Huge thanks to Armored Warfare for sponsoring todays video.💥Start your mercenary career right now! Sign up for free 🆓: bit.ly/T64_ConeOfArc Use code: YB2MR8UA3HTMNM3UA1MZ for a T-64AV "Hunter" for all acounts. (Only for the first 1000) Activate the code here once you make an account: aw.my.games/pl/user
@exo0682 жыл бұрын
When will you continue with the part 2 on the Leopard 2? Great video
@guron2462 жыл бұрын
10:02 I heard that many of those tanks actually ended up in the azov batalion of ukrainian army and the contract with Kongo was cancelled. The modification is called t-64b1m and you can actually see them on this video (but in the video author called it t-64bv but it's not a bv): kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y5-TgoiGgNxlars&ab_channel=AZOVmedia
@LastGoatKnight2 жыл бұрын
Thanks
@cristinmarius2 жыл бұрын
How is AW ? Last time I played a few years ago it was trying to much to be WoT.
@FirstNameLastName-tg3rc2 жыл бұрын
Does anyone know what the music at 6:53 was?
@lieutenant24632 жыл бұрын
feels kinda weird to see him producing this sort of high quality content when I remember that his channel used to just make war thunder meme compilations
@shovel6622 жыл бұрын
Our boi grew up so fast
@ivanmonahhov23142 жыл бұрын
And it has errors within the first minute. L7 development began in 1956 after hungarians rolled a T-54 into a british embassy
@ivanmonahhov23142 жыл бұрын
3:10 T-64 has a 115mm gun , T-64A would get a 125mm gun in 1969
@briansanchez98992 жыл бұрын
War thunder meme compilations ARE high quality content
@the_official_djalanjs05882 жыл бұрын
They grow up so fast.
@strongback65502 жыл бұрын
230 000$? Wow, that's a steal considering how much a tesla costs brand new. Hell, lot of houses cost that much and I am pretty the tank is gonna win against a house.
@ravenouself41812 жыл бұрын
and you will have something to brag about.
@kingoftheneeks36232 жыл бұрын
Fuel and ammo tho
@neilz.2 жыл бұрын
imagine tesla making electric tanks. TESLA T1 VARIANT...... oof borked cuz no sun. The sun god has forsaken us!
@stolek69082 жыл бұрын
@@neilz. Tesla was against any war he was an pacifist. In WW2 croats kill 70% of his family. Elon Musk is clown, puppet of big profit.
@robertmaybeth34342 жыл бұрын
lolol house Vs T-64...
@wonderwaffle58582 жыл бұрын
it seems like the T-64 almost had dreadnought syndrome where it set the precedent for a new design philosophy, but was then rendered obsolete quickly as new versions of this design philosophy came out
@ONEIL3112 жыл бұрын
Honestly a lot of Russian tanks seem to have dreadnought syndrome.
@peterl34172 жыл бұрын
@@ONEIL311 It would have wrecked anything had WW3 happened before 91, no? Not that nukes wouldn’t have just ended most life on Earth, but still.
@fishyfish6050 Жыл бұрын
@@peterl3417 Air support exists along with Atgms
@M4_Sherman587 Жыл бұрын
@@fishyfish6050 anti air exists along with APS.
@fishyfish6050 Жыл бұрын
@@M4_Sherman587 Radiation missiles exists along with the fact that Aps systems did not even exist in the 60s and the soviet drozd aps system was completely useless
@armoredbaguette2 жыл бұрын
A friend of mine was an engineer in Kharkiv during the Soviet times and then in independent Ukraine, who worked on a multitude of vehicles, including T-64. I heard a lot of undocumented stories of the said vehicle development, like attempts to put SAMs and autocannons on top of the turret to battle US helis. During tests, the first turrets would crumble after being hit, and that made them irreparable. And repairability was a requirement. So they switched to Al2O3 in the armor department, which solved the problem of repairability even after a penetrating hit. Obviously, a crew wouldn't survive, but that wasn't as big of a concern as the former.
@Bird_Dog002 жыл бұрын
That's an interesting statement about crew survivability bing of a lesser concern than vehicle repairablity. I was always under the impression that the soviet army too vallued a well trained crew higher than the vehicle. After all, a tank can roll off the production line in a few days, training a crew takes months at least...
@polygondwanaland83902 жыл бұрын
Wouldn't a turret penetration have a good chance of setting off the autoloader anyways? Soviet tanks throwing their turrets is sort of a meme but it's a meme for a reason.
