Photos of new ‘mega-protected’ T-72 tanks have been published online.
Photo: twitter.com / MathieuMorant
Instead of military hardware that came out of action, the 4th Armored Division of the Syrian Army has gotten the new T-72 tanks, equipped with ‘mega-protection’ developed by local military craftsmen, the Vestnik Mordovii information website reported.
According to the website, during the upgrading, military experts took into account an experience of usage of the tanks in battles against the terrorists.
The author of the article noted that the photos reveal that unlike the first upgraded versions of tanks that we could see in the summer 2014, Syrian military completely abandoned the installation of steel chains with balls on their military hardware. This solution was adopted from Israelis, but, as the author pointed out, apparently, the effectiveness of such protection was very far from ideal.
The previous upgraded versions of a Syrian tank (Photo: allmystery.de)
At the same time, height of the slat armor was increased by almost 2 times.
Earlier, there also were attempts to cover the top of a tank turret with slat armor, but this modification did not become widespread, as in this case a crew was in some cage, which increased time, needed for military to leave a damaged tank.
Photo: twitter.com / MathieuMorant
Photo: twitter.com / MathieuMorant
Photo: twitter.com / MathieuMorant
lol, those RPG fragments XD
that’s a lot of hits looks like the filled the void with stones or something
Certainly would help in avoiding direct hit..
Madness to use heavy tanks in urban areas at all. I dont know where that faith comes from.
You can get much more and much more flexible and cheaper solutions by almost anything else. Tanks are for, where there are no other possibilities for cover.
Thanks could be usefull for taking Al Bab, Usufull for taking Palmyra-Al del Zor and some as Turks use them and armed artillery north of Al Bab. Fine for rural flat districkts around Mosul as well.
watch Anna News in Jobar and you’ll understand why they use tanks. it’s not madness, far from it. what’s maddness is to blindly send in tanks without cooperation and infantry support. tanks which operate in close cooperation with other parts of the military can be a good asset in urban combat.
Yes, there is no 100% perfect combined arms – armor-infantry-artillery-air team for the mixed rural-urban battlefields in Syria, but this war has proven that the tank is suited to fighting in built-up areas. One problem I see with the T72 and T90 is the length of the gun barrel which restricts traverse in narrow streets, but unless you have available a heavily armored and well protected tank specifically designed as infantry close support ( large caliber HE cannon, no dead space, etc..) then you make up inf-tank combat teams . The SAA has performed well, learned and improvised solutions. Slat armor is a good compromise- relatively light, easy to design and fix and effective. Syria is fighting a war for its very existence – the SAA must make do with whatever is to hand.
very good points. basically, they are using what’s at hand. they have tanks and are using them.
I agree about the infantery support, but not the rest. Abuqahwa confirm the problems around comming round in urban areas and the long barrel also are seen too soon when the tank come around corners and it also make it easier på spot and shoot at.
Reading the data also confirms the engine is not made to being moved around i heavy urban terrain and it will slide up or down concrite as well as being extra slow.
Well, thats me about it. Im not expert in the new ones. Have read about Your new Armata -seems pretty good.
Next time Syrians probatly will be given KV1&2 and a bunch of IS`s. Ha-ha. Sometimes old stuff is really good stuff.
Dont think many of those are left.
The equipoment make it slow and it also will use much more fuel. To me its a waste and a total misunderstandig of the use of heavy tanks.
You can buy 3 or 4 heavy ordinary howitsers of 150 mm for that or 8 still big ones lets say 120 and remove them often in stead, so they are not hit by tows or something. Gives much more firepower and can be coordinated GPS and walkie talkie.
Cant see most SAA`s has any idea of, what tanks are for. Might be easier to understand easy transportable artillery.
dude, i believe that after 5 years of trial and error (and profesiional military training) they should know better than you. if it wasn’t any good, it wouldn’t have stuck around.
that’s one.
second is the “slow too much fuel” argument. nope. tanks in urban warfare dont go huge distances, nor do they go fast. protection is paramount. so any extra weight of slat is no real problem with advantages it brings.
thirdly, you’re forgetting that tanks can also play hide-and-seek between buildings, come out fire and withdraw, which is now standard tactic of urban warfare. secondly, they can produce smoke screens to hide advancing or withdrawing troops. not to mention blast the entire housing sections. and mentioning artillery, youre mentioning howitzers. but they only fly under elevation, and are further back. so, are not possible to put immediate concentrated fire on enemy sniper of RPG nests.
