T-90M Proryv-3 - Shortcomings
T-90M is undoubtedly the best tank in service with the Russian Armed Forces. It has gained a lot of attention after its introduction to the conflict in Ukraine. But even though it is miles ahead of other Russian tanks like T-72B3, it still has a lot of problems. The newest Russian T-90M "Breakthrough" tank is not a completely new model, but rather a modernization of the T-72. It received the name T-90 exclusively for marketing reasons, because during development it was called T-72BU (or "object 188").
Ukrainian experts from the Center for the Research of Trophy and Prospective Weapons and Military Equipment conducted an analysis of T-90M "Proryv" trophy tanks. In the process of research, it became clear that in many parameters the new Russian tank turned out to be identical to the Soviet T-72B.
According to the information received, almost all electronics used, for example, in the Kalina fire control system and optical-electronic systems, are not produced in Russia. In particular, integrated circuits were supplied by American manufacturers Texas Instruments, ISSI or XILINX, and the thermal imaging camera comes from the French Catherine FC family, produced by Thales.
Observers point out that these components were probably delivered before the full-scale invasion of the Russian Federation into Ukraine and before the introduction of anti-Russian sanctions. The presence of such a large number of electronics from Western manufacturers suggests that, probably, today's production of T-90M tanks is already carried out on a relatively small scale. And electronic "stuffing" is used from stocks or spare parts.
Thus, in the near future, Russian manufacturers have two options: either to simplify the design of the T-90M tank by using the older 1A45T "Irtysh" fire control systems, which are used in the T-80U, T-90 and T-90A tanks, or to stop production T-90M tanks.
Experts say that, of course, Russians can buy civilian electronics to bypass sanctions in neutral or Moscow-friendly countries. However, the question arises to what extent it will meet the strict requirements of military production, since its use will increase the number of cases of failure of the tank's systems.
As for obtaining components from China, access to them may also be restricted by the Chinese side, which is trying to keep its distance and not provide open assistance to Moscow in its military aggression against Ukraine.
Senior Lieutenant Andriy Rudykof the Center for the Research of Trophy and Prospective Weapons and Military Equipment of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine presented the briefing. Trent Telenko noted 17 March 2023 that the "AFU sees the T-90 as "just another Soviet tank," built in artisanal quantities, that 3rd generation Western MBT's with handily defeat. ... T-90M is de facto an extensive modernization of T-72B obr. 1989 with some design solutions borrowed from NATO tanks (including “Nakidka”). AFU got a chance to analyze a T-90M captured in September 2022. Basically, T-90M is the maximum of what the Russian MIC can squeeze out of the old Soviet tank designs, in some regards even exacerbating the issues in some areas The engine of the tank (V-92S2F) is largely directly a direct ancestor of the V-2 (1937), that was on the T-34. In hot climates (like Ukrainian steppes in summer), the engine loses 1/3 of its power.
"Armor arrangement is very similar to what it was on T-72B. The only design decision Russians took to improve the armored protection of the tank, was to bolt the add-on armor. This decreased mobility of the tank in real world scenarios. First T-90M was destroyed by a guy from Kharkiv TDF wielding Karl Gustaf. Research uncovered big shortcoming in tank electronics. “Kalina” FCS doesn’t have Russian components except for markings. Commercial-grade electronics in tanks, procured in dubious ways. T-90M can’t be produced at any large scale without the imported electronics. Without them, it becomes a somewhat worse T-72B. 15 T-90M's have been visually confirmed lost to date (probably the Oryx number). Real loses are likely to be substantially higher. Almost no T-90M are to be seen in the in the frontline area at the moment. The T-90 “Vladimir” might have been called this way to mimic the precedent set by “IS” series of tanks, named after Stalin."
The main sight of the T-90M is the well-known Sosna-U, which is no longer installed in other modernizations of Soviet vehicles, such as the T-72B3 and T-80BVM, where it was replaced by the twice weaker 1PN-96MT-02. How well do T-90M’s intercom systems work? "We discovered they often doesn’t work. For the longest time, we didn’t quite understand why do Russians have communication problems when in use. During testing we learned that it’s afraid of moisture, as it’s not hermetically sealed. There are big temperature drops inside the tank. The moisture condenses on electronics resulting in all sorts of problems. Even the new ones look like they’ve been in use since the 70’s."
The open sources claim that the T-90M was supposed to have new autoloader & turret ammo bustle. Were they implemented?
