Home

Tankograd


This blog was created with the intention of clarifying common misconceptions and mistakes, as well as to discuss the qualities of Russian armoured fighting vehicles in minute detail. Each article is intended to be a comprehensive overview for each vehicle in technical terms and how they affect the performance of the vehicles in practice, i.e their combat capabilities. Each article begins with an introduction that consists of a brief but densely packed summary of the history of each fighting vehicle, but the contents of the articles are dedicated entirely to a technological review. We try to make sure that the information used is absolutely reliable, but there will always be some mistakes hidden away somewhere in each article. To improve the quality of the blog, please do not hesitate to point them out.

Tankograd now has a Discord Server. Use this open invitation link to join the server and don't hesitate to share it around. The server is primarily meant to be a hub for people who share the same esoteric interest in Soviet armoured fighting vehicles, but it is also used as a discussion room for Tankograd articles. You are encouraged to contact the authors in the Discord server and talk about the articles and suggest improvements or point out errors and inconsistencies. See you there!


Due to popular demand, Tankograd is now on Patreon! If you like this blog and wish to give financial support, head over to our Patreon page. As always, the articles will still be published freely on this blog, but Patrons will be able to enjoy a multitude of special benefits such as being able to read the final drafts of upcoming articles before they are published and vote on new articles. The quality and quantity of articles is always on the rise thanks to your support.


INDEX



  1. 2S1 "Gvozdika"

  2. T-10

  3. PT-76

  4. FIELD DISASSEMBLY: BMP-1

  5. T-54

  6. BMP-2

  7. T-80

  8. T-10 (Guest article)

  9. BTR-152 (Guest article)

  10. T-62

  11. BMD-2

  12. T-72: Part 1

  13. T-72: Part 2

  14. BTR-80

  15. BMP-3


Share your thoughts on this in the comments section of the articles, or better yet, talk to the authors directly in our Discord server.


The Tankograd blog is not related to the German publishing company of the same name.

60 comments:

  1. Love your posts and can't wait to hear about the SPRUT-SD and the undersung BRDM-2, have you thought of making a post on T-64? There's so little on that tank and I'd love to see a look into it the likes of your T-72 post!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First of all - Sorry for the late reply!

      Yes, my partner, Miguel Miranda, is currently working diligently on a Sprut-SD article, and the BRDM-2 article is also underway, though it is not on top of my priority list at the moment. Right now, I am concentrating on a series of short articles, dubbed "Field Disassembly". We will be "disassembling" the T-90A and BMP-1. We also have a T-54 article in the works, though not a T-64 article at the moment. There are so many similarities between the "T-tank Triad" (T-64, T-72, T-80) that I find it difficult to justify another new article for the T-64, especially since the technology of the T-64 is largely duplicated in the T-72 Ural.

      Delete
    2. Dear Sir:
      The T-64 was a real brakthrough but there are few details about its 5TDF diesel engine of opposed pistons quite similar al Leyland L-600 of the British Chieftain. I would like to know if you have information about this engine developed by Professor Charomsky.
      I Praise the quality of your articles, specially concerned about optical equipment and weapon stabilization.
      Best regards and congratulations again
      Horacio A. Galacho - Rep. Argentina

      Delete
  2. I can't wait to hear about the BRDM-2 and the Sprut-SD. Love your posts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Easily the best source of information on Soviet and Russian vehicles I've ever come across. Can't thank you enough for your effort!

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's been a while, any update on when your next article will be posted?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry about the atrocious delay, John. "T-54: Red Dawn" will be the next article, and it will be posted within the week. It is similar in length to the T-72 article.

      Delete
  5. Nothing to apologize for, your articles are worth the wait!

    John

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you!

      What would you like to see next? I've got articles on the BTR-60, BTR-82A, PT-76, Sprut-SD and the BMP-1 on the way.

      Delete
    2. Hey man! Keep them coming, I've read all of them so far. Excellent stuff. I also have friend who read your articles, we all love them.

      Sochi

      Delete
    3. Personally, I'm a big fan of the BMP-1.

      Delete
  6. Excellent work. In your future articles could you also include comments on the qualitative differences between the so called 'monkey models' and the models used by the Russian/Soviet Army. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think that I have devoted a few passing remarks on the topic periodically, but to make it clear here: "Monkey models" do not exist in the strictest sense. Export models were definitely downgraded, but there is no proof so far that mild steel was used for armour, that the sights were fitted haphazardly, or what have you. However, exported tanks were severely downgraded by not having the latest ammunition, and not having the latest model. Given the rapid pace of the advancement of arms technology during the Cold War, using stuff that is decades older than what your opponent has is a clear disadvantage. BUT, the "downgrade" was not so drastic. The biggest problem with foreign operators of Soviet equipment is that they often lack the finesse to operate them. Vietnam is an example of a reasonably competent wielder of Soviet steel, but their inability to control or at least influence the air traffic greatly contributed to the loss of many of their armoured assets. More of this will be expanded upon in the upcoming T-54 article, which should come out today.

