47 minutes ago, Player_unknown said:

Hi guys, was wondering, do you think we will see the T-90´s variants ingame?

 

Probably.

 

47 minutes ago, Player_unknown said:

or the first renamed unit T-72BU ?

 

That would be the T-90, and I don't think we'll see it, we're more likely to see the return of the T-90A from the April Fools event.

 

47 minutes ago, Player_unknown said:

or are we to far out in the future for this ? 

 

The T-90 is worse than a T-80U that we already have in-game, there is no reason why it could not be implemented.

 

  • Like 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-90 then T-90A possibly a folder would be a good idea.

 

This could be in the T-72 line even though we have yet to get a T-72B and I don't care if it's a worse version of the T-80U or something. More historical vehicles is a yes for me.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

Probably.

 

 

That would be the T-90, and I don't think we'll see it, we're more likely to see the return of the T-90A from the April Fools event.

 

 

The T-90 is worse than a T-80U that we already have in-game, there is no reason why it could not be implemented.

 

is the T-90 Vladimir worse then the T-80U ? i really did not thought that. it should have better performing gun and armor thoe less agile? or iam totaly wrong ? none the less, it will further the T-72 line :)  i just think its SOOOOOO sexy looking xD and i really want to hand dem germans/US some bias xD

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Player_unknown said:

is the T-90 Vladimir worse then the T-80U ? i really did not thought that. it should have better performing gun and armor thoe less agile?

 

T-90 has roughly identical armour performance.

T-90 has significantly worse mobility.

T-90 has superior turret traverse.

Both can fire the same ammunition.

 

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

T-90 has roughly identical armour performance.

T-90 has significantly worse mobility.

T-90 has superior turret traverse.

Both can fire the same ammunition.

 

 

i see... but would the T-90 not be able to unlock new game mechanics ? with deffensive mods ? vs ATGM and such ? i think the T-90 was a T-72 with upgraded electronics right ? 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 3 main versions of T-90:

 

T-90 Obr 1993, same as T-72B 1989 but with FCS from T-80U (not that it matters a lot in gameplay terms currently).

Compared to current T-80U (1985), this T-90 would have better base armor at the hull and turret, with less significant weaspots and better ERA coverage. So, better protection.

The gun and ammo would be the same  but the mobility significantly worse, would be at the same BR as current ingame T-80U

 

T-90A: new welded turret with up to 15 percent better protection performance and a new 1000 hp engine. Would be 0.3 BR higher than T-80U (i support T-84 in this same BR).

 

T-90M Proryv: better 1200hp engine, improved gun and ammo selection, and new ERA with much better coverage (base armor is most likely the same as T-90A although the turret is of a new design). I would put it at 0.3 BR higher and paired with T-84M Oplot.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 4
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Player_unknown said:

i think the T-90 was a T-72 with upgraded electronics right ? 

 

Fire control systems aren't modelled in War Thunder.

 

And yes, the T-90 = T-72BU, it was renamed for export reasons.

 

5 hours ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

Compared to current T-80U (1985), this T-90 would have better base armor at the hull and turret, with less significant weaspots and better ERA coverage. So, better protection.

 

Base armour is pretty similar given how the in-game T-80U uses the BTK-1 steel array.

Weakspots are the same on both vehicles, #1: Mantlet region, #2: Driver's area and #3: lower glacis.

ERA coverage isn't better, upper glacis coverage is extremely similar, turret coverage also isn't that good due to Shtora placement.

 

Quote

T-90A: new welded turret with up to 15 percent better protection performance

 

Any source on that?

 

IIRC, the turret was only really changed to welded for increased internal volume.

 

Quote

and a new 1000 hp engine. Would be 0.3 BR higher than T-80U (i support T-84 in this same BR).

 

Meh, It'd place them both at 10.3, the T-90A and T-80U that is.

 

Edited by Necrons31467
  • Confused 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will probably come soon, likely topping off the t-72 line alongside the t-80s.

Assuming gaijin raises the br cap to 11.0 I reckon both t-80U and t-90 would be fine there (alongside leo2a5 and m1a1HA).

I'm not sure how much of a step up t-90A would be, possibly 11.3 but I'm not really sure. It's got some kind of APS that works against ATGMS iirc, so that would be something new gaijin would need to model before adding it, although vs other tanks anti-ATGM APS probably won't make a lot of difference. T-90A could even be a researchable upgrade to t-90 at 11.0.

 

T-90M is more cutting edge, and would come alongside m1a2 Sep v whatever, CR2 LEP (or something like that), leo2a6 or 7. Really though I think gaijin should stick to 11.0 being the top and just work on balancing things there, we don't really need to get more modern than that. 

Edited by Dantheman66
  • Haha 3
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

Base armour is pretty similar given how the in-game T-80U uses the BTK-1 steel array.

Weakspots are the same on both vehicles, #1: Mantlet region, #2: Driver's area and #3: lower glacis.

