Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don’t Trudge

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 1

Maybe it is the first time you see real “alive” tanks and infantry combat vehicles instead of museum exhibits painted green. While operation they sound like a jet. In fact this is how a gas-turbine engine works. When they start shooting it seems you go deaf.

These are the pictures of the night tank playwar of Kantemirovskaya tank division under Naro-Fominsk town.

T-80 tank — the main battle tank produced in the USSR. The first production tank with a single gas-turbine power plant. In the inventory of the USSR’s army since 1976.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 2

In battery.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 3


Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 4

The tank fires very very plunk.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 5

During the playwar live ammunition was used.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 6

Fires far away  – the targets are hidden somewhere at a distance.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 7

And this is how a string of burst looks like at 15 seconds exposure.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 8

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 9

Tracer firing and rebounding shot.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 10

The tank weighs 46 tons. It’s two times heavier than a tram’s weight.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 11

The gun’s firing rate is 12 shots a minute. Automatic recharge.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 12

The tank can easily keep pace with an ordinary scooter – it speeds up to 80 km/h.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 13

In the army’s inventory there are about 6500 pcs of T-80 in various modifications.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 14

T-80 were used during the first assault of Grozny and “Jihad” operation.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 15

In the battles the vehicle proved itself to be very protected. Sometimes it stands up to 18 kills of RPG.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 16

In October, 4th, 1993 six T-80 tanks of Kantemirovskaya tank division moved to Kalininsky Bridge opposite the White House. 12 projectiles of 125 mm calibre were fired at the house: two armour-piercing and 10 high-explosive ones.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 17

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 18

Crawler infantry combat vehicle – BMP-2.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 19

Basic armory – automatic 30 mm gun 2A42 intended for destruction of troops,  soft-skinned vehicles and aerial low targets.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 20

As opposed to T-80, BMP can swim (to 7 km/h) and convey landing force (up to 7 persons).

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 21

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 22

Rate of fire – 200 – 800 shots a minute.

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 23

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 24

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 25

Machine gun, sub-machine gun and sniper’s rifle fire – but it’s already another story…

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 26

Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don\'t Trudge 27

32 thoughts on “Mud Or Sludge, Tanks Don’t Trudge”

  1. Always thought the BMP series a very good aifv, particularly with its low profile. The T-80 is a reasonable tank as well, but not on a par now (even with upgrades) with equivalent Western mbts (eg Challenger, Leclerc, Abrams etc).

    Good pics!

    • fail.
      With upgrades it’s not worse than T-90, that as we know as good as all modern tanks of the world.
      Even T-72 with last upgrades good as well, because T-90 just deep modernization of T-72.

  2. Kinda funny they would practice night ops with their lights on. Don’t they have FLIR in Russia? Nothing say “shoot me!” more than running around with the high beams on. LOL

  3. I think you go more than deaf – if you are close enough to the front of the tank when it fires the force can actually wound or kill you.

  4. >>Czenda

    “Although I am sure these are useful in tribal wars, I wonder how they fare against more than 30 yrs old A-10.”

    No better and no worse than any other vehicle against air attack. Frankly, all vehicles (military or otherwise) are sitting ducks againjst air attack without significant air defense. Doesn’t matter whether it’s a T-80 or an Abrams; it’s a dead dodo. Like all 1st world nations, Russia’s armed forces have plenty (read lots!) of air defense units in their armoured divisions.

    Thankfully, we’re not likely to see (fingers crossed) any conflict between 1st world powers. However, if there was to be a conflict involving significant ground fighting, CAS of ground forces and defense against CAS would likely be hugely important.

    The Allied Forces CAS in the first and second Gulf wars inflicted huge damage to the Iraqi armed forces. They were able to do this due to the weakness of the Iraqi air defense. The story would be different in a conflict fought against a nation with a strong air defense capabality.

    Btw, although T-80s are probably not considered to be on a par with the current generation of western mbts, they are by no means obsolete tanks.

    I digress!

  5. redcardinal you wrong.
    T80 MBT(best soviet MBT’s line) is superior to all western counterpart both by firepower, mobility, protection, reliability, cost of ownership.
    major flaws like lack of ergonomics[and air conditioner] and outdated FCS will fined soon in [already]improved T80’s variations.

  6. I agree. The M-1 is far superior. Lethality, Survivability, and it’s ability share real time tactical data, make the T-90s and T-80s very inferior. You see a lot of photos of those nice Russian domed turrents popped off and laying somewhere else.

    • The best Russian made tank that the M-1 has ever challenged in real time war was the T-72 and it didn’t do well because of the M-1’s superior electronics and stuff plus the T-72 was operated by Iraqis…so these popped of Russian turrets cannot be used as evidence of M-1’s superiority over the T-80 or the T-90

      • P.S. The M-1 tank has 2 very big logistics and strategic problems:
        1-it weighs more than 61 tonnes so for crossing rivers it needs large strong bridges and it can be transported by air but only the c-5 or c-17 can transport such a huge load.
        2-the M-1 tank requires 1 gallon of fuel for every kilometer it moves so lets say you have a column of M-1 tanks then u would require a huge convoy of soft skinned fuel tankers to remain close behind and these fuel tankers in turn would require protection or a child with a bbgun can destroy the entire convoy

  7. -I think it i fair to say that all tanks require massive amounts of logistical support. Read any accounts of the dessert campaigns of WW2. Raiding and using the enemies supplies were doctrine.
    -Transportation to the battlefield would be a more serious issue for another country. However the US has no problem with moving massive amounts of war fighting equipment. Also, the prepositioning of equipment in world hotspots is a luxury no other country has. Who else can afford to keep a couple divisions worth of equipment in storage for a future war in multiple locations.
    -Popped turrents are not something you see on the M-1. It has built in vents that reduce the damage if the ammunition explodes. Also the composite armor is some of the best in the world. There were M-1s that had taken multiple anti tank hits and didn’t lose a crew memeber. Even in the recent Georgia campaign you have seen popped turrents on both sides.
    -Finally, doctrine is the greatest advantage. A standing volunteer army is much more lethal than a conscript army. The C3 capability of a US Army RCT is sick and has no drop off in night ops. Until Russia gets away from the conscript system, they will always put an inferior army on the field.

  8. Well I find the T-80(with good crew+upgrades) to be as lethal as an M1(which isn’t the best tank in the world[K2, the new Japanese MBT, Leo2]), same goes for the T-72. T-90 is one of the best tanks currently on service.

    I would’ve liked to see the BMP-3 and the BMT but oh well

  9. The T-72 was the best (and maybe still is the best battle tank)the best battle tank, because it was very fast, low to the ground and a 125 mm 2A46 series main gun, i saw a documentary about it, because it was low to the ground and fast it poses a big threat.


Leave a Comment