>>>Play War Thunder for FREE! Support my channel and get a premium aircraft, tank or ship and a three day account upgrade as a BONUS: gjn.link/RedEffectWarThunder Also available for free on PlayStation®4 and Xbox One.

@sovietsymp803

4 жыл бұрын

RedEffect hi

@nsms1297

4 жыл бұрын

Red effect make a video on Bob Semple tank.

@rahulsamant2003

4 жыл бұрын

redeffect you should make war thunder video too.. like tank review and gameplay

@andreidaner1300

4 жыл бұрын

@Golden Frog that's why military has three different divisions, that's to protect each other's military equipment through the specified capabilities on their counterpart which will be helped with reconaissance assistance and tanks' own defensive and offensive capabilities will be mixed with proper and accurate calculations to avoid such threats to damage the whole mechanized divisions and exterminate anti-tank entities and it tank crew and support from the ground, air and sea can destroy positions of anti-tank positions if needed and approved by military officials and commanders.

@tedgarrett9437

4 жыл бұрын

I like the look of the game!!

This war thunder ad is brought to you by raid shadow legend

@benjaminpadilla1464

4 жыл бұрын

Andrew Coetzee LMAO

@alanmaclaren4118

3 жыл бұрын

Laughing my ass off

@vanukas8783

3 жыл бұрын

@@alanmaclaren4118 you should go see a doctor

@alanmaclaren4118

3 жыл бұрын

@Tohtori Vanukas why though?

@vanukas8783

3 жыл бұрын

@@alanmaclaren4118 your ass falling off, as I understood it is pretty serious.

T-80BV exists: Gets upgrade T-80U exists: 'sad russian tank noises'

@rinaldoman3331

3 жыл бұрын

T-80U russian army has in small count

@spamuraigranatabru1149

3 жыл бұрын

Not to mention the 80U can still technically hold its own, so no need to spend money on it.

@CS-zn6pp

2 жыл бұрын

@@spamuraigranatabru1149 the t-80u was a great tank.

@spamuraigranatabru1149

2 жыл бұрын

@@CS-zn6pp Yeah, it is, that's why it should have never upgraded instead of the 80B/BV

@kurousagi8155

2 жыл бұрын

@@rinaldoman3331 is there a source for those figures? I can’t find anything on total T-80U production figures. All I know is that Ukraine had a few hundred that it sold to Pakistan.

I have to agree. Any tank that goes into an urban combat setting without Infantry Support and one has insurgents with anti-tank weapons (such as RPGs) is (as well say in America "a sitting duck." One might as well paint a huge bullseye on the top or on the behind. 🎯

@bernardobiritiki

4 жыл бұрын

Now imagine those tanks are fighting ex-soldire who used to work with those tanks and know its weak spots . Grozny was fucking mess

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

@@bernardobiritiki And also have commanders with almost the highest General's admission (Dudaev), unlimited access to weapons in warehouses, get information BEFORE the attackers.

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

@@bernardobiritiki There was no preparation for the assault, no predetermined task was set. The enemy received information BEFORE those who entered the city, i.e., it was a trap in advance. There were no experienced crews; they were assembled from different units. There was no preparation of tanks for urban combat. ERA often did not load at all after transporting the equipment. There was no interaction with infantry and aircraft; the enemy immediately received information. The enemy had tactical, quantitative and information superiority. The enemy had virtually unlimited stocks of mobilization weapons depots. The enemy had the experience of command and support from abroad and domestically. It was a political step, the troops were trapped in order to receive political dividends and demoralize the army in order to seize power.

@youngrody2386

4 жыл бұрын

I think modern day Syria would fare waaaaay better in the battle of Grozny (even assuming they have the same amount of men fielded as the Russians, exact equipment as the Russians, the same available intelligence and the same amount of preperation as the Russian) in place of the Russians in terms of utilizing Armor and Infantry. The way they utilize armor along side infantry, though not perfect, was intoxicating.

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

@@youngrody2386 Yes, the Syrians are learning fast and unfortunately just as quickly forget. a tactical advantage is often lost due to many errors. The general level of the army is extremely low and lack of initiative. In addition, logistics problems are simply terrible due to lack of transport and fuel. That is why the United States is occupying and stealing oil in Syria, giving terrorists time to recover and not allowing Syria to restore logistics. In addition, constant sabotage and air attacks by Israel But the constant air strikes of the Russian Air Force prevent the situation from being missed and provide the Syrians with the opportunity to maneuver.

You forgot one little detail about Grozny. The T-80 reactive armor is supposed to stop an RPG. What Russian crews found out on the ground was that their explosive responsive plates...had NO explosives in it! Stolen for the black market.

@scotsbillhicks

4 жыл бұрын

Richard Patton I read somewhere that the aftermath of that was a hay day for Stavka. Oh there’s a hull over there, and there’s a turret over there. That means we lost two tanks. What? Why the false accounting? Why exaggerate the losses? Where did the tanks that were not knocked out go? Many reasons. High denomination, used, non-sequential. Despite all this, I don’t forget that the more savvy commentators did not disparage Russian/Soviet tanks because they knew they were designed to fit in with the prevailing doctrine. If they did not have the same features as their Western counterparts, it was deliberate. Maybe these days in an age of hybrid war fare, tank development is not a priority. By the time conventional armour makes an appearance, either the operation has failed or they are just there to look impressive on the evening news. No one should ever again think “we have only to kick in the door, and the whole rotting edifice will collapse.”

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

When transporting or storing the ERA must unloaded for safety reasons. I already mentioned the reasons why the ERA was not loaded: The problems of the T-80 during the New Year’s assault were that: There was no preparation for the assault, no predetermined task was set. The enemy received information BEFORE those who entered the city, i.e., it was a trap in advance. There were no experienced crews; they were assembled from different units. There was no preparation of tanks for urban combat. ERA often did not load at all after transporting the equipment. There was no interaction with infantry and aircraft; the enemy immediately received information. The enemy had tactical, quantitative and information superiority. The enemy had virtually unlimited stocks of mobilization weapons depots. The enemy had the experience of command and support from abroad and domestically. It was a political step, the troops were trapped in order to receive political dividends and demoralize the army in order to seize power.

