Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SuperDeng (talk | contribs) at 00:52, 28 November 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Copyright issue

GlobalSecurity.org and FAS.org both have roughly identical copies of this text. GlobalSecurity.org has a footer that says:

Copyright © 2000-2004 GlobalSecurity.org All Rights Reserved

As far as I can tell, Global Security has not released anything on their site to public domain (despite the copying by FAS.org) and therefore we are in violation of their copywrite. -Vina 19:46, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I have removed the infringing sections. Lupo 07:23, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Limited Service?

And if it is permissible for an objective observer to interrupt the sales pitch here, it is appropriate to note that, #1, the T-90 has never been used in combat, and #2, only a handful have actually been built, probably fewer than one hundred since the late 1980s. It seems to be more of a limited-service test bed project for new design ideas than an actual weapons system, just as the T-64 was. Given the sad current state of the Russian economy and Russian industry, it is by no means certain that they would be able to manufacture a significant number of these tanks even if they got an order for them.

I'd be inclined to suggest that that's more inaccurate than objective. The T-90 has been kept out of combat deliberately because it would undoubtedly be destroyed in combat in Chechnya, as were the old T-80BVs deployed there (no tank is invincible, after all. . . witness the destruction of several M1 series tanks in Iraq by 23mm AAA fired at the sides and rear. This would look bad for the design and the factory, and while it's nothing out of the ordinary for tanks to be destroyed, when your opposition in the market is routinely successful at painting your product as inferior despite the desadvantages of their own offerings, you can hardly be blamed for being antsy about the whole deal, given the state of your economy.

The T-90 is employed in small numbers by mainly guards tank units in Russia, and is is indeed considered even in Russia to be merely a stopgap interim solution to keep production lines open and workers at their jobs until the government can afford to purchase newer tanks, which are in fact based on the T-80 chassis. While the T-90 is the most advanced production tank in Russia, it isn't by any means the most advanced tank available.

The writer of the italicized comment is demonstrably 5 to 10 years behind the curve in his understanding of Russian and Ukranian tank technology, and even in that regard has a lot of facts mixed up, backward, and affected by the opinions and assumptions of a vocal group of 'analysts' who would prefer to presuppose their opponent's kit is inferior to theirs, rather than investigate the matter objectively. It may very well be that Russian kit is inferior, but the method of arriving at an informed understanding of the matter is to explore it fully and without bias, rather than to assume it based on half-understood and outdated notions.

Placed here as placeholder until someone rephrases them to a form suitable for main article.

And if it is permissible for an objective observer to interrupt the sales pitch here, it is appropriate to note that, #1, the T-90 has never been used in combat, and #2, only a handful have actually been built, probably fewer than one hundred since the late 1980s. (note: the T-90 went into service in 1993, and several hundred have been built to date for Russian service) It seems to be more of a limited-service test bed project for new design ideas than an actual weapons system, just as the T-64 was (note: the T-64 was not a test-bed, it was a production tank which was viewed as too complex to be produced in large numbers during the cold war, and the design became the T-80). Given the sad current state of the Russian economy and Russian industry, (note: Rosoboronexport, the new Russian state-run arms company currently turns out billions of dollars in arms exports every year, and is one of the largest arms suppliers in the world.) it is by no means certain that they would be able to manufacture a significant number of these tanks even if they got an order for them. (note: the factory recently produced 124 T-90 tanks for India, with a further 184 to be assembled there from parts manufactured at the factory.)

If it's further permissible to interrupt the western party line to legitimize the 'sales pitch', an informed objective observer might be inclined to suggest that that's more inaccurate than objective. The T-90 has been kept out of combat deliberately because it would undoubtedly be destroyed in combat in Chechnya, as were the old T-80BVs deployed there (no tank is invincible, after all. . . witness the destruction of several M1 series tanks in Iraq by 23mm AAA fired at the sides and rear). This would look bad for the design and the factory, and while it's nothing out of the ordinary for tanks to be destroyed, when your opposition in the market is routinely successful at painting your product as inferior despite the disadvantages of their own offerings, you can hardly be blamed for being antsy about the whole deal, given the state of your economy.

Alex.tan 14:44, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Reverted Edits

All specialists are recognize that the T-90S the best anti-tank in the world. He's also named "flying tank".

Reverted this edit by 194.246.112.83 to the last edit by User:Mzajac. Besides poor grammar, this editor does not specify who these ‘specialists’ are that consider the T-90S the best anti-tank in the world. Also, this editor says that “he’s” also named the flying tank. Who is he? Do you mean the tank? oo64eva (AJ) 19:41, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

It sounds like a literal translation from Russian, referring to the tank. The attribution of "all specialists" is certainly wrong, and I don't think the nickname is correct, either. The T-80/T-84 are called flying tanks, because of their very high power-to-weight ratio. —Michael Z. 2005-04-9 22:07 Z

Russian Economy

I have been hearing that the economy in Russia is doing well toomany people are thinking of 10 years ago Russia probably doesn't want all of them destroyed in Chechnya It would be better to use an older tank in urban combat such as the T-55 Dudtz 7/20/05 2:38pm est

I found the officla page of the Company that makes the tanks

I added the links and also made some changes to the characteristics screen

The officla page has its own characteristics scrren which can be found by clicking on http://www.uvz.ru/eng/ then clicking on ENTERPRISE ACTIVITIES then clicking on MILITARY PRODUCTS then on t-90 c or just go here http://www.uvz.ru/eng/edata/euvz/eprodukt/mprod/t_90.htm

Also i have problems with adding new lines to wiki characteristics screen dotn know how to create a new line if someone could do that for me that would be great i added the to lines about FIRE CONTROL SYSTEM and GUIDED WEAPON SYSTEM