Soviet / Russian army in Red Dragon

[UGBEAR]

Supposedly T-72BV is mislabeled T-72BA ERA [or vice versa]. Main difference being Kontakt-1 methinks.

There is no official designation such as T-72BV or T-72BM. There is only T-72B obr.1985 (with Kontakt-1 ERA) and T-72B obr. 1989 (with Kontakt-5 ERA). T-72BA is a name given to a T-72A modernised to T-72B level.

So the in-game T-64BV T-64BV1 T-72B1 were also incorrect? I saw tones of T-72BV(a T-72B with K1) on the web and book, I suppose there's a place to find their "True Name"

[Mr0Buggy]

I think the issue is that there were and it was analogical naming idea but just not for T-72, yet western sources named it that way anyway, hence the confusion.

[chema1994]

The T-72B obr. 1989 is the best T-72 ever, capable to withstand any 120mm shells available in that era.
And a Kaktus equipped T-80 is enough for me.
Instead of 152 and 140 tank guns we should get advanced ammo for the prototype tanks like the M829A3 (2003 Silver Bullet round) and the 125mm equivalent. For the Germans the L55 gun seems OK to me.

[Azaz3l]

So the in-game T-64BV T-64BV1 T-72B1 were also incorrect? I saw tones of T-72BV(a T-72B with K1) on the web and book, I suppose there's a place to find their "True Name"

They are correct. It's just that there was no "V" or "M" letter in T-72B designations, T-72AV is still valid though.
I guess people started to assume that T-72B with ERA was called T-72BV as it was the case of T-64B and T-80B (T-64BV,T-80BV); the thing is that the T-72B was originally projected with explosive reactive armor and there were no plans of introducing a "naked" T-72B.

[Killertomato]

The T-72B obr. 1989 is the best T-72 ever, capable to withstand any 120mm shells available in that era.
And a Kaktus equipped T-80 is enough for me.
Instead of 152 and 140 tank guns we should get advanced ammo for the prototype tanks like the M829A3 (2003 Silver Bullet round) and the 125mm equivalent. For the Germans the L55 gun seems OK to me.

I doubt we'll see Kaktus on anything- we'll probably just get the T-80UM, which only differed in engine power and thermal optics.

M829A3 and the L/55 are both too far out, too- we'll probably get M829A2 on the M1A2 (service entry for both in 1992) and the Leopard 2A5 still had the L/44...

The USSR should get the Object 187, I think. The hull's different but the turret was taken straight off it and put on the T-90A and the gun was a longer version of the T-80's- not quite super, but pretty darn nice.

[Alex18762]

The object 292. Its basically a T-80U with a 152mm cannon and nothing else.

IMO this should be the second highest end soviet tank complementary with the T-80UM. It will have less accuracy but a lot more powerful gun. Of course it'll be available as a prototype.
Info and pictures:
http://sovietoutpost.revdisk.org/?p=80

[Azaz3l]

I doubt we'll see Kaktus on anything-

Don't lose faith in ikalugin.

M829A2 on the M1A2 (service entry for both in 1992)

I honestly doubt about the M829A2 entrace date. I know that M829A1 entered slightly before Gulf War (end 1990 I think). M829A2 was developped because M829A1 couldn't penetrate soviet tanks equiped with Kontakt-5. So if it took 2 years to develop a new sabot then Americans are damn fast.

The USSR should get the Object 187, I think. The hull's different but the turret was taken straight off it and put on the T-90A and the gun was a longer version of the T-80's- not quite super, but pretty darn nice.

Object 187 would have M1A2/Challenger 2 protection level. Also the gun could accept more powerful rounds.

[Killertomato]

Don't lose faith in ikalugin.

I have limited faith in anyone's ability to bring glorious super-tanks about.

I honestly doubt about the M829A2 entrace date. I know that M829A1 entered slightly before Gulf War (end 1990 I think). M829A2 was developped because M829A1 couldn't penetrate soviet tanks equiped with Kontakt-5. So if it took 2 years to develop a new sabot then Americans are damn fast.

More like five years, really. M829A1 first came along in 1988, M829A2 came along in '93 (my mistake, not '92) as a result of a drive to help the M1 Block II (the M1A2, basically) counter expected Soviet/Russian advances in armor design. The US acquisition of T-80Us post-'89 helped move the project along, but it happened independently of Kontakt-5.

Object 187 would have M1A2/Challenger 2 protection level. Also the gun could accept more powerful rounds.

That's why I like it. It would still give the USSR the top-tier tank advantage- none of the type-classified Soviet tanks were that much better than the T-80U- without throwing us headlong into FST-2 territory. People around here don't like Objects, though...

[rolls]

what about T90?

[Kraxis]

People around here don't like Objects, though...

Yeah they generally object to it.

Sorry, had to be done.