@jamesricker3997

2 жыл бұрын

That comment has aged like a fine wine I think the explosives were never installed but the manufacturer charged the Russian military for them

@JoseOrihuela

2 жыл бұрын

@@jamesricker3997 there are some videos of tanks destroyed in Ukraine with empty ERAs

@augusto8821

2 жыл бұрын

Thats the main problem in this totally corrupt country...

9:27 poor T-80U :( Probably my favorite tank.

Will you do a video of the T-80UM2? The black eagle that well, never happened?

@synthilein

4 жыл бұрын

T-100 Varsuk

@woodonfire7406

4 жыл бұрын

@@synthilein hahahaha, fellow Arma 3 player you are! :D

@Max_Da_G

4 жыл бұрын

The Black Eagle, AKA Obyekt 640. was never completed into a functioning prototype

@Havana-8

3 жыл бұрын

Previous person is wrong. One T-80UM2 was made and us usable at the moment, not in future production though.

@ravenouself4181

3 жыл бұрын

@@Max_Da_G It was a functional prototype, they even did testing with it, the project was cut short because Russia saw the potential cost and said: "NOPE, NOPE!!" Edit: Some of it's technologies were used to further the development of the T-90MS

My guess is that the T80BV was used for the newer upgrades because the Russians didn't want to take the T80U out of service to upgrade it. Upgrading the T80BVM will allow these tanks to "leapfrog" the better T80U and keep more tanks in service.

Russian Army: "Oh no, these tanks are horribly obsolete and we don't have the money to replace them!" Tank Manufacturer: "Well... why don't we give a nice, cheap upgrade for them -that doesn't address the underlying issues that make them obsolete- ." Russian Army: "Okay."

@melt6894

4 жыл бұрын

42 not really a man with a 10 rounds of ammunition can beat 10 unarmed men without breaking a sweat. Quantity only works if your opponent is running out of material. The Soviet’s has lost 30million soldiers in their mass attacked strategy, but they had the men to back it up. Now Russia is paying for that as their population is only 118million. It turns out sending 30million men to their death had effects on the future population.

@melt6894

4 жыл бұрын

42 if quantity’s beats quality, why did the USA lose the Vietnam war? You know, it’s easy to send millions of troops to die when your an authoritarian government and a world superpower.

@melt6894

4 жыл бұрын

42 think of quantity vs quality like Machine gunner vs Sniper. Machine gunner can spray bullets and has a small chance of succeeding and killing his target. The Sniper may take longer to shoot, but he has a high chance of actually hitting his target. So yes quantity will get results faster and possibly a successful result , but it will never be as good as a quality success.

@faq187tim9

4 жыл бұрын

@@melt6894 But the US only had 50k casualties compared to 1 million Vietnamese casualties. So in your logic the Vietnamese won by quantity

@Rainaman-

4 жыл бұрын

When you pimp out your Lada, but it is still a crap

i love t80. i love how it looks, i love the gasturbine, the autoloader, etc. But yeah, it has lower protection, fire controls, optics...etc than western tanks. The 2 most shameful things about T80 for me: low gun depression( just like any post-ww2 soviet tanks),it has gun stabilisation, but when a t80 goes on a bumpy road, on bigger bumps its gun points at the sky.western tanks had proven the benefits of gun depression at the Yom Kippur War. Second thing: primitive mechanical steering mechanism (even some western ww2 tanks had better steering): it can only turn on a couple fixed turning radius, and it cannot pivoting.Modern tanks have hidrostatic or hidrodynamic steering, they can turn as smooth as a car.I red somewhere that the T80um1 had hidrostaic transmission, but it was just a prototype from the end of 90s, for export only. Maybe its not a big issue, but im always jealous when i see in videos, that how smooth is the gunstabilisation on a Leo2 even on big bumps compared to the t80, and the steering,too.

@drewschumann1

2 жыл бұрын

I'm glad to see you understand the importance of gun depression. It is truly the Holy Grail of tank combat.

One of my favourite channels. Always concise, articulate and intelligent content. Very good.

@wonkagaming8750

4 жыл бұрын

and a better mic :D

@grammoore

4 жыл бұрын

No robot voice either.

@wonkagaming8750

4 жыл бұрын

@@grammoore that is one of the most important one

i always LOL hard when he says even Arjun have CITV xD

@HanSolo__

3 жыл бұрын

Meh, I think the CITV in Arjun was probably not even plugged to power or it failed right at the beginning of tank service. Then it was replaced, and then again and again, and they simply left it as it is cuz it started to be hilariously expansive to fix.

@solid_fire9388

3 жыл бұрын

MrKansai1 teghe how dare you !!!Arjun best MBT in the world !

@purushottumkumar9580

2 жыл бұрын

@@HanSolo__ lol, nice story , but source?

@Ewoodster

2 жыл бұрын

@@HanSolo__ I worked a lot with Indian colleagues in railway business and I can 100 % confirm that this is the way they work. A non functional part is being replaced three times, then they give up, instead of searching for the reason, why the part didn’t work in the first place.

@danielolguin6495

2 жыл бұрын

Me too!!! 😂😂😂

Watching technical videos with subtitles that confuse the names of things and trying to not lose track of what's going on is very hard

The problems of the T-80 during the New Year’s assault were that: There was no preparation for the assault, no predetermined task was set. The enemy received information BEFORE those who entered the city, i.e., it was a trap in advance. There were no experienced crews; they were assembled from different units. There was no preparation of tanks for urban combat. ERA often did not load at all after transporting the equipment. There was no interaction with infantry and aircraft; the enemy immediately received information. The enemy had tactical, quantitative and information superiority. The enemy had virtually unlimited stocks of mobilization weapons depots. The enemy had the experience of command and support from abroad and domestically. It was a political step, the troops were trapped in order to receive political dividends and demoralize the army in order to seize power. After the failure of the coup, he fled to London. ----------------------------------------------- For the first time, a criminal case against Berezovsky was instituted in 1999 under the Primakov government. Since September 20, 2001, he was wanted in Russia on charges of fraud, money laundering and an attempt to forcibly seize power. In addition, since 1999, the Swiss prosecutor's office has been investigating him on charges of fraud and money laundering. In the same year, Berezovsky was denied entry to Switzerland. The circumstances of the death of Berezovsky on March 23, 2013 near London were not reliably established; According to the priority version of the investigation, he committed suicide. German forensic expert Bernd Brinkmann, a strangulation specialist employed by the businessman’s family for an independent investigation, did not agree with the suicide findings. In his opinion, the deceased could not hang himself; he was strangled. -----------------------------------------------

@JAnx01

4 жыл бұрын

*(Boris Berezovsky)* Whether it is in Russia, western Europe or America, (these people) always act only for their own interests, but against the interests of the native population. Their ideology preaches that people outside their ethnic group are to be considered "cattle" and (they) aren't held by any moral restraints when interacting with. (They) have secretly held these racists views for millenniums. Nowadays, they're heavily involved in liberal activism, influencing foreign policies of superpowers that benefit their home country, promotion of open borders and endless third world non-white migration. (Who) are these people?

