Russia is dusting off antique tanks from the 1940s, monitor group says, as its losses mount in Ukrai

[blue-wave]

Source: MSN/Business Insider

Full title: “Russia is dusting off antique tanks from the 1940s, monitor group says, as its losses mount in Ukraine”


Russia has taken tanks from the 1940s out of storage, according to new images from a monitoring group, as it continues to lose large numbers of tanks in Ukraine.

The Conflict Intelligence Team, a group that monitors Russia's military, shared images of the antique tanks on a train.

It said that the images show T-54 tanks, which the Soviet Union started producing in 1947, moving west from the far east of Russia.

While other old tanks have been used by Russia in Ukraine, none have been as old as the T-54, the group said.

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-is-dusting-off-antique-tanks-from-the-1940s-monitor-group-says-as-its-losses-mount-in-ukraine/ar-AA18WB6Y

[cstanleytech]

1. They might be using them for other things other than front line combat such patrolling the varies

towns and cities that they have captured.

[Aristus]

32. That's pretty likely. Intimidation, more than anything else.

So many shitpot little dictatorships around the Third World have purchased small fleets of T-55's (not enough to fight a war with, but perfect for parades down the main drag of the capital city), for the intimidation of a cowed populace, that the tank itself is considered a symbol of autocratic repression.

[orangecrush]

2. Can you imagine

Being ordered to take a Sherman tank into battle against modern anti tank weapons?

[brewens]

5. Yeah, and really any tank if our side doesn't totally control the air. It still couldn't be safe

with the infantry anti-tank weapons. That's why I'm surprised the Ukrainians have done as well with what tanks they have used so far. The Russians are supposed to make quality anti-tank rockets and missiles, similar to what the Ukrainians have been using against them. You could expect them to not be as good, but still dangerous. If the Russians don't have their guys all over trained and equipped with those, they have to be out of their minds.

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if incompetence prevented that. Maybe they never bothered to build enough, they are defective, possibly because they weren't maintained properly or something like that. They had huge cluster with their heavy vehicle tires. Whole convoys were stalled and sitting ducks.

[orangecrush]

7. Good points

I don't know that much bout it, but it seems a move of desperation.

[bluescribbler]

13. Incompetence and corruption.

Incompetence in strategy and training and corruption siphoning off the funds to provide the soldiers with the material to succeed.

[DENVERPOPS]

37. If the US really got involved in Ukraine

Convoys of Russia's weapons on roads or rail lines wouldn't stand a chance against our Wart Hogs................

Same with any of their weapon supply dumps.

[yardwork]

46. It's another chapter of "the Russians aren't as powerful as we thought."

We've seen this movie before. At this point, I believe the Pentagon hypes Russian strength just to get their budgets approved. I think the DoD has always known it's lies.

[Aristus]

33. The Israelis used a heavily-modified model of the Sherman as a second-line tank

right up through the mid-1970's. It held its own, more or less, against more modern tanks fielded by the Syrians and Egyptians.

[orangecrush]

35. Interesting

[brewens]

39. By the end of WWII the Sherman model they called the "Easy 8" was vastly improved over

the early models. The Israelis took those and made them even better. With their training and tactics, they did well.

Those same guys in the 8's would probably do pretty well against the obsolete tanks the Russians are pulling out of storage.

[Kennah]

58. A Sherman against a Tiger was a daunting prospect

I watched a program with a WWII German Tiger tanker who said one Tiger could take on ten Shermans. However, there was always an eleventh Sherman, and there was never a second Tiger.

[rurallib]

3. if it was good enough for great grandpa ................

[TreasonousBastard]

4. Russia lost thousands of those old hulks in the 40s. Stalin threw...

them at the Germans as part of his human wave attacks.

Stalin had little use for survivors who might have to be fed.

[infullview]

8. and the tradition continues....

[Layzeebeaver]

17. Not the T-54

T34/76, T34/85, KV-1, JS-2, even JS-3...

But not T-54 - that was a post war tank.

The majority of T-54s that have been lost have been in third part conflict from my recollection - and most of the time they were not commanded by Russian crews. I'm not recalling the deployment in Afghanistan - I thought that was primarily T-64s but I could be wrong.

Regardless, these tanks are the crap on the bottom of a pile of crap, old old old tech and have no place on the modern battlefield.

If it really is true they are deploying these, is HAS to be for rear guard activities and no way intended for front line deployment.

If they are destined from front line deployment, then... the crew should bail out prior to starting the engines.