A lot of expensive tanks as well as soldiers are killed for almost nothing by types like You if they are in power to it.
A lot of people has written about it almost exactly as I do and there is nothing new in armies should have weapons they actual can handle and many good details about Tanks and infantery in Urban warfare.
Naziproblems by taking over Warsaw is a well described lesson and what was learned by loosing so many tanks.
The best infantery in the world also carried small canons with them in the frontline, they were good, but too vonurable.
So they invented armed small range rapidly with very short barrels, and Im sure russians still have some of them from museums as well as rapid shooting ones, which also could be used for airdefence.
You also forget, that after that a lot of low weight anti arm incl. tanks are invented and its fast. You write here about surprice, but You forget its THEM who several places actually are waiting for the fool to be unprotected. It becomes much easier if its walking around as a pregnant elefant with astma bumbing and sliding up and down and not like Bambi.
Very arrogant presuming You know much more compared to the tank results of Fx Aleppo.
If its about the socalled famous Tigers, they are mainly good because they at least dont run away – after 5 years training – my as.
man, arent you easy to take off… when did i say i know better? never, nowhere. it’s my uneducated opinion. but as for presuming you actually KNOW something about me and how i mentally behave in complicated situations (such as op planning) from a single post you didnt even read properly… well, this aint worth a laugh.
anyways, i told you already everything in my previous posts. you do whatever you want with it. my opinion matters as much as yours – nothing. it’s other guys running the show. im just typing here.
Well – Allright – But to me war is not to demolish buildings but to hit the enemy hard as military units big and small.
Smashing building as the 1070 apartment in Aleppo could been done by both parts many times only using explosives. But they didnt, because it would give at better defence.
Made a typing mistake. I meant high velocity canons and relativly short barrel. RPG`s up in building has to be taken by snipers or as seen from Toyotatypes single or double shots.
RPG`s are easy targets, if You have more than one window or roof covered and well observed – and You are ready and have fast cartridges.
Have a nice day – If You wish… Regardas a.s.o.
So your suggesting that whenever the Syrian army encounters resistance, they call in an artillery strike, and blow up a city block sized area?
Are you American?
I havent written anything near, what You presume.
1) I have written that You can get much more effective power to a less trained army by using many flexible haubizers.
2) I have also written a slow tanks with as small motor and a long barral is an easy target in urban warfare. T72 is known for it smal motor and here its plastred with some tons weight above that.
Knowing about tanks has nothing to do with nationality. Im very familiar to most armed vehicles as well many kinds of artillery.
I wrote about some old classic lighter tanks which are taken out from some museum i Assads. They have double barrels and has also been used as antiaircraft. There i wondered why they were not in use long ago, because they are very fit for streetfigthing.
So its not about tanks or not. Its about what they are fit for in heavy urban terrain helping and being helped by the infantery.
Jens you are correct that many times in mixed urban terrain the T72 is not the best choice but Syria is fighting for its survival here and must use every weapon available, so tanks get modified, add-on armor etc.. bow bars, dozer blades etc.. and rushed into battle. I agree that there are many lighter armored fighting vehicles, like with twin 23 mm auto cannon or Russian 2S9 120 mm SPMor, better suited to close infantry support but the SAA just doesn’t have them. Maybe you should ask the Bundeswehr to give us some rather than selling Leopard 2A4 to our enemy
I will ask Merkel next time we drink coffee. Might bring some lokums as well.
>”heavy tank”… are you retarded? T-72 is not a heavy tank it’s a medium tank and much lighter comapred to the heavier western tanks. Also the extra cage armor doesn’t “slow it down” at all because it’s not really much we’re talking about 1 or 2 extra tons at most which still doesn’t change the classification as a medium tank. Western tanks weigh almost twice as much and yet even they have still good mobility. It’s not a waste of anything except a waste of RPG rounds and missiles shot at this bunker.
Syria has enough artillery and rocket launchers, but it still needs tanks for direct fire support.
aaa, good improvement the hight of the slat armor. shows that RPG shots were mostly fired from above.