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

@@JAnx01 This is the financial "elite" (as they themselves believe), which is hindered by the state and the family as an institution of society, the goal is the atomization of society and direct financial management, corporate fascism with the relegation of a person to a disenfranchised element that does not have its own identity. The right to something delegates responsibilities, but if a person is completely "free" then he does not have rights. Their goal is maximum "freedom", freedom from being human. "A terrorist or extremist doesn't have a nationality, it's just a criminal." с Liberalism, in the sense that it is now being imposed, is the plague of our time, which cripples society and deprives it of the possibility of development.

@Tankliker

4 жыл бұрын

@@JAnx01 pls tell why immigrants that are non white are bad? Also if an poor Afghany guy can barely make it over several country's with really small budget and bad education and still can steal your job, then maybe you should try harder and not he.

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

​@@Tankliker It is true that no one is worse or better; everyone is equal. If you want to do something good just do it, do not expect that someone else will do it for you. Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria were destroyed by the United States and Europe, although these were secular countries. Granting preferences to migrants in Europe is also not clear, this contradicts the logic. Everyone must be equal before the law otherwise it does NOT work.

@DerDop

4 жыл бұрын

@@elusive6119 any proof with that billionaire part?

Worth mentioning that after the dissolution of the USSR, Russia inherited quite a few t-80UDs (which actually was supposed to become the main Soviet tank). Those t-80UDs ended up being scrapped after the engine resource was exhausted, all those superior turrets just wasted

@Strelnikov403

Жыл бұрын

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the T-80UD uses the exact same turret, gun, and FCS as the base T-80U, only changing out the powerpack. There aren't any turret improvements to speak of.

@jaffacalling53

Жыл бұрын

@@Strelnikov403 The only T-80 with an improved turret that I know of (ignoring prototypes like Black Eagle) is the the T-84 Oplot M, which has a welded turret that looks strikingly similar to the T-90A.

The biggest problem with T80 is price and maintenance problems of the helicopter-type engine. Also, it use more fuel. The Russian Army keeps them ONLY in the northern part of Russia where this kind of engine can be started more easily compare with regular diesel.

Problems of operation of the T-80: Lack of manufacturability, high cost of maintenance and repair. High labor costs for field repairs, the impossibility of field repairs in many cases. High fuel consumption, 1-2 times higher than the T-72B for the same mileage. 4 times higher cost of replacing the engine, the requirements of high-class fuel and lubricants, filters. Difficulties with system repair, extreme (unjustified) complexity of aiming systems. Increased requirements for mechanics and crew. The difference in mobility with the T-64 and T-72, higher average speed and fuel consumption. Problems with logistics, spare parts, fuel. Technical problems: Higher complexity - higher likelihood of breakdowns, higher labor costs for repairs. The requirement for the availability of special tools, consumables and high-class mechanics. Longer repair time. High fire hazard due to the presence of hydraulics (the T-72 is an electro-mechanic). Arrangement of charges in the loading mechanism vertically, increased vulnerability. Increased risk for the driver due to the specifics of the tank. Weaker booking compared to the T-72B, for the T-80B, except for the rare T-80U.

@cactuslietuva

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, this is the real problems with T-80. Gas turbine tanks are not needed anymore. Germans has turbo diesel engines as powerful as Abrams gas turbines and consumes a lot less fuel. Also cheaper to make and to maintain. T-80 is from the era were Soviet Union had 10x bigger military budget then todays Russia. Todays Russia can't afford gas turbine engines anymore. I dont say that Russia is poor, but only very rich countries can maintain gas turbine tanks and in big numbers. But even Germany understood that turbo diesel was the better choice in most cases.

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

@@cactuslietuva The use of a gas turbine engine on the T-80 was dictated by a greater specific power and compactness. Now on the T-14 this is not so much relevant, the diesel is more than enough.

@benwinter2420

4 жыл бұрын

#AttackOfSwampGas

@galicije83

4 жыл бұрын

You can start T-80BVM or any T-80 at -40 less then minute, and for all diesel engines you need at that temperature more then 45 min to start up engine....So T-80 is great for arctic conditions and arctic warfare...

@benwinter2420

4 жыл бұрын

Highly charged electric fields . . will rule the bloody roost . . as per Tunguska