ERA coverage isn't better, upper glacis coverage is extremely similar, turret coverage also isn't that good due to Shtora placement.

 

 

Any source on that?

 

IIRC, the turret was only really changed to welded for increased internal volume.

 

 

Meh, It'd place them both at 10.3, the T-90A and T-80U that is.

 

Currently we have T-80U model 1985. By 1989 both T-80U and T-72B got upgraded hull armor. Either tank from 1989 has better armor than their 1985 versions.T-72B turret has comparable or better protection than T-80U (550-600mm KE) while the UFP weakspot should be a little smaller.

About the increased turret protection properties from T-90 to T-90A its because the latter uses a new welded turret (T-90 and T-72B use cast steel, less effective compared to RHA). On all of these subjects, check the article on Tankograd about T-72B.

 

For BR:

10.3: T-90 // T-80U

10.7: T-90A // T-84

11.0: T-90M // T-84M

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

About the increased turret protection properties from T-90 to T-90A its because the latter uses a new welded turret (T-90 and T-72B use cast steel, less effective compared to RHA). On all of these subjects, check the article on Tankograd about T-72B.

 

Cast steel isn't automatically worse when accounting for the additional angle, and again, where did you pull that +15% figure from?

 

10 hours ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

For BR:

10.3: T-90 // T-80U

10.7: T-90A // T-84

11.0: T-90M // T-84M

 

So I still have no clue why you continue to place the T-80U and T-90 at the same BR.

 

One is just flat out worse than the other.

There's a reason why the T-80B is 0.3 BR higher than the T-64B.

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

Cast steel isn't automatically worse when accounting for the additional angle, and again, where did you pull that +15% figure from?

 

 

So I still have no clue why you continue to place the T-80U and T-90 at the same BR.

 

One is just flat out worse than the other.

There's a reason why the T-80B is 0.3 BR higher than the T-64B.

 

Again, for the turret effectiveness check Tankograd

https://thesovietarmourblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/t-72-part-2-protection-good-indication.html?m=1#t_72b

 

As to why place T-80U 1985 and T-90 1993 at the same BR, is because the latter has higher protection and the first, higher mobility.

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

 

And nowhere does it claim a 15% increase in effectiveness in that article.

 

43 minutes ago, Alan_Tovarishch said:

As to why place T-80U 1985 and T-90 1993 at the same BR, is because the latter has higher protection and the first, higher mobility.

 

Protection increase is practically irrelevant.

 

Same turret armour.

Minor hull armour increase.

Same weakspots.

Sameless-than-ideal Kontakt-5 coverage.

 

 

Also, T-64B and T-80B aren't at the same BR, to repeat myself.

 

medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Necrons31467 said:

 

And nowhere does it claim a 15% increase in effectiveness in that article.

 

 

Protection increase is practically irrelevant.

 

Same turret armour.

Minor hull armour increase.

Same weakspots.

Sameless-than-ideal Kontakt-5 coverage.

 

 

Also, T-64B and T-80B aren't at the same BR, to repeat myself.

 

Sorry i messed up my sources, it was here: http://btvt.info/3attackdefensemobility/turret_welded.htm

 

Edited by Alan_Tovarishch
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with T90M as an answer to 2A5  considering  T90A is a sidegrade at best compared to T80U ( unless they give it Svinets or something but i doubt ) .

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Raldi92 said:

I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with T90M as an answer to 2A5  considering  T90A is a sidegrade at best compared to T80U ( unless they give it Svinets or something but i doubt ) .

Still has the awful 7 speed fwd 1 speed reverse with 4kph reverse speed typical of most of the modern Russian MBTs and worse power to weight ratio then T-80. Only advantage would be better ammo that Gaijin would give it.

Edited by RoflSeal
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/04/2019 at 03:46, RoflSeal said:

Still has the awful 7 speed fwd 1 speed reverse with 4kph reverse speed typical of most of the modern Russian MBTs and worse power to weight ratio then T-80. Only advantage would be better ammo that Gaijin would give it.

 

Not only better ammo , better armor , better ERA ( Relikt ) and much better ERA coverage on both hull and turret  . Also the autoloader is protected  from small fragments ( granted will still go off incase of direct hit ) and the rest of the ammo is stored in protected compartement with blow out pannels behind the turret wich allows to take full loadout.

 

SureT90M is not on T80 level on the mobility side but at least it will be a very tough nut to crack from the front very similar to what 2A5 is now ! 

Edited by Raldi92
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Raldi92 said:

 

Not only better ammo , better armor , better ERA ( Relikt ) and much better ERA coverage on both hull and turret  . Also the autoloader is protected  by small fragments ( granted will still go off on a direct hit ) and the rest of the ammo is stored in blow out pannels behind the turret wich allows to take full loadout.