"The autoloader is largely identical to the one on the T-72. 22 rounds in the carousel and 18 additional rounds in the turret bustle. BUT THE BUSTLE ISN’T CONNECTED TO THE CREW COMPARTMENT. A CREWMAN HAS TO PHYSICALLY GET OUT OF THE TANK TO PASS THE AMMUNITION INSIDE (translator’s note: LMAO). This is unrealistic to do during battle, de facto forcing the tank to retreat to reload the carousel. There are also concerns about the autoloader reliability, considering it’s an old design with minimal changes."
In a viral drone video, on 1 January 2024 a trior of US-made M2 Bradley fighting vehicle neutralized a Russian T-90 tank at nearly point-blank range. In this case the T-90 tank was sent alone to support Russian infantry pinned down by Ukranian infantry, which called in the T-90 tank, the 3 Bradleys where the closest anti armor, so they got sent in. In the crew interview they said the tank was going after their infantry, so they had no choice but to engage. The prominent damage and confusion within the T-90M come from a FPV drone hitting the tank short before the video begins. The tank hull wasn't penetrated but seemingly all its [unarmored] electro-optical sensors were blown off. After a brief but significant emotional event the Bradleys left and the T-90 was intact, though not mission capable and abandoned by the crew.
The Bradley hit the tank with dozens of 25mm high explosive rounds. The Bradley's 25-mm automatic gun is effective against a variety of targets, and its Tube-Launched, Optically-Tracked, Wire-Guided (TOW) missile system can destroy tanks. The Bradley's armor can withstand 14.5-mm projectiles on all sides, and the M2A2 Bradley can withstand projectiles up to 30-mm.
The T-90 ground strike in the beginning is a common issue with Russian tanks: they aren't very tall and the sights are mounted high on the turret. When targeting something rather close, especially if the tank is behind cover, it's easy for the gunner to think they have a clear line of fire while the gun is actually blocked by cover or ground inclination. The "explosion" on the T-90 were actually it's flares to confuse infrared guided munitions and thermal sights. The T-90 has an auto smoke grenade launcher system called the shtora and fires the smoke grenades automatically when painted by a laser.
TOW is a long-range ambush weapon. The crew has to line it up and keep the target in sight the whole time when in use. The reason the TOW wouldn't have been fired in this engagement is that at a range of 50 meters, it was too close, with too many impediments to line of sight, and too much motion. The TOW has an arming range of minimum 65 meters -- the Bradleys were actually too close to reliably target the T-90 with their TOWs, both aiming (crew need to keep the sights manually on target until contact) and arming wise (minium range).
The TOW can only be fired from a stop, or very slow speed. Stopping with a clear line to the tank would have been death for the Bradleys. TOW is wire-guided, and any obstacles can tangle or break the wires, especially if the M2 is moving. They were shooting across dozens of obstacles. The wires are uninsulated, and if they lay in moisture the electrical signals can short and send the missile out of control. This is especially true if they get tangled together on an obstacle.
Many observers were impressed with the Bradley commanders' aggressiveness. Dedicated individuals with inferior platforms can overcome poorly trained and motivated ones with what should be encounter winning platforms. Against a skilled crew, at least one Bradley would have been destroyed easily. But the skilled crews are all dead, it’s straight up amateur hour now.
So, after so many 25mm shots, the crew could have been blind. The tankers in the T-90 probably couldn't even think straight with the 25mm rounds slamming into the turret. The shots were most likely damaging its external modules (view ports, laser, sensors etc). After the first dozen hits they had shattered optics and electronics throughout the vehicle. The periscope blocks are cracked, the gun sight ,targeting system and thermal imaging systems are non-functional and the only way the crew could see outside the tank was to open a hatch , which they couldn't do while the Bradley's were hammering away .
Another observer noted "In an open field battle, the Bradley would probably have been massacred, but this wasn't an open field fight. This was a coordinated fight where the Bradleys had better maneuverability and were supported by air. The Ukrainians in the video won the fight because the game was rigged from the start."
One former armored vehicle office [@randomyoutubebrowser5217} wondered "why the T90 was alone and unsupported. 1) You don't hold or capture an objective this size with one tank 2) You don't hold or capture an area with several buildings without infantry support. With what I know about the battle lines, it looks like Stepove is kind of a "no mans land" contested area, but its also near Avdiivka which is currently held by 2 brigades with 5 direct combat battalions each (although the 110th mechanized brigade would be considered significantly degraded). Its just a waste of an asset to be probing with a lone unsupported T90 or if it was a straggler, it didn't look like it had trouble moving or keeping up so its platoon or company messed up big time by leaving it behind to get destroyed.""
Of the three Bradleys, one was hit by a tank, and a few days later the remaining two Bradleys were destroyed. One of the Bradley crew who was interviewed also said that it was lucky that they hit that part of the turret that day. The Bradley crew reported that they lost the next engagement and also lost their vehicle. The driver said "Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't".
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