[Igel]

20. Or the tank equivalent of using prisoners for a specific purpose.

Those poor convicts are thrown at lines to draw fire and die--in so doing they gobble up ammo and "out" where the Ukr soldiers are lurking so that artillery or more specific offenses can be directed at the concentration of forces, using more adept Wagnerians.

Put inexperienced drivers in an ancient tank and have them waste the Ukr ammo, draw out the Ukr armor so that artillery can be trained on them and slow them down so anti-tank weapons can be used against them. Alternative is for the Ukr forces to do nothing and, well, then it ends even worse.


Still, the point remains: An attempt to justify Putin's patron saint Patruus Josephus sovieticus' "quantity has a quality all its own" line.

[Aristus]

34. An inexperienced driver isn't going to be able to handle the T-55 in any purposeful manner.

Anyone who has driven it will tell you, you pretty much need to be built like a gorilla to be able to steer the thing and shift its notoriously stubborn gear stick.

[News Junkie]

52. I'm amazed they'll run

Damn.

[nattyice]

6. In 8 months, it'll be muskets. 7 months after that will be armored suits on horses.

[IronLionZion]

9. They're going to run out of those too

what's it going to take for them to finally end this stupidity?

[DENVERPOPS]

38. A massive stockpile of

super sonic rockets............

[LenaBaby61]

10. Since putin wants to go there, why not ......

Try to dig up a British Mark IV Tank or two

VS

[oldsoftie]

25. Only issue UKR has with the M1 is logistics & training.

It takes a few months to get a soldier up to speed on an M1. THEN we still have to keep it supplied at the front

[Botany]

11. And we are sending M-1 Tanks that as they are moving 50 mph can hit a target @ 500 meters or more

... those rounds will be dead nuts on and those shells will be shaped charges that will burn through
armor and once through the armor and into a fresh source of O2 @ which point a fireball will incinerate
everybody inside the vehicle or building it hits.

And both the French and Swedish are sending artillery pieces that can drop shells on target from > 1 km
away .... come spring any Russian inside Ukraine including Crimea will be in peril of his or her death.

BTW never forget that Trump, Fox News, and the members of the Republican party support Putin in his war of
aggression against the people of Ukraine and his kidnapping of 14,000 Ukrainian children. They are on the wrong
side of history. Fuck 'em.

[jmowreader]

14. Kinetic energy rounds work better than HE rounds

Last edited Wed Mar 22, 2023, 06:12 PM - Edit history (1)

A kinetic energy round fires a depleted uranium dart at extremely high speed toward the target. It has two effects:

Effect 1 is the dart breaks up the tank as it’s boring through, so it showers the crew with shards of hot metal.

Effect 2 is DU is pyrophoric - it ignites when it breaks up and is exposed to air - so you get a big fireball that not only burns the crew but ignites all their ammunition.

You’ll be dead long before you notice.

The open question is this: is the Russian Defense Minister going to order his troops to shoot Putin before, or after, they have to break out World War I-vintage equipment to keep this ill-considered war going?

[Botany]

15. The last big tank battle in Ukraine around Bakmut had the Russians loosing all but 2 of the tanks ..

... most all of them to Javelins because the Ukrainian ground troops could get up and close to
the Russian tanks with them.

Sooner or later the Russian military and the people of Russia are gonna have to kill Putin.

BTW thanx for the update on what the M-1 is firing.

[jmowreader]

21. Javelins? That surprises me.

I would have thought AT4s or Carl Gustavs, which are smaller, rather than Javelins. “But the AT4 won’t penetrate frontal armor!” Yeah, that’s why we have hills to fire from on top of.

[orthoclad]

28. Great

Poison more ground with eternally toxic uranium, like we did in Iraq.
Ukraine will love us.

[jmowreader]

30. They also make tungsten penetrators

Plenty of tank chunks, no pyrophoric fireball.

[EX500rider]

45. It's up to the Ukraine if they want to use the tank ammo we give them

My guess if it is more efficient at killing Russian tanks (and I believe it is) they will be all for the depleted uranium rounds.

Uranium is a very dense metal, so depleted uranium can be used to reinforce the armour-plating on tanks.
It can also be put on the tips of bullets, mortar rounds and tank shells, to penetrate conventional tank armour.

Depleted uranium is mildly radioactive.
The UN General Assembly ordered a review into the health effects of depleted uranium weapons in 2007, and international bodies have carried out several further reviews.

The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) found no significant poisoning was caused by exposure to depleted uranium.

[EX500rider]

53. Actually the depleted uranium shells aren't any more radioactive then granite is

When it burns the the smoke will be toxic but so will the smoke from the alternatives like lead or tungsten.

