Ukranian Omlot-P MBTs ready for action...

Lunatik

Active member
Just read at a respectable source that an initial order of 10 has been placed for the Ukranian 17th tank brigate. This product model has the cutting-edge Shtora active protection system installed.

2009042822479814.jpg


2009042822479815.jpg


2009042822479817.jpg



This tank is said to be superior to any tank currently in NATO. Only the new Korean K2 Black Panther (TR Altay too?) and Japanese tanks are rivals. America, Germany and the French are now a generation behind and the UK has left the tank business altogether. I wont even mention the Chinese. :smil:
 
This tank is said to be superior to any tank currently in NATO. Only the new Korean K2 Black Panther (TR Altay too?) and Japanese tanks are rivals.

The diffrence between "sadi to be" and actually being is very significant
 
Terrific another over hyped pseudo-Russian tank.

I have no doubt it will look the part and more than likely have a very good gun but as usual it will be powered by electronics and optics that the West discarded in the 70s.
 
Thats T-84 Oplot you meant and what you show specifically is T-84-120 Yatagan, its a good tank but still a good few years behind the best the West has.

As for "said to be" its the same as with specs for Russian RPGs and BMP-3s, utter bull, the tank is a glorified T-80 with some new electronics, armor and a new gun, its somewhere around Leo2A4 and still inferior in many regards.
 
Every company (and country) tends to make their weapons look good on paper. It's not just a Russian feat. :smil:

And believe me, being a Turkish-American and a staunch supporter of NATO and containment of Russia, I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever toward Russia or any other country under their sphere of influence, except Ukrain, since I have family roots there, lol. If you want to stop the Russian Empire from rising again, in the long term, you'll have to expand NATO onto Ukrain and make sure the EU is less dependent on Russian energy...

Anyway. It has a 120mm cannon. Whether it's smoothbore or not, I don't know.

Electronics-wise, it may be assembled in Russia but it uses the same "Made in Taiwan" components as the M1A1. It has a good FCS and the exact same scoot and shoot capability. So I don't see why you all are calling it "inferrior" just because it's Russian/Ukrainian. Because you don't see them in cool movies? :smil:

If you think the Abrams is superior because it features depleted uraniaum armor, you're wrong. DU is not some miracle armor that can't be penetrated. It's long been established that the M1A2 can take 1000-1200mm against HEAT and the T-90 can take 1150-1350mm with Kontakt-5.

Pretty much every NATO country halted tank development in the 90s, the upgrades that the M1 and Leo received over the course of almost 2 decades are laughable. K2 already stole the title of the best tank the day its prototype rolled out on the testing field. Fact that the T-95 is around the corner and NATO isn't doing anything shows that either the military lost interest in them or it's incredibly hard to get funding for them. The American MCS is probably going to get axed along with other FCS designs and I think the US is putting itself in the position of staying a generation behind. :(
 
Every company (and country) tends to make their weapons look good on paper. It's not just a Russian feat. :smil:
Naturally but Russians do not tend, virtually all of their "wonder" toys are basically fat lies.

Take BMP-3 for example, a light thin skinned underpowered vehicle, they've packed so much weaponry into this thing that virtually every other aspect has to be inadequate given its weight-size ratio unless Russia has some cutting edge unseen tech that no one else has yet its listed specs are cranked up all the way up there with modern IFVs.
And believe me, being a Turkish-American and a staunch supporter of NATO and containment of Russia, I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever toward Russia or any other country under their sphere of influence, except Ukrain, since I have family roots there, lol. If you want to stop the Russian Empire from rising again, in the long term, you'll have to expand NATO onto Ukrain and make sure the EU is less dependent on Russian energy...
I'm no friend of Russia myself.
Anyway. It has a 120mm cannon. Whether it's smoothbore or not, I don't know.

Electronics-wise, it may be assembled in Russia but it uses the same "Made in Taiwan" components as the M1A1. It has a good FCS and the exact same scoot and shoot capability. So I don't see why you all are calling it "inferrior" just because it's Russian/Ukrainian. Because you don't see them in cool movies? :smil:
No sir, there's several reasons why its inferior to western tanks, it still has inferior optics and no active optics, it still has severely inferior base armor which K-5 does not fully compensate for so its pretty much like i said a glorified T-80 similar in capability to 2A4 (though lacking in its armor and optics) and definitely well below the A6 or the latest Abrams/Leclerc/insert other modern tank.
If you think the Abrams is superior because it features depleted uraniaum armor, you're wrong. DU is not some miracle armor that can't be penetrated. It's long been established that the M1A2 can take 1000-1200mm against HEAT and the T-90 can take 1150-1350mm with Kontakt-5.
Abrams is superior in optics, armor, ammunition, again i'm highly skeptical about K-5s capability.
Pretty much every NATO country halted tank development in the 90s, the upgrades that the M1 and Leo received over the course of almost 2 decades are laughable. K2 already stole the title of the best tank the day its prototype rolled out on the testing field. Fact that the T-95 is around the corner and NATO isn't doing anything shows that either the military lost interest in them or it's incredibly hard to get funding for them. The American MCS is probably going to get axed along with other FCS designs and I think the US is putting itself in the position of staying a generation behind. :(
T-95 never left the heads of russian military enthusiasts, the tank is not being made, planned to be made or going to be made in any forseeable future and we have hard evidence and logic for that.