@jintsuubest93312 жыл бұрын
@@polygondwanaland8390 The reason is people making meme don't understand shit. T-64 stow no ammunition above the turret ring.
@matthiuskoenig33782 жыл бұрын
@@polygondwanaland8390 and that reason is poor training and tactics by Arab users, not a unique soviet design problem. Look up Iraqi abrams, they also lose their turrets when they blow up.
@UgandanAirForce2 жыл бұрын
@@Bird_Dog00 well the t-64 was an expensive and advanced tank for it's time, so it kinda makes sense they want it as repairable as possible.
@kobeh61852 жыл бұрын
Its certainly scary how little the capabilities of Soviet armor were understood. At the time the US was still fielding the M60, the Soviets fielded not only a smoothbore equipped tank in the T-62, but also a 125mm armed APFSDS firing autoloader tank with composite armor, all in a package that was lighter, faster, and more well armed and armored than anything the west possessed. There was a time where Soviet tanks could eliminate any western tank at virtually any combat range.
@logannicholson18502 жыл бұрын
The fact that it wasn’t until highly advanced 105mm rounds and new MBTs like the Abrams and Leo 2 did the west have some sort of counterpart
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
The West saw AP missiles as an effective counter to Soviet armour during the 1950s and 1960s. The widespread adoption of missiles in West helped convince the Soviets of their validity and thus the urgent need to develop missiles equal or better than those of the US for use in armoured warfare. The lineage of the designs that resulted can still be seen today, even in modern Russian armour whilst the West gained time to catch up in the areas of armour development that were dragging the anchor.
@Axterix132 жыл бұрын
Maybe. Because it is also the case that when the western countries actually faced various Soviet designed tanks, like in the war in Iraq, they found they'd overestimated their abilities. Not saying the Soviets didn't build decent tanks, but, like the T-34, they tend to have a variety of drawbacks that people overlook/ignore.
@kobeh61852 жыл бұрын
@@Axterix13 thats a comparison in the opposite favor. A bunch of poorly trained crews in T-72s in extremely disadvantageous positions facing US vehicles with thermal imaging and stabilized weapons is of course a crushing defeat. A T-64 firing 125mm anti tank ammunition is without a doubt going to destroy an M60A3 at any reasonable combat distance. Mentioning the Abrams is beyond the point because it represents the closing in the gap between US and Soviet armor. By the time of the Abrams introduction the Soviets had fielded 3 different composite armor tanks with advanced heavy smoothbore cannons. Comparatively the M1 Abrams started with the same 105mm rifled gun as the M60 before it.
@hendi15712 жыл бұрын
@@kobeh6185 but the M60A3 TTS featured a thermal sight for the gunner and modern 105mm apfsds were capable of penetrating all but the most modern soviet mbts (T-80U/T-80UD, T-72B, T-72B Obr. 1989) frontally. While lacking in armor compared to soviet late second gen tanks, the M60A3 TTS packed a heavy punch and was deadly accurate, its fcs was one of the most advanced of its era, especially as it had a thermal sight, something only T-80UK got.
@nhancao47902 жыл бұрын
0:45 Wasnt the L7 development for the Centurion to reliably combat the T-54/55 while the 120mm Conqueror acted as the counter to the IS-3?
@ConeOfArc2 жыл бұрын
The 105 was better than the 120 for it because of the reload and lighter weight. Plus ammunition advancements made the 120 less necessary until more recently.
@mohamedsewilam41342 жыл бұрын
@@ConeOfArc to my knowledge the 20pdr was developed in response to the is 3 and then the L7 was developed once the British managed to inspect a t54 in Budapest and concluded that the 20pdr performance wont be sufficient enough to co,bat the t54
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
@@mohamedsewilam4134 I think the 20pdr had been toyed around with during WW2 but the British didn't have tanks capable of housing it to good effect.
@jackburton90352 жыл бұрын
Yeah you’re right, the L7 was developed after the British measured a t-55 during the Hungarian uprising in 1956. The British over measured and believed the 20 pounder to be unable to penetrate the t55 and so developed the L7 as a direct competitor. The chieftain was seen as the direct response to the t64 with its 120 l11 which phased out the conqueror and centurion. I think cone has missed some key points here.
@mohamedsewilam41342 жыл бұрын
@@aymonfoxc1442 20pdr was first used in 1948
@YARBlackSpark2 жыл бұрын
This video didn't aged well. Now unfortunatly the T-64 has a lot of chances to prove itself on real battlefield. Maybe new update? Btw. Great job ConeOfArc, loving your content.
@EricToTheScionti2 жыл бұрын
It sucks.
