Why is the T-90M such a bad tank?
>>62895294Do we know this is a T-90M? Even the T-62M turrets look very different from the originals.
>>62895294Uralvagonzavod is a small indie startup company please understand.
>>62895294the only way tanks are seen in this war. when will they learn...
>>62895294because it's a T-72 derivative in the Year of Our Lord 2024 and has all of the same problemsgiven that it's been 51 years since the introduction of the T-72 without substantive improvement and Russia somehow cannot build as many T-14s as they can build modern* fucking fighter jets, I think it's safe to say that they won't be getting tanks right anytime soon
>>62895325/threadWhile the Abrams is only 7 years younger it's seen significant upgrades over the decades.
>>62895294it'd the equivalent of tossing a new turret, ERA and some slightly improved optics on a M60 Patton and calling it the best tank in the world because the T-90 is basically just a T-72 with all the bells and whistles it's a result of the Soviet stagnation and Russian corruption and failure that followed
>>62895294bloody basterd anglo saxons bandera nazis propaganda bandera
>>62895294>Why is the T-90M such a bad tank?Because of the crew "trained" to use it.
>>62895342>it'd the equivalent of tossing a new turret, ERA and some slightly improved optics on a M60 Pattonwtf its real
>>62895304Only the T-90M has that wedge mantlet (part of the Kaktus K6 ERA kit)
>>62895294>Why is the T-90M such a bad tank?Every tank is obsolete now with cheap and efficient FPV drones, including the T90s, the Leos, the Abrams, the Challenged ones, each are much more easily disabled or destroyed.
>>62895294Because it's just a T-72
>>62895339It's not just that, it's also that the Abrams and other Western tanks' base designs were just fundamentally better suited for modernization. They had blowout panels, better crew accommodations, more space for armor upgrades, more space for optics/weapons/additional equipment on top of the turret, etc. which all turned out to be really important. As for the Soviet shitboxes, the carousel autoloader was fine for when it was introduced because the armor of the T-64 and T-72 were indeed capable of reliably stopping existing 105mm ammo so it wasn't a problem. However when the 120mm gun and more powerful 105mm APFSDS ammo came out the USSR/Russia didn't change their design philosophy and instead doubled down for decades, so now they're stuck with it. Also having a single reverse gear that's slow as shit is indefensible for a country that a) plans on fighting battles that are not exclusively offensive and b) cares about human life.
>>62895294why is nobody coming out?isn't it hot inside?
>>62895552its cold outside and ziggie likes the way it hurts.
>>62895342>tossing a new turretyes they do that a lot
>>62895294>Why is the T-90M such a bad tank?>>62895325thesebtw here is a leaked video of the reverse gear of those tanks
>>62895342>m60Except that tank is superior in every way to the T72 so it gets even worse when upgraded.
>>62895475>machine guns made infantry obsolete >SAM's made aircraft obsolete >AShM made surface ships obsolete This is what you sound like.
>>62895294The T90M was a T90 designed to be used in mountainous terrain
>>62895342>it's a result of the Soviet stagnation and Russian corruption and failure that followedStunningly accurate.
>>62895707Please tell me about that contraption. I can't imagine how fast that first cog would be spinning by the time that furthest one is going at a good pace. It's scaring me.
>>62895342>it'd the equivalent of tossing a new turreta new turret can completely change the characteristics of the vehicle, especially when combined with >some slightly improved opticsVery bad analogy.You gave the right answer at the end though.
>>62895294Cause T90 in reality is a T72 pretending to be a whole new tank.There is a reason why all of the "elite" vatnig tank divisions are using upgraded T80BVM/T80Us and not the T90s.It's just simply BAD.
>>62896888it would take longer than the universe has existed for the last gear to do a rotation
>>62895379yes but nobody is calling it the best tank in the world, anon
>>62895707i wonder how fast it would spin if the first wheel on the other side was moving
What makes you say that?
>>62895294>T-72 with more steps
>>62896888Its a googol:1 gear reduction ratio. It would require more energy than exists in the entire universe to turn the final gear once.
>>62895339The Abrams from the get-go was designed to be the penultimate MBT, the T-72 was considered the "low cost" platform, and thus consequently the T-90 can only be polished so much with that pedigree.
>>62895342If only..
>>62898170Light speed
>>62895294Because it's based on an older bad tank with unsolvable design flaws that can only be offset so much by slapping on ad hoc half-remedies and random shit masquerading as improvements.
You love to see it
>>62895367Nah. You could train a western crew on it and it would still be a shit tank.
I remember seeing many tank comparison videos, all of them had the t-90 on the podium, and was praised as the absolute peak of armored cavalry. Infact, thos place as well used to look upon the t-90 with awe and respect. That just gives you an idea of how good russians are in lying and deceiting, and hopefully will get you wearier next time.
>>62895294Its 3 times cheaper than Abrams and 4 times than Leopard. You get what you paid for.
>>62900275>You get what you paid for.No you don't because it's like 10 times worse than those two, if not more.