T80: exists Enemies: on a second or third floor T80: sad noises

They probably choose to prioritize the modernization of T-80B/BV tanks because those are actually hopelessly outdated, and there are also many more T-80B/BV than T-80U. Even though the T-80U is outdated, it can still somewhat hold its own against NATO tanks which are not the most advanced of their types. For example, Turkey uses Leopard 2A4 and M60A3 tanks in large numbers, and even the M60T 'Sabra' probably isn't better than a T-80U, while the mainstay of Polish Army are T-72M1s with various degrees of upgrades (including the PT-91), with a good number of them being even worse than T-80B. All of these tanks I mentioned above are arguably inferior to even basic T-80U. Additionally, relatively limited upgrades such as T-80UM or T-80UE can continued to be applied which makes the T-80U fleet more capable (even if it is still not up to standards of most modern tanks). Protection-wise, T-80U turret with Kontakt-5 makes it at least somewhat capable of withstanding all but the most modern munitions, which is relatively rare among European armies, and even the US Army still has some old APFSDS in service that were proven to be ineffective against T-72B. The T-80BV on the other hand, is far worse in capability (with base armor being worse than T-72B) and therefore needs the protection of Relikt ERA, and other upgrades to things like FCS, much more urgently. That's why the BVM upgrade makes sense, especially if the plan calls for reintroduction of thousands of T-80B/BV, which were previously in storage, now to be modernized and back in active service alongside T-72B3 as the 'second line' of its tank fleet (with T-90M and T-14 forming the 'first line'). So suppose that the Russians decided to apply the BVM upgrade to T-80U instead of T-80BV (let's call it T-80UB). They would end up having ~350-400 T-80UB (which still isn't as good as T-90M), while the 3000 or so T-80B/BV are still stuck in the 1980s and would get trounced by other tanks or ATGMs in an actual war. This choice is obviously worse than the plan they actually chose, with the 3000 T-80B/BVs eventually upgraded to semi-modern standards to meet their requirements. Furthermore, if they were to upgrade the T-80U, than the T-80Us would be taken out of service temporarily without a good substitute, while the T-80B/BVs are not in active service anyway. This way, the army would not be affected much during the modernization process.

It's probably good enough for it's intended role..the armor is good enough against most rounds it will probably face from the front. The most likely round the T-80BM will face from another tank is the Bm42/22 .

I'm pretty sure British Challenger 1 was the first tank to have hunter-killer ability...

@HanSolo__

3 жыл бұрын

I'm am 100% sure XD

@joekent5675

2 жыл бұрын

It's probably a joint thing.

5:10 when I first heard you say a cavity full of quartz , it sounded like you said a cavity full of farts . Lol .

Ok that meme at the end caught me completely off guard. Well played, sir.

Nice to have a fairly , as much as possible, unbiast channel in English done by someone from the other side of the former Iron Curtain.

@Rainaman-

4 жыл бұрын

Well if you like unbiassed things, Warthunder is not for you!

@giantskeleton2418

3 жыл бұрын

@@Rainaman- War Thunder isn't biased

@23GreyFox

3 жыл бұрын

@@giantskeleton2418 It is.

@giantskeleton2418

3 жыл бұрын

@@23GreyFox please, explain.

You make really good videos without the fanboyish slant a lot of reviewers give their videos.....way to go. I would love to see an in depth video on the T-14 Armata sometime this year, just to see how far its evolved since its unveiling.

basically the same story with the tanks since t-62... - i'm obsolete let me die already. - here have a insignificant upgrade that will barely change anything and we will either give you new letter in the name of the model or slap a new number.

Everyone always forgets; intended function. Just because it's not the same as something we understand, does not mean it's worse.

I get the feeling its just a cheaper alternative to more expensive models. Likely to help phase out T-72's at a higher pace.

The T-80BVM is the T-72B3 MOD.2016 of the T-80 line, the T-80BVM is a upgrade for a less then desirable vehicle that Russia has alot of, just like the B3 UBH, the T-90Ms existence tells me a T-80UVM(probably won't be its ne lol)will be eventually made, to bring the T-80U up to T-90M standard, so Russia has T-90M and T-80UVM as front line units with T-72B3 UBG and T-80BVM as the more numerous backline units.

love the thumbnails with world leaders in shock

Thank you algorithm for bringing up old videos based around current events for us people of culture to watch!

GREAT VID. SUPER INFORMATIVE !! THANK YOU !! AND I COMPLETELY AGREE W YOUR ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT AND FUTURE STATS. OF T-80

Only the 4th Guards tank division is armed with T-80Us, and it is one of the most prominent formations in the Russian Army, stationed in the Western MD near Moscow. The fact that its vehicles are not being upgraded while almost all others are seems to indicate that its units are among the first in line to be rearmed with the T-14s. Perhaps, when that begins to happen, its T-80Us will be rotated to other formations, receiving upgrades in the process.

@Postoronniy

3 жыл бұрын

Another option would have been to mate the turrets of decommissioned T-80UDs (that Russian MOD maintains a stock of) with the hulls of T-80BVs during the upgrade, similarly to the T-80UE-1. But, apparently, the Russian MOD considers just adding Relikt to be the more cost-effective option for now.

I hope there will be a T-80 vs Arjun "battle" on this channel

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

T-84 Bastion (or old T-80UD) VS Arjun "battle". It does not make sense to compare with the normal T-80 or T-80B. Pakistan has 200 T-80UDs, with all their problems that they cannot solve. Unlike the indicated problem T-84 or T-80UD, T-80B and T-80U are still in service and are being modernized.

@giantskeleton2418

3 жыл бұрын

@@elusive6119 it would still be nice to see it

@ravenouself4181

3 жыл бұрын

T-80 would completely obliterate the Arjun, the only advantage the Arjun has is the TC's independent thermal sight.

Another great and informative video, keep it up

This is my favorite Russian tank of all time. Even given its flaws. However, if I had a fantasy tank that I've always wanted, the Black Eagle is it. That rounded front end to the turret and a long box for ammo on the back with blowout panels for crew safety. I just love the way it looks 😊

Red please do a video on the Romanian TR-85 and TR-125! I love your content man keep it up!

@bobfg3130

2 жыл бұрын

The TR-125 was an unfinished project.

Basically the only problem with it is the sight … got it lol

@SnazzBot

2 жыл бұрын

Considering how many of them are on fire in Ukraine, I feel they have a few more issues than simply sites.

@bobron7688

2 жыл бұрын

@Nevermind wrong

Keep the videos up :) love to see these

Yugoslavia supposed to introduced M94 and it was supposed to be state of the art but the country collapse

Can you do a video on the battle of Grozny though? Nothing like a ‘guide on how not to use a tank’

7:26 Arjun level rant

The reason for up grading the t80bv and not the t80u is to extend the service life, although the t80u being upgraded would make a more heavily armoured tank it does not currently require the upgrade

Wow using a quartz filled pocket in the cast turret is fascinating. Cool fact, thanks!

I feel like in this modern age, tank armors are not really that important. Modern tanks have crazy amount of penetration and Equipped with ATGM that'll blast through anything anyway.