Also any radioactivity released by depleted uranium are the much safer Alpha rays, not Gamma rays, and Alpha rays are stopped by just about anything, including skin.

The increase in cancers in Kuwait and southern Iraq since the 1991 Gulf War are much more likely to be from the several weeks of burning oil fields set alight by Hussein and the thousands of armored vehicles that tore up the pristine desert created an unprecedented (even for Arabia) dust cloud containing a very fine, talc like, sand and a lot of other nasty stuff, the oil smoke fumes are a known carcinogen and were far more abundant than the remains of depleted uranium shells.

KUWAIT CITY, Kuwait (CNN) -- In the waning days of the Persian Gulf War, as Iraqi forces retreated to Baghdad, Saddam Hussein sent a team of engineers into the Kuwaiti oil fields and blew up hundreds of wells.

Over the next seven months, more than 1 billion barrels of oil went up in flames, and Kuwait and much of the Persian Gulf was engulfed in a poisonous smoke, creating a large-scale environmental disaster.

[orthoclad]

54. I said nothing about radiation

Uranium is a toxic metal. Unlike organc toxins, it's a metallic element and will be poisonous forever. Radiation fades.

[EX500rider]

55. You do realize the other object they would use would be lead

I don't believe that's any less toxic
Or tungsten, basically the only thing that makes good penetrators are heavy metals which are all toxic

[Renew Deal]

12. How long until the chariots come out?

[Warpy]

16. They're not the only museum pieces, either

They're having to use anything they can get to roll and/or fire some sort of projectile. The projectiles are also in short supply, mostly because of their "flatten everything, move forward" strategy that requires them to shoot 10 artillery rounds per the one carefully targeted round used by Ukraine. Both sides are rationing ammo but the poorly trained Russians don't know how to make it count.

WWII tanks against the shit that's coming at them will result in nothing but more carnage. At some point, they're going to have to plug Putin and get somebody saner who will withdraw to Luhansk and Crimea and beg for negotiations. Right now, they're all hoping he croaks from natural causes but they might not have that luxury much longer, he's costing them far too much.

I don't kid myself that any reforms in Russia will be particularly long lasting, something sourly echoed by many expats.

[Kennah]

18. I do worry as Putin burns through people and equipment ...

... does he move closer to a nuclear tantrum?

[jmowreader]

22. I don't think so, but no one can predict Putin

Putin’s biggest problem: if he goes nuclear people WILL retaliate. They won’t retaliate with nuclear, but with things like walking into their embassies and kicking everyone there out of the country before they get a chance to destroy the evidence of their spying.

However, the Russians have a long history of knocking off their troublesome leaders.

[sarisataka]

19. I wonder how many realize

Ukraine is using the slightly newer derivative T-55?

These old models cannot stand against modern western tanks, but at the moment that isn't a concern.

[Igel]

23. But Ukr isn't a superpower

that's launched a revanchist invasion against a lesser power.

It's also not a superpower boasting about its superduper modern and advanced technology.

Since 1990 or so, it's got squat updates until recently. That's a 22-year gap, and they've also reached into mothballed equipment.

To ridicule Ukr is to ridicule the oppressed; to ridicule Russia is to ridicule the great, "Look at *me*, the Great and Privileged! All bow or, offended by having our grandeur not sufficiently adored, we'll effing *make* you bow!"

[sarisataka]

24. The advent of the T-54

Was about the last time the Soviets/ Russia had a superior tank than the west.

If a battalion of T-54s went against a platoon of M-1s, it would be no contest. The M-1s wouldn't even be late for dinner. However if your tanks are on par with what the opponent is fielding it is a different story.

From what I have read elsewhere, the Russians have lost 2000+ tanks but are only moving 14 T-54s. They have thousands still available. That tells me they are not battlefield replacements. Whether they will be used to train replacement crews or to test upgrades I cannot say but I don't think they will reach Ukraine anytime soon.

[Lithos]

26. It depends on many factors

First the T-55 has been modified many, many times over the years. What was not discussed was if these were truly tanks who saw their last modification in the 1960s or earlier, or if they were one of the later modified ones. Yes, they will suck against modern MBTs as evidenced by the huge loss of equipment by the Iraqi's in both wars. But in an infantry support role they probably still have value, especially if their optics include infra-red and their gun has been upgraded and modernized.

Case in point - the Slovenians have been providing the Ukrainians with modernized T-55S tanks (as of last year), so they are already on the battlefield.