@baronentertainment3622 жыл бұрын
That it does
@dejectedfrogcat28402 жыл бұрын
Majorities of the Russian tanks that got knocked out were done by ATGMs/Artillery instead of Ukrainian T-64s, though.
@miroslavdockal94682 жыл бұрын
You meant that vid where Ukrainian T64 shoot other Ukrainians? On pieces? I know, thats Ukrainian tradition. But......
@flawer13162 жыл бұрын
Tbf. Its mostly how shit the tank is being used.
@Damien_N2 жыл бұрын
I thought that the reason Ukraine continued with development of the T-64/T-80 was on account of inheriting the production line and technical package from the Soviet Union. Likewise for the Russian Federation and the T-72/T-90. I would have thought that Russia would have preferred to further develop the more "prestigious" vehicle - intended for use with it's tank divisions as opposed to the vehicle which was intended to accompany her Motorised Rifle divisions. Interesting stuff!
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
Ukraine did indeed inherit a lot of the production line like most sophisticated engineering products in Ukraine, I believe components likely came from at least three countries. The Ukranians have certainly made it an indigenous sovereign manufacturing capability now.
@matthiuskoenig33782 жыл бұрын
The Soviets chose uvz to produce the next main tank for shock armies to replace the t-80 and t-64. This is because the t-72b proved uvz could produce superior armour layouts, reliability and range while still being cheap to produce and the only reason the t-80s outperformed them was better optics and firecontrols where were not part of kharkov's design but something added later. This resulted in objects 188 and 187, the former of which eventually became the t-90, both are uvz designs. Object 187 was the prefurred choice, basically being to a t-72b what a t-62 was to t-55 (new turret, modified and lengthened Hull, but a ton of interchangable parts) but Russia chose the 188 becuase of a lack of funds after the fall of the ussr (thus only building the object 188 which was originally just going to be called the t-72bu as it was intended to be a t-72 upgrade. But when it became the t-80 replacement instead it got a fancy new name, the t-90)
@hendi15712 жыл бұрын
@@matthiuskoenig3378 wasnt the turret armor layout and strength of the T-80U or at least the UD comparable to T-72B? Furthermore Objekt 187 was not simply an T-62 like Improvement over T-72s qualitys, it introduced a new hull and especially ufp layout (which russian tanks lack up to this day) and a new layout for the engine. So it implemented totally and radically new features.
@Nothing_._Here2 жыл бұрын
@@hendi1571 T-80U has armor far superior to T-72B, T-80UD has armor superior to T-90. The T-90A's turret is even based on the late T-80UD's turret. I'm not sure why Matthius is talking out of his ass. Obj-187 failed in it's attempt to be selected as the new USSR tank, Obj 477 was intended to go into production in the 1990s as it vastly outperformed all the alternatives. T-80UD was intended to be an intermediate production tank until 477 was in inventory in significant numbers. T-90 was never a replacement for T-80s, it was meant to replace T-72Bs. The only reason it hasn't is a lack of funds.
@hendi15712 жыл бұрын
@@Nothing_._Here I'm not quite sure about this. There are varying accounts and opinions according to which the armor (turret front) of T-80U is either slightly weaker, slightly better or somewhat substantially better compared to the T-72B. The latter seems indeed most accurate as development of Objekt 187 and 188 was supposedly initiated with the intent to raise T-72 protection to T-80U level. But I've seen the hint that T-72B obr. 1989 was already a major step in this direction, which would make sense as Objekt 188 did not really have far better armor than this latest T-72 variant and instead featured a capable FCS. So as I said that's quite contested. And as the layout of the armor of T-80U and T-72B is significantly different its hard to compare. Furthermore T-80Us turret armor was improved over time, especially in 1989 which makes it even mor complicated. But in this case, T-80UD turret armor would outperform T-90 by a pretty big margin as the former surpasses T-80U itself and the latter is more or less the same as T-72B. But T-90A turret is unlikely to be based on T-80UD. It was based on Objekt 187 welded turret - yeah, Objekt 478BK had a welded turret as well but it was Kharkov's product. Furthermore this would mean that T-80UDs armor layout would follow the one of T-72B, as T-90A still shares the basic layout of T-72B afaik. And that seems pretty unlikely but its not impossible as T-80UD's turret armor significantly varied from T-80U. T-80UD was adopted as it was far cheaper in production and service than T-80U - a gas turbine was around 8 to 10 times more expensive than a diesel engine and had a 1,2 to 1,4 times higher fuel consumption. After Ustinovs death a new high capability Diesel engine tank became bearable again - introducing T-80UD. While T-90 may not have been inteded to replace T-80s in service, it replaced them in production as producing 3 different designs at the same time (T-80U in Omsk and by Kirov; T-72 and T-90 by UVZ ) was deemed not feasible and Yeltsins Russia-policy played a role as well.