US will definitely not smack its new tank design since the Abrams is aging, France is developing the new tank and Germany is certain to begin working on something in the near future since there's already talks on how 2A6 hit the end of the modernisation road.

Heck, Poland has a shelved program for an extremely highly advanced MBT that went well past concept stage and you're claiming countries with much larger budgets wont develop one?
 
Electronics-wise, it may be assembled in Russia but it uses the same "Made in Taiwan" components as the M1A1. It has a good FCS and the exact same scoot and shoot capability. So I don't see why you all are calling it "inferrior" just because it's Russian/Ukrainian. Because you don't see them in cool movies? :smil:

If you think the Abrams is superior because it features depleted uraniaum armor, you're wrong. DU is not some miracle armor that can't be penetrated. It's long been established that the M1A2 can take 1000-1200mm against HEAT and the T-90 can take 1150-1350mm with Kontakt-5.

None of the the M1's components are made in "Taiwan". The FCS is
from GDLS Canada, turret and chassis parts produced by SAAB and Chrysler, the power pack is made by Honeywell. And last time I checked none of those are located in Taiwan.


I think the M1 is superior in the terms of it's armor because it doesn't need additional ERA to defeat HEAT, and DU wasn't used as a HEAT defeater, it was used to defeat KE rounds.

So until the T-90 can magically defeat HEAT rounds with it's basic, bare bones, off the factory floor production armor like the M1, then there is no contest, because you need to add ERA. Well the M1 has an ERA package too. The point is moot. What the real miracle armor on the M1 is, Chobham.


What makes the M1 superior is it's ability to sustain a 90% hit and kill ratio, and fight at night. The M1's thermals are some of the best in the world both the GPS and CITV are Gen Three, Block Four, what is the Omlot-P's thermal abilities?

Does the Omlot-P have the ability to track friendly and opposing forces? Can it communication via a 3G Comm network? Can it operate in NBC conditions, without it's electro-optics? Does it have a TUSK kit to help enable it to fight in MOUT? Does it have seperate ammo storage from the crew?

Another superior make of the M1 is it's munitions. The M829A3 APFSDS-T and M830A3 HEAT-T and additional munitions MPAT and STAFF.

Now every other Western tank is along the same par as this. Differing in producers, design and ammo, but they still maintain the same level of abilities, unlike anything produced by the Russian's or any ex-bloc country.
 
Last edited:
the thermal sights issue is critical. last thing i know is that therussian stuff still sees to 40% shorter distances. I dont know if that is changed, but if it hasent than its a big big issue.
 
Naturally but Russians do not tend, virtually all of their "wonder" toys are basically fat lies.
RPG-30 or 32 "Chashim" ?
The M1's thermals are some of the best in the world both the GPS and CITV are Gen Three, Block Four
Gen three - is about infrared imager ? I heard of there are fourth gen with not refrigerate matrix from France.
 
Last edited:
RPG-30 or 32 "Chashim" ?

Is that the new one that fires two rockets in an attempt to overwhelm CIWS/APS on tanks? Im not sure if that would work against the USA Quick Kill system...Im not even sure if it would work against TROPHY or Iron Fist. The systems have more than one ready to launch projectile and very quick response times...
 
Is that the new one that fires two rockets in an attempt to overwhelm CIWS/APS on tanks?
RPG-30
Im not sure if that would work against the USA Quick Kill system...Im not even sure if it would work against TROPHY or Iron Fist. The systems have more than one ready to launch projectile and very quick response times...
For that matter there are a State test. Jordania has bought a RPG Chashim not long ago ... check them ;)
Lunatik said:
This product model has the cutting-edge Shtora active protection system installed.
I do not see a "Shtora" on the photo. There IR-projector suppression, but its not full service.
 
Last edited:
For that matter there are a State test. Jordania has bought a RPG Chashim not long ago ... check them

LOL. State tests are great but no one outside Israel and the USA currently holds the Quick Kill and Iron Fist/TROPHY systems, so i doubt the russians tested against these systems. They probably tested against ARENA.
 
LOL. State tests are great but no one outside Israel and the USA currently holds the Quick Kill and Iron Fist/TROPHY systems, so i doubt the russians tested against these systems. They probably tested against ARENA.
Neither of those give a serious advantage, Fist is useless against fast travelling missiles since its basically a mortar bomb lobbed in the general direction and wired to blow in proximity, its good against RPG and older gen projectiles like TOWs.

I'd say that the primary inferiority of soviet and successor designs is inferior armor and huge cost of installing systems equivalent to western ones in designs not made to house them, reactive armor does not compensate, it creates a danger zone, it can blow multiple bricks, it can get destroyed by lighter munitions and its not as effective as russian "tests" show it, i'd know we use home made reactives in Poland that are better than Russian counterparts (we've purchased enough Russian ERAs from Ukraine to know) and perform well below russian claims.

I'm pretty sure Ukrainian OPLOT is not much cheaper than Leo2A4 and with 2A4 you get an option of much cheaper upgraders that bring it well above the Ukrainian tank, you cant upgrade OPLOT on the other hand, its cranked up as high as it goes.
 
Back
Top