      Delete
  7. Understood, many thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dude the T-54 article was outstanding! Can't wait for the BMP-1 article since its such a classic vehicle and the father of modern IFVs.
    -Sochi

    ReplyDelete
  9. Great job on the T-54. Definitely an underrated tank! Do you plan on adding some text on a few sections that were not discussed in detail (such as the BDD armor)?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, the BDD armour on the T-54 is practically the same as in the T-62, and I've already covered it on the T-62 article. I've added a link in the BDD section of the T-54 article to that end.

      Delete
    2. What are the full frontal arc protection stats of a T-62 and T-55 with BDD amour? and what is the max they can stop? Thanks in advance!
      -sochi

      Delete
    3. Well, it depends. The Hungarians did a test with a decommissioned T-54 by putting some BDD armour on it, taken from a T-55. They shot at it with a Fagot missile from the side. It went through, and the cumulative jet was stopped by the gun breech. They don't tell us how deep it went into the breech, or where it was exactly that the missile hit, but we know that the side of the turret of a T-54 is 120mm thick on average, and that the Fagot can penetrate 400mm RHA. Therefore, the front of the turret should be able to stop the missile, because it's got an extra 80mm. BDD armour on itself has a very limited effectiveness. It should be able to stop anything hitting the front of the tank it's mounted to as long as what's hitting it has a shaped charge that does less than 400mm of penetration. In other words, it's good for LAW rockets (and its Soviet copies), older RPG-7 rockets, M47 Dragon missiles, and anything to that effect, but nothing more.

      Delete
  10. Tankograd! Whats the next article going to be man?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not sure. I work on a few articles at a time, and the one that gets finished first depends on my own personal interest and reader requests. Right now, I'm working on articles for the BMP-1, PT-76, BRDM-1, BTR-82A, BTR-60 and T-64 (115mm gun). Which one do you want to see first?

      Delete
    2. I voted for BMP-1 ;)

      Delete
    3. Duly noted. I will be writing the article in the "Field Disassembly" format, where I cover all of the unique aspects of the vehicle in full detail as usual, but I gloss over the parts that are shared with a sister design. In the case of the BMP-1, I will only be examining the turret and some small layout differences between it and the BMP-2. The chassis, engine, transmission, steering system, fuel system, and so on, are all either identical or largely the same.

      Delete
  11. I was internet surfing and found that the Cubans still use thousands of T-55 and T-62 and have them in top of the line condition. Pretty cool video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIvwnzGbwVc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, of course. I would be immensely surprised if Cuba had the financial resources to replace their old tanks, even if they wanted to. Cuba used to have a significant international presence. I have no idea how powerful they used to be, but they starred in Red Dawn alongside the Russians as equals, not as subordinates. I always found it strange that they portrayed Cuba as a nation powerful enough to invade the U.S.A. Now they don't have much influence, so I cannot envision what they might use their tanks for if they decided to upgrade to new ones, so I suppose that it's for the best that they keep their old ones. Less upkeep and all.

      Delete
    2. Cuito Cuanavale was the bloodiest battle in Africa since WW2 and the cubans waged the second part of that conflict putting the south africans in defense and later on retreat. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjX-EtsL26Y
      Am guessing now cuba is just to outdated and look at their gear is all old as hell. I think their newest tank is the T-72 and they only have a couple.

      Delete
    3. Yes, and that is exactly why I made the point that the T-54 cannot be considered a subpar tank. It performed very well in the right hands. The Cubans really knew their stuff, it seems.

      Delete
  12. Brother I love your articles are outstanding. What is the next article on?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The BMP-1 got the most votes, so it'll be next. Stay tuned!

      Delete
  13. BMP-1?!?!?!?!?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Will there be a T-64 or T-90 article any time soon?
    I really want to read about them(especially the T-90)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had some interest in the original T-64 (with the 115mm cannon) initially, and I've got a draft for a T-90 article that is 20% complete at this point, but right now, I have absolutely 0 motivation to write any more articles for Tankograd. I'm afraid that you'll have to make do with the material that I've put out so far. Real life affairs are at the top of my priority list, and Tankograd is at the bottom.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for all your work! ! Good luck with The real Life!

      Delete
  15. I have followed your blog since the very beginning. I love your works and I really want to get in touch with you! Can you perhaps give me your contact? I would like to collaborate with you! :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My email is at the bottom of the page. It's irondrapes@gmail.com. Please do contact me!

      Delete
  16. Just wanted to say that your blog is excellent. Pretty much the best source of info on Soviet / Russian armor on the web, bar none. Hope your real life issues are going well and one day you'll be posting again.