@dyerwulf54592 жыл бұрын
Production quality for this channel is improving in leaps and bounds. Keep up the good work.
@brendonbewersdorf9862 жыл бұрын
T-64 is probably my favorite MBT of all time
@RustyBear6 ай бұрын
It looks so cool. Especially the ukrainian variants
@Niko-xt5bs2 жыл бұрын
You could have talked about the t64 2017 model, nozh (knife) ERA, a thermal sight, new comms equipment, its certainly interesting.
@scandited27632 жыл бұрын
Or Bulat - quite interesting too
@RustyBear6 ай бұрын
@@scandited2763bulat 2 is even better
@robeadon29372 жыл бұрын
1000 FREE TANKS! That's like 2 each for every player left on their servers!
@impguardwarhamer2 жыл бұрын
0:40 That's not true. The L7 was a reaction to the T-55, that where briefly captured during the hungarian revolution. The initial response to the IS-3 can be seen more in the development of the Conqueror and M103
@miltaryaddict12 жыл бұрын
Its obscenely untrue given the 13 year gap between the unveiling of the IS-3 at the berlin victory parade, and the L7 being first mounted in a production tank in 1958
@impguardwarhamer2 жыл бұрын
@@miltaryaddict1 to be fair that does sound par for the course of british army competency
@MrX-un8cz2 жыл бұрын
The Soviet and german really know how to make a gorgeous looking tank
@keirfarnum68112 жыл бұрын
I think America makes the best tank of all; it flies and goes “brrrrttttttt”. 😁
@SuperSladjo2 жыл бұрын
@@keirfarnum6811 nah
@-Ryan_Gasoline- Жыл бұрын
@@keirfarnum6811 Oh no! It's retarded!
@-Ryan_Gasoline- Жыл бұрын
@@keirfarnum6811 My guy, literally any tank is obliterated by an A-10, even the M1A2SEP, yep! The abrams isn't invincible! Although unless it isn't shot down since it doesn't have much missile protected like fighter jets such as the F-35,22 and 18.
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
A very well made and well researched video mate however, one note is that against up-armoured Cold War era tanks, many believe that the Ukranians' Cold War era armour piercing sabot shell may be found wanting at medium and long ranges. A HE shell may also therefore be selected to deal with these in a fashion similar the Germans peppering Soviet armour with HE in WW2, when their 37mm and 57mm AP shells struggled against the T-34 and KV-1. The Americans also did this to some degree when encountering German heavy armour and even Panthers. The HE has a chance to cause damage and holes in the top of the tank and shrapnel to split off inside the tank from the percussive force. Shrapnel can include metal fragments and paint chips/ dust; making it dangerous and even lethal. Some tank hulls have been known to amplify the percussion, making things worse. HE may also cause the damage to, or misfiring of, some reactive armour modules - making a tank more vulnerable to the old AP shells. I haven't researched the T-64's characteristics against percussive forces but since it is such an early example of its MBT lineage, I'm inclined to imagine vulnerabilities remain. Although this would be less than an ideal situation for warfighting, it would be a fair fight if both sides now face the same problem with the same tanks. I do note that the infantry support role does indeed tend to be the dominant use of the T-64 tanks in Ukraine today but I just thought that I'd provide a cautionary note as an example of how the load out of tanks can be deceiving without specific context, especially since they will still form the backbone of Ukraine's armoured response against a Russian incursion if Ukranian drills are an accurate guide.
@werrkowalski29852 жыл бұрын
You are comparing post WWII tanks to WWII tanks though, I'm pretty sure the T-64 had some sort of a spall liner, meaning unless it is hit in a place where there is like ~40mm of armor it should be ok.
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
@@werrkowalski2985 Yeah but I doubt they are just going to stare at each other and wave as they go by, and like I said that may also be hoping to open a gap in the reactive armour's protection to make scoring an effective hit possible but I'm spit-balling here mate. You'd have to be on the front or in the motor-pool to know what they are thinking.
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
@@werrkowalski2985 In WW2, it sometimes took dozens or even hundreds of direct hits to elminate a KV-1 like this with the small calibre guns.
@MrToasterWaffles2 жыл бұрын
@@aymonfoxc1442 Yeah I’m kinda failing to see the point of using HE for just the chance of something happening instead of using regular AP rounds. Like sure you explained HE can be effective but wouldn’t AP accomplish all of that and to a better degree?
