm sure you will find several posts about the quality, or lack there-of. More than likely you will also find my call-sign in the mix. I have dealt with AEF for many years. Best way to describe them is hit or miss. Some stuff is marginally ok, while others should go from the box straight into the trash can. You take your chances with every purchase. If you have the funds, by all means go with AA's conversion. "Q"
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 04:20 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Well, if you are willing to wait, Sergej is working on a T-80B turret. Not sure when it will be out, but it will be for the DML kit. He is currently working on it and mulling over it, but is still somewaht debating over it because of the hull detail problems. I think, in the end, it will see the light of day.
Also remember that on those T-80 designations, the Mxxxx numbers indicate when said vehciel was put into production. T-80UD M1985's were around SOMEWHERE in 1985 + and if the Reds had wanted to go to war, I am sure they would have found there way into the mix rather quickly.
Kontact-1 ERA was in use in 1984/85, so the -V designated tanks would have been available.
Here is a link to help My T-80 research.
Also, on a side note, has I been looking into invading Western Europe at the time, and I had the bag of goodies the Reds had, i would have found a quick and simple way yo get as much ERA on all the tanks in my arsenal ASAP before a invasion. Those ERA blocks really blunted the effectiveness of HEAT warheads and that was the primary Anti-tank weapon to deal with the Red Threat. So the idea of large numbers of T-55's with ERA seems plausable, but not historic.
Of course, I don't think the borders were ever fully prepared for invasion, much as the western side never was prepared to invade. (different equipment would have been set-up or on the lines.)
I just made the connection that you're the guy who runs SAAM. I'm the one who sent you the email this week regarding the possibility of using the SP Design BTR-T T-55 conversion on the Trumpeter T-55 kit. Ultimately my goal is to get my MBTs (-64, -72, -80) in line of production before I get back to the T-55 (and what to do with it). No rush on the T-80 (3506) at this point as I think the next focus will be to complete my T-80UD (3512) as I'm doing it OOTB. After that it might go to the -64 and the Accurate Armour conversion. I'll then be idle and sniffing around on what to do with my -72 and -80...Though if Sergej is waffling on the T-80B turret waffle no more as it looks like there are few T-80 corrections (other than the one he already does) on the market.
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 01:05 PM UTC
Also...what's the difference between the DML T-80UD (3512) and Skif T-80UD? Just picked one up (Skif) on eBay...
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 03:35 PM UTC
Best answer is in my T-80 link to see the differences between the kits.
Basically, the DML kit is dimensionally inaccurate and the turret is off.
The Skif kit has a good hull, but the turret is still a bit off. Also, the main engine deck grille is incorrect.
Basically, the DML kit is dimensionally inaccurate and the turret is off.
The Skif kit has a good hull, but the turret is still a bit off. Also, the main engine deck grille is incorrect.
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 03, 2005 - 03:38 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Best answer is in my T-80 link to see the differences between the kits.
Basically, the DML kit is dimensionally inaccurate and the turret is off.
The Skif kit has a good hull, but the turret is still a bit off. Also, the main engine deck grille is incorrect.
Jacques,
Yes, read your article (bookmarked by the way!). Was wondering more along the lines of what is the difference in what DML modeled vs. what Skif modeled? The DML T-80UD has different ERA to the Skif T-80UD. Is one a later version of the other?
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Sunday, December 04, 2005 - 12:48 AM UTC
Ok, easier question. :-)
The Skif kit models the T-80UD m1985 with 1st gen. Kontact-1 ERA.
The DML kit models a T-80UD m1989 with 3rd Gen. Kontact-5 ERA.
BTW, if you go to eduards webpage and look up the T-80UD from DML, you will see their PE on the DML/Zvezda kit...does not look too bad.
The Skif kit models the T-80UD m1985 with 1st gen. Kontact-1 ERA.
The DML kit models a T-80UD m1989 with 3rd Gen. Kontact-5 ERA.
BTW, if you go to eduards webpage and look up the T-80UD from DML, you will see their PE on the DML/Zvezda kit...does not look too bad.
woodstock74
Joined: December 28, 2002
KitMaker: 1,189 posts
Armorama: 692 posts
Posted: Friday, December 09, 2005 - 06:40 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Ok, easier question. :-)
The Skif kit models the T-80UD m1985 with 1st gen. Kontact-1 ERA.
The DML kit models a T-80UD m1989 with 3rd Gen. Kontact-5 ERA.
BTW, if you go to eduards webpage and look up the T-80UD from DML, you will see their PE on the DML/Zvezda kit...does not look too bad.
Just received my Skif T-80UD in the post yesterday. What is up with the kit's plastic? Definetely a different type then I'm used too as it seems almost flexible and not (ultiamtely) brittle like you get from everyone else. Don't get me wrong, its is merely a subtle difference. But I hope it doesn't cause any issues when gluing!
Elad
Joined: June 19, 2004
KitMaker: 458 posts
Armorama: 269 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 10, 2005 - 12:20 AM UTC
I once read that the T-64 wasnt deployed outside the USSR.
this sits pretty good with the soviet doctrine of keeping the best equipment on the defence and sending waves of the lesser stuff on the offence.
btw, I keep hearing the turret shape on Tamiya's T-72 is off.
can anyone comment on what exactly is wrong with it?
this sits pretty good with the soviet doctrine of keeping the best equipment on the defence and sending waves of the lesser stuff on the offence.
btw, I keep hearing the turret shape on Tamiya's T-72 is off.
can anyone comment on what exactly is wrong with it?
Jacques
Joined: March 04, 2003
KitMaker: 4,630 posts
Armorama: 4,498 posts
Posted: Saturday, December 10, 2005 - 02:49 AM UTC
The T-64 was never exported...correct. It mainly had to do with how advanced the design was and they did not want any secrets to accidentally get out.
US does this too. No DU armor and lesser electronics for any M1A2 buyers other than US Army.
Skif kit plastic is just Eastern European standard. I also see it some other kits, especially from the Ukraine and Belaruse.
Tamiya T-72 turret is off, just going on memory, in that the front "face" is too sharp and the angle is incorrect. Also, the rear of the turret tapers too narrow and too quickly. I will have to look it up again to see what the problem is for sure.
US does this too. No DU armor and lesser electronics for any M1A2 buyers other than US Army.
Skif kit plastic is just Eastern European standard. I also see it some other kits, especially from the Ukraine and Belaruse.
Tamiya T-72 turret is off, just going on memory, in that the front "face" is too sharp and the angle is incorrect. Also, the rear of the turret tapers too narrow and too quickly. I will have to look it up again to see what the problem is for sure.
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.