    ReplyDelete
  17. All I can do is repeat what others have said. These articles are without compare, period. I'd love to see more when you have time. But in the meantime, best wishes.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I just recently came upon this site. I agree, excellent work! You cover all the aspects, including ammunition for said vehicles.
    Thank you also for quickly responding to the questions I posted recently.
    Hopefully life treats you a little better these days. Do know that your contributions are appreciated by all us.
    If you do decide to add to the page, my vote is for BRDM-2.
    Thanks again!

    ReplyDelete
  19. hello friend im the guy who asked about the T90A armor.
    i personally do not really think we can just yet say that the armor in the T90A is similar to the T72B because no info is there , apart from a brochure with an illustration that kinda looks like reflective sheet layout , but doesnt speak about the composition.
    as for the other question , people sometimes say that the T90M for example has mediocre armor compared to the abrams M1A2 SEP , how true can this be ?
    do we have RHAe values ?

    and is the safe ammo placement on the abrams really that much of a giant advantage ?
    thank you.
    ps : out of curiosity , what is your favourite tank?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, precisely. Nothing can be said about the composition right now, although the layout appears to be the same as the T-72B turret based on available evidence.

      There is not enough information about the T-90M or the M1A2 SEP, so I'm not going to give any comment here. Let's just put it this way: both are fully capable of fulfilling their roles.

      Safe ammo placement in the Abrams is a significant advantage in asymmetric warfare. The ammo in any tank will be safe if its armour doesn't get penetrated, and practically all modern tanks can easily resist an RPG-7 from the front so all modern tanks are equally safe in that respect, but in Chechnya, the majority of hits sustained by Russian T-72 and T-80 tanks landed on the sides, rear, and some landed on the roof. Barring some lucky non-penetrations, separated ammo with blow-out panels will be infinitely safer than any other method of ammo stowage.

      My favourite tank is the T-62.

      Delete
    2. alrighty so the so called ''nato tank technology superiority " isn't what it's cracked up to be given the lack of evidence .

      thanks for the answer.
      T-62 , first tenk with smoothboi :-D.
      one more thing : russians said that the armor is worth up to 1100 mm vs KE , and that the next tier of defence , the cabsule , is worth 900 mm , if you stack this with that , *AND* with the malkhit ERA , wouldnt that be way too much?

      Delete
    3. I didn't say anything close to that. I think that there are many examples of NATO tank technology having a lead over current Russian technology. The biggest shortcoming of Russian tanks right now is the lackluster thermal imaging equipment and the shortage of funds, forcing the current fleet of T-72B3s to rely on outdated Kontakt-5 instead of something more modern.

      Nobody said anything about 1100mm vs KE or 900mm vs KE. All these random numbers on the internet are basically meaningless.

      Delete
    4. The main problem with russian tanks is simple: Uralvagonzavod. Their megalomaniac leaders totally eliminated competition in the 80s, while fully knowing that this will greatly harm their country. In the '80s Harkov worked on revolutionary designs, like the Objekt-490A and Objekt-477/A/A2. These designs were far ahead of anything in the world. Both were almost ready for mass production, but UVZ with its huge political influence prevented it. So russia was stuck with totally obsolete T-72 tanks. Even the most modern T-72B3 is on the level of late '80s. T-90M is OK, but the design itself is outdated. Actually, same story with BMPT...

      Delete
  20. Hi! I think there might be a bit of an issue with the hyperlink on the homepage for the BMD-2 article; the link there routes to an error page while the link to the same article in the drop-down menu to the side works fine. Idk if I'm missing something or if it's just a problem on my end but I thought that I'd mention it anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, there was a mismatch in the hyperlink. I've fixed it now. Thanks for pointing it out.

      Delete
  21. I know you said you have too little time to continue this blog, but I still ask, is there any hope that we'll see a new article sometime in the future? The quality of the blog is so high that it would be a pity if you would abandon it for good.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh yes, I have a T-10 article that's almost ready to be published. I can't say when exactly it will be published though. I honestly have too little time to invest in this blog for regular uploads to be possible. It also makes it difficult to maintain interest in a single tank for me to decide to commit to writing about it. Still, this blog won't be abandoned outright. Maybe there will be one or two articles a year with frequent updates to older articles. That's the best that my schedule will accommodate.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for quick answer! This is very good news! Yes, I fully understand RL takes priority. 1-2 articles a year is perfectly fine!

      Delete
  22. Unfortunately it looks like T-54 article is gone which is great loss as it was great.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh no it has just been taken down temporarily for some updates. It will be back up in a few hours.

      Delete
    2. It's still missing... or was it removed again?...

      Delete
  23. Only as information, the article about 2S1 "Gvozdika" is not yet in the main index

    regards,
    Gaius

    ReplyDelete