I doubt a t-80 could wrangle with an Abram. Maybe a t-90, a leopard 2 or a later Merkava, but I think t-80 would get flattened.

Speaking of which, when was the last time it was tank on tank? Planes are much more effective.

Both times the US went up against the Iraqi army there tank battles. The T80s have a smooth bore gun and can't shoot straight. They are useless against the Abrams.

3BM-42M or 9K120 Svir/Refleks would be enough.

Smooth bore is useless? Why don't you say that to T-80's face :) I mean, I know 15,000 yards is impressive for Abrams, but if we are talking urban or forest warfare, that hardly matters.

Also, don't forget that there are different models of T-80s and the ones in Iraq were not equipped with reactive armor or decent rounds. I don't seem to remember any significant, concerted, tank action in Iraq, just a bunch of abandoned tanks being sliced open by A10s.

Uh, fellas...the Iraqi's never had T-80's. Their arsenal was made up almost entirely of T-72 & T-62 Soviet-made tanks. The rest were T-54/55's and about 20 WWII-era Pattons. While their armored divisions were some 5500 MBT's strong at the beginning of GW1, we quickly and efficiently decimated their ranks to about 2500. Not one Abrams was destroyed by an Iraqi tank during that conflict.

In GW2, they had about 2200 of those same tired-ass tanks, with an additional 12 years of wear and tear on them. As far as I can tell, (since I'm now just reading about this stuff instead of living it) we still have yet to have an Abrams even so much as scratched by an Iraqi tank. I haven't seen good information on how many of their tanks the coalition forces destroyed and how many were captured.

During GW1, we used to joke that we could sell the hundreds of pristine, abandoned Iraqi tanks dotting the roads from Kuwait to Basrah...'For Sale: Iraqi tank. Driven once, never fired. White flag included free of charge'. Many of the ones destroyed by our forces either had a single large hole in them from the Abrams, or 50-60 smaller holes from the 30MM gun on the Bradley. In the ones destroyed by Bradley's I'd sometimes find survivors to treat and evacuate...I never found a survivor in one taken out by the Abrams. Just pieces. Small pieces.

PWNED VIA CLAVIS!

Not true, see article from the Washington Post 1992 (search for T-80). They had 550 T-80s, but I am assuming they were deployed closer to Baghdad and were never used.

http://www.krigskronikan.com/Wolfowitz1-wp1992.html

Dude, read your own source material a little more carefully:

Because all six regional contingencies are based, according to a memorandum from Jeremiah, on 'the most current {intelligence} information and assessments available,' the Feb. 4 document offers a revealing window on the world that Pentagon planners expect to face in 1999. It is projected, for instance, that by then:

North Korea 'possesses a limited nuclear capability (5-10 weapons deliverable by aircraft or missiles).' Iraq, by contrast, which has been the focus of an international anti-proliferation effort, is predicted to have only 'possible' possession of 'enough fissile material to produce a small number of nuclear explosive devices.'

Iraq has used oil revenue to buy 550 T-80 Russian tanks, a top-of-the-line model it did not possess in last year's gulf war. It also has 880 T-72 tanks, compared to 150 estimated today, and about 180 more top-of-the-line Russian combat aircraft than it has in today's inventory of about 50.

The entire article is about contigencies and plans...forecasts for the future. It isn't presenting MTOE figures as fact. The operant phrase being, 'It is projected, for instance, that by then:'

The Iraqi's didn't have the T-80 in 1990-1991, and they didn't have them 2003-Present.

Dude, explain this then:

http://www.cimoli.com/pictures/oif/pages/T80%20tank%20and%20UH60%20crew_jpg.htm

Sounds like the intelligence reports were not entirely off mark.

Oh, I forgot...the M1A1 is equipped with the M256 120mm smoothbore cannon. It is definitely NOT shit. Dead-on aim to 4000 meters @ 50MPH isn't bad, IMHO.

Holy shit! you guys take your tanks pretty seriously-The main prob with them is that they are'nt very good at stealthy urban warfare which is the current style- Have just been reading about the stealth fighter, again an awsome peice of kit, but fairly useless at finding or killing urban terrorists (or even a 6 foot fucktard hiding in the afghan hills), The best weapon of all is a shitload of well trained well armed soldiers on the ground.

Loved the tank getting air and firing and the niose of the turbine engine.

Simply a misidentified tank. Show me one single reference to Iraq possessing a T-80, and I'll concede. The fact is the motherfukers couldn't afford the 80's, especially after GW1.

The 72 & the 80 are built on the same frame, and are nearly identical, visually. The differences are in the engine, armor, and fire control systems...things that can't necessarily be spotted in a photograph.

I don't know what your interest is in arguing this point, but what the hell...I don't get to talk too much military shit anymore.

And another thing...

Pull up a pic of a 72 then of an 80, and note the configuration of the FF(Flak/Flare) canisters on the left side(looking from the TC's perch) of the turret. Now compare with the configuration of the tank in your photo.

Compared--looks identical. Yeah, I know they share the T72 chassis, but the styling of the turret is slightly different for T80.

Let's drop this anyway, I guess no one but us cares.

Good to know that you know your stuff and had experience. This could lead to some interesting discussions in the future...

Yeah, it looks impressive but I seriously doubt that it can contend with western tanks especially the Abrams and the Leopard. The Ruskies still design their tanks the same way, as apposed to western tanks that have taken radical new approaches like the British Chobbam armor. The Russian tanks look the same as the ones during the cold war only with upgraded targeting computers.

I think the Russians are losing their edge on the high-tech weapons market, just falling back on their crude mass-produced arms like the AK line and the RPGs. Although their new MiG looks pretty badass.

My tank is fight.