When we will see the next Tank Arena ?? :)

Hi RedEffect you have nice videos with lots of informations, and i would like to see if you make a video of our czech T-72M4CZ like T-72B3 vs T-72M4CZ

Do they really need that extra protection given they are deployed somewhere at the far north? Are they likely to face serious opposition there?

Muv-Luv Alternative: TE begs to differ.

T-80BV does have upgraded turret compared to T-80B, so it has nearly the same level of protection as T-72B (basically, T-72B and T-80BV are from the same generation, and T-72A and T-80B are from previous generation of the tank families). I've seen many internet experts not mentioning this fact, but, you know, internet experts are no experts at all 99% of the time. Overall design of turret armor of T-80BV is the same as T-80B, unlike T-72B compared to T-72A, but the materials are different as far as I know (basically, T-80BV has different composite filler in the same cast shell), so armor protection had increased between two models. T-80U is more akin to early T-90.

@RedEffectChannel

4 жыл бұрын

T-80B and T-80BV have exactly the same turret, I dont know where you got the idea that any changes were made. When in 1982 USSR got captured Israeli tanks together with M111 Hetz 105mm APFSDS, they discovered that the hull armor of their tanks, including T-80B, could be penetrated, the turrets were good enough on most tanks because they were made to be stronger than hulls in the first place. So in 1983 they put additional steel plates over existing tanks as a place holder until new armor arrays are developed. T-80BV retained the same turret of T-80B but got upgraded hull armor, at that time it wasnt that necessary to upgrade the turrets and the turret of T-80U which appeared at the same time as the new hulls, was more expensive, and thus was reserved for the superior T-80U tanks.

@user-tc9sk4ei9y

4 жыл бұрын

@@RedEffectChannel "Дальнейшее усиление бронирования танка Т-80Б достигнуто в Т-80БВ, принятом на вооружение в 1985 г . Броневая защита лобовой части корпуса и башни этого танка принципиально такая же, как на танке Т-80Б, но состоит из усиленной комбинированной брони, и из навесной динамической защиты «Контакт-1» - "Further increase of armor protection of T-80B was made in T-80BV model, which was adopted for service by 1985. Upper front hull and turret protection remained fundamentally the same as for T-80B, but consisted of reinforced composite armor and ERA 'Kontakt-5'. Link: btvt.info/1inservice/t-80.htm - there are some sourcebooks at the end. You can google translate the whole article if you don't believe me. But I wouldn't believe whose sources fully, as the armor protection is a matter of technological secrets, so even in with the collapse of the Union all the sources remained pretty vague and politically motivated.

@user-tc9sk4ei9y

4 жыл бұрын

@@RedEffectChannel in any case, not increasing turret protection of T-80BV doesn't make any sense in historical perspective, as NATO made a major shift in firepower increasing battletank's gun calibre by early 80s. T-80B model was made with the 105 mm gun in mind after all. T-80U was, on the other side, more of a more experimental 'future-proof' model rather than a direct response to new up-gunned Abrams models, even if the adoption year officially is the same as of T-80BV.

@RedEffectChannel

4 жыл бұрын

@@user-tc9sk4ei9y I have used the article as source for info for the video, but that sentence in particular is very vague. It states that the armor is mainly like the one of T-80B but features improved composite armor, the problem is, it doesnt mention the parts where the improved composites are implemented. You can see in the table a little below that text that the armor values for the turret (420mm) and the hull (570mm) against APFSDS are drastically different, that is because the turret hasnt been upgraded. You have other proof. When T-80BV appeared existing T-80B tanks were now getting 30mm plate on the hull instead of the 16mm one that was being added after the tests against M111. This was suppose to bring T-80B to T-80BV in the level of protection, but no changes were done to the turret to T-80B, which should say that the turret of T-80BV is the same, since no efforts were made to improve the T-80B one when T-80BV came out. And why would they make an improved turret when they were already working on an improved one, the T-80U one, the turret was also meant to be installed on T-80BV tanks, and such tanks are now known as T-80A tanks, a pic of T-80U turret I used in the video is one of those, you can recognize it by the fact that it has Kontakt-1 mounts.

@dodgedemonsrtx

2 жыл бұрын

Shut up Ivan

Excelent as usual.

Primitive Hunter killer was on the Sherman. That's actually pretty cool ngl. I just found you channel and I am liking it.

T80u with k5 era had around 700-750mm of armor vs KE That means with relikt it should have more 100-200mm of armor vs KE rounds (750-1000mm).

@76456

2 жыл бұрын

I don't believe T-80U have 700mm but rather ~630mm(since its not that thick) , T-72B whit K5 was also ~650mm. (this also comes from a source displayed in one off red effect vidoes Frkm what I know T-80UD was 600mm it had knew armour layout T-80UD'89 had the same but armour was RHA and not cast ( or it was cast but hardened) being 700mm against AP and T-80UK which had the base turret In hardened RHA (High carbon steel) 850mm ke. Soviet tanks had expecial steels whit better properties than regular steel.

@aihamkashow1511

2 жыл бұрын

@@76456 yeah you are right i thought t80u had hardened armor all the time What about t80ue1

@76456

2 жыл бұрын

@@aihamkashow1511 idk i think it was like an UD whit a diesel engine

Red effect make a video on Bob Semple tank.

@strelok1396

4 жыл бұрын

Add Bob Semple to War Thunder please

@sumrandumguy7177

4 жыл бұрын

Nsm S no and no. This joke is getting old, it stopped being funny ages ago. Your iq must be in the low 40s if u still think it’s funny

@lehonwhale8070

4 жыл бұрын

@@sumrandumguy7177 i still like the tank

@giantskeleton2418

3 жыл бұрын

@@strelok1396 I actually wanna see that

@strelok1396

3 жыл бұрын

Emilio Loredo I think it would be ovepowered

Red effect could you make a difference about rifled cannon against smoothbore cannon

Thermal sight looks almost like the TIS Used in M-1 Abrahms series tanks.

4:30 Why is his head so red? Is this part of the upgrade?