 

Sure T90M is not on T80 level on the mobility side but at least it will be a very tough nut to crack from the front similar to what 2A5 is now ! 

The counterparts would be the M1A2 SEP v2 or C and Leopard 2A6/7 which have ammunition designed to defeat Relikit (DM63, M829A3/A4). 

medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Raldi92 said:

 

Not only better ammo , better armor , better ERA ( Relikt ) and much better ERA coverage on both hull and turret  . Also the autoloader is protected  by small fragments ( granted will still go off on a direct hit ) and the rest of the ammo is stored in blow out pannels behind the turret wich allows to take full loadout.

 

Sure T90M is not on T80 level on the mobility side but at least it will be a very tough nut to crack from the front similar to what 2A5 is now ! 

T90A is probably the closer counterpart to leo2a5 (particularly with just dm33) than t90M

T90M  is more m1a2sep, leo2a6 at the least. We should certainly see how the t90A performs first before we add that. 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depending on the armor arrays.  I could calculate them.  I would need to know what kind of steel was used though.  As BTK-1 is already modeled in game with a 1.1 modifier.  The T-90's were suppose to use a later mix of high hardness and high toughness armor in the hull.  And the T-90A with the welded turret is actually suppose to have a mix of new hha and ceramic inserts which is where the claims of extra protection come from.  

 

T-80U Hull without the Kontakt5, has an RHAe of about 470mm straight on if it were using the regular armor classes material modifiers.  T-72B Mod 85, would be around 480mm RHAe according to my estimates, but it could be more or less, as I'm not 100% positive on the steel types for the internal 10mm and 20mm plates.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Conraire said:

Depending on the armor arrays.  I could calculate them.  I would need to know what kind of steel was used though.  As BTK-1 is already modeled in game with a 1.1 modifier.  The T-90's were suppose to use a later mix of high hardness and high toughness armor in the hull.  And the T-90A with the welded turret is actually suppose to have a mix of new hha and ceramic inserts which is where the claims of extra protection come from.  

 

Another issue with calculating the T-90's glacis armour is that bulging module, I don't even know where to start on getting accurate data on it's performance in combination with the rest of the array.

 

On 24/04/2019 at 03:46, RoflSeal said:

Still has the awful 7 speed fwd 1 speed reverse with 4kph reverse speed typical of most of the modern Russian MBTs and worse power to weight ratio then T-80.

 

Sure, except, T-90M is still highly mobile going forwards, and it's opposition (Leo 2A5/A6, M1A2, Challenger 2 TES, etc) just keeps getting slower and slower due to the added weight.

 

On 24/04/2019 at 03:46, RoflSeal said:

Only advantage would be better ammo that Gaijin would give it.

 

  • Access to almost all APFSDS projectiles due to carousel changes.
  • Added carousel protection.
  • Spall liners added throughout the entire interiors.
  • Turret ammunition moved to a bustle rack with blow out panels.
  • Shtora removed, resulting in superior ERA coverage.
  • Relikt ERA implemented.
  • CROWS.
  • Automatic transmission (IIRC).
  • V-92S2F engine.
  • Upvote 5
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Mememeist3r said:

The counterparts would be the M1A2 SEP v2 or C and Leopard 2A6/7 which have ammunition designed to defeat Relikit (DM63, M829A3/A4). 

 

How many times it has to be explained  that tanks in WT won't  necessarily  have their best available ammo ! 

 

Yes if T90M gets 3BM60 then maybe you would need  something better than M1A1HA and 2A5  and i say maybe because back in the April fools event T90A was firing 3BM60 and 2A5 was still very competitive.

 

With this in mind  you don't have to give 3BM60 to T90M you can leave it with 3BM42 so in this case it will bring some decent armor and survivability boost over T80s without breaking the balance compared to 2A5 . This along with M1A1HA  would make a pretty balanced meta where all tanks will be hard to pen from the front thus forcing all players to aim ! 

 

15 hours ago, Dantheman66 said:

T90A is probably the closer counterpart to leo2a5 (particularly with just dm33) than t90M

T90M  is more m1a2sep, leo2a6 at the least. We should certainly see how the t90A performs first before we add that. 

 

Refer to the comment above.  The thing with T90A is that it won't bring real balance compared to 2A5 and it would make litle sense to introduce it this late . If Gaijin had to introduce T90A i believe they would had done so along with 2A5 ( they had the model already done so yeah ) but they didn't so i believe there is a reason for that . Imo they are going with T90M wich was probably not finished yet  when 1.87 dropped  .

 

Edited by Raldi92
  • Confused 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Truths2Hard4You said:

Soviets asking for more vehicles...

 

If you put your clear anti soviet BIAS on the side for few seconds you will realise that  ALL OTHER NATIONS  NOT ONLY SOVIETS need something on part with 2A5 !  

 

But yeah it would be foolish to expect this kind  of common sense from some people so you are free to continue your soviet hatred nonsense . 

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.