[EX500rider]

41. Russia took them out of service late 70's/early 80's

So over 40 years ago, I very much doubt they got any upgrades after that with the majority most like sporting 1960's tech.
And I doubt they got much preventive maintenance while in storage.

While the T-54 and T-55 are relatively simple in their design, CIT cites the lack of rangefinders, ballistic computers and modern fire control systems, “primitive” sights, and poor gun stabilization as “key disadvantages” for the system.

https://taskandpurpose.com/tech-tactics/russia-tanks-t-54-t-55-ukraine/

[Lithos]

42. Correct

However, Russia did not directly put the previously reactivated museum T-62s on the front line. Instead, Russia has been furiously refurbishing and updating them first.

I would suggest the same is happening - these older tanks are bound for a factory where they will be modernized as much as the frame will tolerate. This is why I pointed out that Ukraine received several models which did get more modern rangefinder and fire control systems. Some of these updates have sometimes involved swapping out the main cannon with something a bit more modern. Will it be the same as a T-90? Probably not, but valuable in many conditions - including urban combat situations. Rather lose a $200k tank which operates at 80% capability of a $7mm tank.

L-

[Kaleva]

50. I've seen reports that RU can upgrade 7 T62s a month

The sanctions have really crimped their ability to upgrade fire control and other electronics because key components that were imported from the West are no longer available.

RU has an economy smaller then Canada so their ability to greatly increase their industrial capacity is very limited.

[EX500rider]

27. Ammo's going to be a big problem

Those tanks have been out of service for over 40 years and they use the 100 mm round not used by the later tanks.
Any ammo in storage is going to be very questionable to use.

[Lithos]

43. Again, I suspect they are going to a factory to be "upgraded"

Meaning a new cannon which supports the current armament.

However, I am please as this means the Russians are definitely scrapping the bottom of the barrel. Slava Ukraina!

[EX500rider]

47. Assuming they can fit a larger gun in that turret

That is, a larger Soviet style gun, I know the slovaks got the L105mm in theirs, maybe the 115 out of the t62 will fit but I doubt the 125 used in later models will

[Lithos]

48. There are quite a few variants out there

The T-55M6 has a 125mm, like the T-72. I think the Bangladeshi Durjoy variant also had a 125mm ATGM gun. But to your point, the irony is the Russians always tried to go a step too far in their main gun upgrades, trying to get a 100mm into the T-34 (which required extensive re-engineering before it halfway worked).

But, I was referring to the introduction of 100mm ATGM ammunition in the mid-1960s. I thought it required a change in the gun to support it, which I thought would be an essential rework for these antiques. But in review, I made a mistake, as the ATGM was made to work explicitly in the existing 100mm D-10T guns. So, I was wrong here.

[EX500rider]

56. 1st photos of the T-54/55's have already showed up in the Donbas

Looks like zero mods were done

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/antique-t-54-series-tank-appears-with-russian-forces-in-ukraine

[Lithos]

57. Saw as well

Useful until the first RPG or modern tank appears.

[Wonder Why]

29. Would you call those "septic tanks"?

[Kennah]

60. Coffins

[Oneironaut]

31. This reminds me of the game, Civilization .

[Martin68]

36. I'll bet they are incredible gas-guzzlers.

[SWBTATTReg]

40. Good! Now NATO can dust off their older anti-tank weapons, and start using them up too! No sense

in wasting them. It's a shame though, that putin is putting so many of his younger people at risk, who more than likely, don't want to be there in the services but got conscripted into the Russian forces because Russia/Putin was desperate to rebuild its decimated armed forces.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

44. "Open source photographs show T54 and T55 Soviet tanks, first put in service in the 1940's ..."

Open-source photographs show T-54 and T-55 Soviet tanks, first put in service in the 1940s, being transported west by railroad, possibly for use in Ukraine.

washingtonpost.com
Russia is shipping very old tanks west, signaling shortage in Ukraine
Open source photographs show T54 and T55 Soviet tanks, first put in service in the 1940's, being transported west by railroad, possibly for use in Ukraine..

Link to tweet

[dembotoz]

49. don't they ever recycle anything?

would have thought they would have been melted down into new lawn chairs decades ago

[EX500rider]

51. Yeah I can't imagine the US military storing some M26 pershings for later use

Especially 70 years later where they should all be in museums, the ones that weren't melted down.

[Kennah]

59. Slovenia heavily upgraded T-55s into what become known as the M-55S

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-54/T-55_operators_and_variants#Slovenia

28 went to Ukraine last October