Summary and Key Points: The T-90M Proryv, hailed by Vladimir Putin as the world’s premier main battle tank, faces an existential crisis on the Ukrainian front. -Despite Uralvagonzavod shifting to a 24-hour production cycle to output nearly 300 units annually, Russia is losing armor faster than it can be replaced. -Visually confirmed losses now exceed […]
You can build an autoloading mechanism that doesn’t require the ammo to be stored this way. They chose to do it anyways to make the tanks smaller, specifically to reduce the height. If you store all the ammo in the turret where you can have blowout panels, the turret will be much larger and the tank higher.
Fair enough. I think part of the design choices specifically included a lower profile to make the tank harder to hit, which goes to tank safety.
This is the correct answer. The autoloader also enabled them to remove one crew member, thus reducing interior space and increasing armor thickness for the same weight. Contemporary western tanks like the M60 didn’t have blowout panels either, so the argument that ‘the Bolshevik hordes have no regard for the lives of their peasant conscripts, while the enlightened west spares no expense to protect its precious troops’ holds no water
That is until you compare the T-90M to a modern NATO tank it’s supposed to contend with. The T-90 entered service in 1992, the US had the M-1 Abrams enter in 1980. Most M-60’s were retired by 1995.
It’s cheaper, easier on logistics, and it does its job fine. The Ukraine war has proved, once again, that no tank is invincible, and the greatest danger to tanks is from dedicated antitank weapons rather than other tanks.