@colin.k6263

4 жыл бұрын

he's trying to squeeze one out rn

@cullenduval1056

4 жыл бұрын

He probably cold

@MrNebelschatten

4 жыл бұрын

Probably the vodka

@FOOMGaming

4 жыл бұрын

Heavy drinking

@Rainaman-

4 жыл бұрын

Vodka + frostbite

Please review modern Swedish tanks, best regards from Sweden

You know, maybe you should do the Black Eagle tank video. We know it’s a chassis from the T-80U but there’s almost all the information we know but what about something else it was planned to have.

And over here i was wondering why in WT T80BVM turret armor is worse than T80U

Some funny ideas for fun: maybe you could view some fictional tanks or AFVs (i.e., Mammoth Tank from Command and Conquer or Scorpion Tank from Halo) and see how they would work / how good they would be if they actually exist IRL.

@shaider1982

2 жыл бұрын

He could collab with Spookstoon.

I would be interested to see an unbiased video on which tanks are being used, how they are deployed, and how well they fare in action in the Ukraine Conflict.

@talltroll7092

2 жыл бұрын

Really badly, it seems. Oh wait, you meant 2014...

@richardm3023

2 жыл бұрын

@@talltroll7092 javelin seems to be a game changer.

@SianaGearz

2 жыл бұрын

@@talltroll7092 Ukraine has its domestic tanks of closely related types as well. Hopefully the combined tactics are better such that they don't fare as bad as Russians. The most recent variant being Oplot but I don't think they have more than a handful of these.

@mrmakhno3030

2 жыл бұрын

@@richardm3023 the actual game changer is Stugna. If Ukrainian equip thermal imaging for every unit, I don't think there is a show place for Javelin. Stugna is a God.

@mrmakhno3030

2 жыл бұрын

@@SianaGearz There are 5 Oplot in Ukrainian army. Yeah, there are 5. I dunno if they survived. The rest are outdated T 64. Some have the new thermal imaging system for gunner. Some have Nozh 3rd gen ERA- T 64BM Bulat. The condition of Ukrainian tank force is even worse than Russian one, which is already bad. But Ukraine has a lot of modern anti tank weapon and that is the main point.

really concise explanation of what happened to this tank ,informative

@cdgncgn

4 жыл бұрын

not really. Lots of opinions. Not backed up by sources and so on. He is not always wrong, but makes too much drama and inaccuracies pop up.

Red Effect: this video is better then a many of your other ones.

Also, that tank "killed" one of russian youtubers. Alconafter (his nickname) made critical video about video on Zvezda chanel about this tank. Zvezda, as channel of russian Ministry of Defence, of course, sayd, that this tank is super cool, super moder and that army need this one very badly (usual propaganda). And, when they saw, that some dude from the intrnet with 400k subscribes criticizes them they baned his chanel on youtube. And, what is the most funny part of all this story, they baned him for using chronicle videos of Soviet Ministry of Defence.

@Iskandr314

3 жыл бұрын

Smells like sarcasm

Cutting edge tech...gas turbine

@mr.waffentrager4400

4 жыл бұрын

Gas cutter ...

@deven6518

4 жыл бұрын

Gas turbine is actually cutting edge tech for a tank. The use of them has been limited by cost, availability of parts etc. Ask le mureica, they'll swear by it.

@mr.waffentrager4400

4 жыл бұрын

@@deven6518 I know...but gas turbine cutting edge sounds....weird

@benwinter2420

4 жыл бұрын

#AttackOfGas

@Tepid24

4 жыл бұрын

A modern gas turbine is definitely "cutting edge tech", so is a modern diesel engine. It has less to do with the principle of operation and more to do with the specific engine model in question.

During the 80's I was in the US Army as an 11H (Anti-Armor Weapons Infantryman) where we used the TOW missile. Each month I would go to our BN S-2 shop and review armor vehicle updates from Jane's Monthly to learn about new systems and countermeasures the Soviet bloc countries were using. But for each missile defense system they put on their tanks, we would simply modify the TOW missile to work around it. For instance, when reactive armor was fielded we developed a "top attack" missile that flew one meter above our aiming point then when the missile detected both thermal and metal below it through its anomaly detectors, two shape charges would detonate downward to penetrate the thinner armor on the top of the vehicle. We have about 8 different types of TOW missiles to choose from when engaging a target (BGM-71A-H). I've seen older Soviet type tanks being used in Syria and I know the export types are not the same as what the Russian Army uses. It's up to the country that bought the tanks to improve their armor protection but they rarely care to do so because they don't want to spend money on their military. When fighting against tanks we use other assets before the tanks are close enough for the TOW system (4,000 meters) which is aircraft, naval gun fire, artillery and even mortar rounds. By the time an enemy armor formation reaches our positions, the enemy has been weakened substantially which gives us an advantage because of how their state of mind is which ensures they'll make poor decisions when we attack. We try to use terrain to our advantage by killing the rear tank then the lead tank in a road convoy to bottleneck the convoy so they have nowhere to go and then we work through all the tanks one by one until eliminated. Our main purpose is to protect our Infantry and armored vehicles if we have them attached to our task force. By knowing details of each tank variation we're able to tell which tanks have advanced technology or are their leaders so we engage them first. The easiest way to tell is if a tank has two or more radio antennas since most tanks will have just one. What I mentioned doesn't always ensure I'll win a battle since we have to worry about countermeasures to deal with.

Exactly the upgraded T-80BV to BVM to avoid graveyard and scrap because T-80U can still be made operational once needed. If you think about it, Russia did not produce Tanks for more than a decade, pushing all the resources into T-14's development, So they need to keep the Tanks available by upgrading older T-80BVs to T-80BVM, older T-90 and eventually all of T-90s to T-90M (also promoting for export), while upgrading what in service of the T-72s to T-72B3/B3M and have T-80Us in reserve/operational storage, while the rest in long term storage such as T-80B/T-72s. So basically the plan was a mix of T-90M/T-80BVM/T-72B3M to reach 2700-3000 in service and T-80U 2700-3000 in reserve/operational storage (with an amount of T-72 in storage for potential spare parts or export after modernisation) Until T-14 gradually puts T-80BVM/T-72B3/B3M in reserve/operational storage and T-80U in long term storage and the rest such as T-62/72/80B/BVs in graveyards to be scrapped into parts or metals/components. Now what happened is proving that T-80BVMs was the right decision, the brought old T-80BVs instead of scrap or inoperability without decreasing the number of T-80Us. The situation is so dire that they need every tank available due to poor Tank storage condition, parts stealing and illegal scrap, and constant breakdowns + proof is that they are fielding T-62Ms to the battlefield despite being old/vulnerable and having a different ammo caliber (115 mm i/o 125 mm). I think in those 7000 T-72s in storage they can only rely on a 1000-1500, half can be sent to battle after minor repair (some previously in reserve, so working from time to time). Leaving 5500-6000 T-72s in a situation where scrapping is better (salvaged and missing parts, rusted, old designs, grass all-over), so might be used for some commun parts to be given to working Tanks. While T-80s despite being a legacy of ukrainian soviet factories and having the hated gas engine, T-80U can be sent to battle after a quick repair and overhaul maybe 2500-3000 units, replacing the Tank losses and arming half of mobilized 300ks reservists, but will complicate logistics (Fuel/spare parts/skilled mechanics and crews (they are more familiar with T-72s). T-80A/B will have the same fate of T-72s, scrap and canibalisation (at least they serve a purpose), while what remains of T-80BV can be sent to factories for modernisation to T-80BVM. Basically 3000 T-80U/BVs (contact 5/1 ERA) and 1500 (contact 1 ERA) T-72s (+4500) Tank can be repaired and sent to battle and replace all Tank losses (Numerically) and arm the 300 K reservists in Ukraine, with little to No operational reserves remaining. (Some 6000 T-72/80 used for parts/scrap), hundreds of T-62Ms to be sent as fire support (as mobile short Artillery or as an IFV) to compensate for the losses of IFVs, All of the BMP-2 fleet in storage can replace all IFV losses but will not arm 100% the reserves, while Bmp-1 is in same situation as the T-72s. The only reserve is in order to maintain a post war 3rd G level stock of Tanks with few hundreds of T-72/T-80BVs in storage reserved for modernisation in factories to B3M/BVM, relaunch full production of T-90M production and send those 200 reserve T-90s to battle (meaning suspending T-14). Creating basically a cushion of a few hundreds to 500 Tank of 3rd G for expected inevitable attrition as a replacement in the next couple of years. So basically we have 1700-2000 lost or will be lost in few weeks. Meaning only 1000 remains from previously active service Tanks made of mostly (T-90/T-80BVM/T-72B3-B3M). + 1500 T-72Bs (contact 1 ERA) for immediate losses numerical replacement (+ hundreds of (ex-mothballed T-62M for infantry support or Wagner/Donetsk militia-previously reserved for Syrian army), small & slow influx of T-72 from storage areas if they are lucky (salvaging the 5500 scrap metals of old inoperable T-72). + 3000 T-80s from storage (mostly contact 5 ERA T-80Us) arming the 300k reserves for a winter push in Ukraine. (Total in best conditions 5500 Tanks(T-90/80/72)-4500 to fight in Ukraine, maybe 1000 in guard duties and 3500 for pushing the lines ( +3 to 1 odds necessary for a push) and 1000 to remain in Russia proper), No further Tank reserve remaining (5500 T-72s/80s in critical condition-Better to be scrapped). Having 500 tank or So (T-80BV/T-72) in bad condition but eligible for modernisation to be sent to factories for modernisation (out of combat potential) to replenish 3rd G level Tanks and future attrition post-war replacements. + production of T-90M.

At last, Arjun is better than something.

@upsyndrome4964

4 жыл бұрын

The bayhst tank in the worold. 😂

One question: Can it beat Bob Semple tank and Emus at the same time?

@benwinter2420

4 жыл бұрын

Emu's would run rings around a T80 just on their own

The biggest problem is that the Soviets ended up with 3 very similar tanks in the form of the late model T-64B, T-72A/B and T-80 due to political machinations around the 3 design bureaus and the Army. Similar in size, different in armour (though most of that was mounting completely different ERA in the T-80U models) and similar guns, with different ammo loadouts. T-80U did represent the pinnacle of Soviet tank tech in the late 80s/early 90s though. T-80 now suffers the same problems again, with the Russians stuck with the T-72, T-80 and T-90 series. Any upgrade to one type can easily apply to the rest, since a lot of upgrades are now plug-and-play. T-80BVM pretty much is used for the arctic patrol anyway, with T-72B3 being the mainline tank, and T-90M as the odd breakthrough tank. This pretty much means that the budget is not really going to upgrade T-80s.

I think the reason why we modernizing the t-80bv it’s their numbers. Upgrading them much cheaper than building new thanks especially until we will starting to produce t-14 in mass numbers. In the end it’s better to have BVMs in reserve than old ass BVs.

The MK 1 land ship would have laughed off those RPG'S in Grozny 😏

@karlhans6678

4 жыл бұрын

a WW1 tank? i think not!

@toasterbathboi6298

4 жыл бұрын

Nah. Just send in captured german tiger 2 xaxaxaxa

@giantskeleton2418

3 жыл бұрын

The Mk 1 land ship would kill the crew if it was hit with an RPG

@giantskeleton2418

3 жыл бұрын

@@toasterbathboi6298 If the King Tiger doesn't malfunction then it's ok 👍

So they turned out to just be shit tanks

Wouldnt be the correct tilte "what were they thinking?"

very interesting video, maybe the solution would be to revive the Omsk factory

Me in 7:29 : Yaah we also hv thermal sight. Also Me in 7:30 : WTF eVeN ArjUn

@remove_marko

4 жыл бұрын

Lmao but no offense mate, the arjun is probably one of the worst tanks in the world

@amalsooraj4256

4 жыл бұрын

@@remove_marko *probably

@FirstDagger

4 жыл бұрын

@@remove_marko ; We know, that is why the comparison is made. Even Arjun has the commanders thermal sight, which makes that new T-80 obsolete.

@arkadeepkundu4729

4 жыл бұрын

@@remove_marko It's better than the old T72A variants that it's supposed to replace anyway.

@sumit1275

4 жыл бұрын

@@remove_marko the mark1 version of arjun outperformed t90 in 2008 trials, is t90 also one of the worst?

Better than tanks in my country,I think🤔🤔😂😂

Can you do a video on the Black Eagle?

At least a fitting Sponsor. Im happy for you :D

＊ｄｏｎｔ＊ｆｏｒｇｅｔｔｏ＊ｐｌａｙ＊ｗａｒｔｈｕｎｄｅｒ＊

I wonder how good a t80 was, when it's left on top of a hill for days like the Turkish leo 2a4. The Leo 2a4 losses in turkey are the prime example for people who like to descredit its performance. But on a t80 we should start to get picky. That's double standard.

@Andrewza1

4 жыл бұрын

I won't nock the leo for how turkey used them it is the same as saying how shit the M1 is based on Arab countries being Arab

@23GreyFox

4 жыл бұрын

It doesn't matter when a tank is used by monkeys.

@cdgncgn

4 жыл бұрын

tank usage doesnt increase armor unless specifically angled. And that is spot-specific. Western tanks didnt have to fight jihadists in their own countries with plentiful modern antitank means. What it basically means, once there is a counter to armor or even with APS, there is radar suppression from infantry, when hit from the side especially, most tanks go boom, but it also depends on loadout.

@Reddsoldier

4 жыл бұрын

@@cdgncgn Most modern composite armours don't really work as well when angled as they do from head on. Hence if you look at the armour of tanks without the steel plates etc, it's almost always in flat 90° blocks.

Do a video on the Black Eagle!

Could you make a video on the Black Eagle

T80 vs t72m plz

@cdgncgn

4 жыл бұрын

T-72M didnt get any massive armor upgrade, T-72M1 did get some 16 mm high hardness steel on glacis and turret.

The biggest problem with the T80, as well as all other Soviet T-tanks, is that they must be nearly fully exposed to fight. Soviet engineers fetished small size to the point where they can no longer occupy a hasty hull down position, which limits them to fully prepared stationary defensive fighting positions (called "kill me" positions by Western tankers) or driving around fully exposed in the offense. Western tanks can acquire targets from the turret down position and kill targets from the hull down, which is far superior to anything you can do with Soviet tanks.

any chance of a video about T-54/55 variants still in use today? For instance the tr-85m1 still in use by Romania which is a NATO member?

I hope a new heavy infantry fighting vehicle and amour personnel carrier variants are develop similar to the bmpv-64 and bmp-k-64

Tbh it wont matter much if it's 630 or 730 when it comes to modern projectiles from NATO countries

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

Not exactly, at a range of more than 1.5 km, it matters. In addition, 80BV or T-72B3 M are needed to counter the P-91, T-64B, T-72M, T-72A/B, Leo-2A4, T-55 and T-62. For NATO, there is otrk Iskander.

@Sveta7

4 жыл бұрын

@@elusive6119 i didn't say it doesn't matter at all but not much, you forgot chall 2, chall 1, leclerk, 120 abrams variants, leopard 2a5+ for them it doesn't matter much

@elusive6119

4 жыл бұрын

@@Sveta7 Poland or Ukraine do not have these tanks. The United States and Britain or France will start a war only if it is financially beneficial. In addition, they are too vulnerable due to the lack of air defense, in case of aggression against Russia, the losses will be so serious that it is simply not worth it.

@Sveta7

4 жыл бұрын

@@elusive6119 i doubt it's that simple war wise, they are in nato shit would start, but this is off topic

@23GreyFox

4 жыл бұрын

@@elusive6119 Lucky for us that count for both sides.

And Putin is sending these guys into Ukraine?! Wow!

@russellwilliams3209

2 жыл бұрын

Your mom wanted a abortion?! Wow!

Why would Gaijin sponsor this guy? I don't think a single person watching a red effect wasn't already playing War Thunder before the ad

Modernized t80s have their uses, mainly where the gas turbine engine offers an advantage (extreme cold,etc).

Good news for Russia: Every day, the amount of still active T-80 tanks gets reduced. Plus they found a way to use cardboard as reactive armor.

@ASlickNamedPimpback

2 жыл бұрын

Lol what? Send a link cuz I can’t find anything about cardboard era

@ReaperCH90

2 жыл бұрын

@@ASlickNamedPimpback i did not save it, but in pictures taken from north of Kyiv territorial forces of Ukraine found T-72 tanks with cardboard insted of reactive armor in capturedtanks. I can't give you a source, so you either have to Google yourself ot do the "dude, trust me"

@rogue__agent5884

2 жыл бұрын

@@ReaperCH90 those are spacers for explosive reactive armor not cardboard My god do some research

heh as i was watching this, i was downloading war thunder

@possiblyadickhead6653

4 жыл бұрын

It's a bad game don't play it

@JAnx01

4 жыл бұрын

F2P games are never worth the grind. If you don't listen now, you will realize it 1000 hours later.

@debinoh4273

4 жыл бұрын

low tier ground forces are fun, jets are fun too, at least for france and america i dont recommend you get attached to your heavy tanks

@inggle5341

4 жыл бұрын

@@JAnx01 Oh, but imma still play it

@stefane8512

4 жыл бұрын

Prepare for grind

Does the T-80U have a stabilized gun allowing shoot on the move like the M1A2?

@sumrandumguy7177

4 жыл бұрын

Ofc it does. A stabilizer is a standard feature on any mbt made since the 80s

@Postoronniy

3 жыл бұрын

All Soviet tanks since mid-1950s have gun stabilizers.

Let's be honest nothing stops Russians to make a T80UM (just put the same stuff from T80BVM but on T80U ) but they just don't do it there even was attempts to put APS on T80U and they named as T80UM1 and T80UM2 so technically i believe that they are okay with what T80U capable to do.

I’ve had issues since I drove my T-80 off the Lot....should have got a T-90 instead...buyers regret!

@JaM-R2TR4

4 жыл бұрын

T90 has a diesel engine.. which means it had huge issues to work in arctic conditions... turbine doesnt have such issues and can run in much colder weather.... thats why T80

"this video is sponsored by war thunder" Me: skip skip skip

I'd say that they will ultimately upgrade T-80U, but after they finish T-80BVM. I do Agree that the upgrades the T-80BVM and T-72B3 receive don't extend far enough.

I'm guessing the thought process was "the T-80U is already pretty good, but the T-80BV sucks. Let's upgrade the oldest, worst tanks first, and then the newest, best ones."