@aymonfoxc14422 жыл бұрын
@@MrToasterWaffles Not if the 'AP' round being used isn't capable of penetrating the target.
@samwill72592 жыл бұрын
Man...that had better be one great, big bench. None of the ones I've ever seen could be warmed by a tank. Unless you're ok with it getting "warmed" while also ending up in small pieces, flying away from one another at high speed.
@trentongoertz8762 жыл бұрын
Well we got to see it truly tested finally.
@eaar2 жыл бұрын
:(
@dement_tf2maybe2 жыл бұрын
That's the T-72 doe
@Ry-bo9hi2 жыл бұрын
They do not do well alone
@Ry-bo9hi2 жыл бұрын
Ukraine had alotta these, but right now it seems that they exhausted most if not all their T64s with the remaining probably in the western territories or in use by LDNR But early on we got to see alot of the T64s (usually ganked on) kinda unfortunate ngl I liked how they looked
@RustyBear6 ай бұрын
@@Ry-bo9hiukraine still has them. Azov uses them and basically every tank brigade. Even though captured and field modified T-72 are also very common
@captainkrazee77262 жыл бұрын
Little did he know what was to come in the following months
@OSTmm2 жыл бұрын
One of my favorite tanks ever made. Even with its flaws, I love the design. The BV variant is a personal love of mine.
@summoningsaltfanhere22832 жыл бұрын
Let’s go t 64
@monnorcerkl97312 жыл бұрын
I think an episode of Sails and Salvos on the USS Alabama (BB-60) would be neat since It’s the only American ship honored by the Soviets after WW2 among other neat things
@pat06522 жыл бұрын
"Chemical warhead" could be misunderstood. I'd just say HEAT/Shaped warhead.
@Mati_Panzer2 жыл бұрын
this was awesome, the only nitpick I personally have is that I feel the intro is a tad too long, but that could just be me
@r-saint2 жыл бұрын
During tank-on-tank engagement in 2014, Ukrainian T-64s were able to disable several Russian T-72s with HE hits, apparently even when hit from the front, 125mm shell can and will ignite the engine of T-72. After that, T-72s were abandoned by the crews during the battle.
@keirfarnum68112 жыл бұрын
Fascinating. So the older tank beat it’s replacement? That’s usually not how it works.
@r-saint2 жыл бұрын
@@keirfarnum6811 T-64BV and T-72B2 are only marginally different, the gun is the same.
@salamander46682 жыл бұрын
@@keirfarnum6811 not really, most of the operatable 64s were destroyed during 2013
@nicolas80982 жыл бұрын
@@r-saint "T-72B2" yeah ... no , and T-64BV and T-72B3 (which was used by russian in donbass) are quite different , B3 as way more armor , better FCS , better engine for exemple
@elusive61192 жыл бұрын
@@r-saint There definitely could not be a T-72B2 "Slingshot", this is a prototype of the UVZ modernization for the T-72B in 1989. it is the basis for the T-72B3, but it is very different from it. T-72B 1989, similar to the B3 because it is being upgraded from this model. The most protected and dangerous. T-72B1 (BV) simplified model T-72B 1984. T-72B3 2013 is a T-72B 89 body with complete disassembly, defection and replacement of systems, engine and weapons with T-90A 2004 and modern T-90S systems. The T-72A was not used, as far as I know. The T-64A is the original model, has no EPA, weak armor, poor reliability, but good FSC. T-64BV mid-80s, there is a first-generation EPA, excellent FCS, armor at the level of T-72B 1984, as well as reliability problems. T-64BM Bulat - T-64BV with a heavy Knife-type ERA, suffered heavy losses, was withdrawn from the conflict zone due to constant breakdowns, very weak chassis. The T-64M is the T-64BV, but with a Polish thermal imager and a new "light" epa "knife", some analogue of the T-72B3, work on errors regarding the T-64BM Bulat. But they are few. In addition to the T-72B3 (Catherine generation 2+ cooled thermal imager) and the T-64M (not cooled generation 1+), the listed tanks do not have thermal imagers. 125mm guns are really similar and use the same high-explosive shells. But the T-72B3 uses the A46M5 cannon T-90A with a slightly different design and improved characteristics, the T-64BV and T-72B use standard 2A46-2 and 2A46-1. the main shells for these guns are high-explosive or cumulative. They are much more powerful and closer to artillery shells than tank shells in the usual view. In addition, the T-64BV is much more advanced than the T-72B, but inferior to it in reliability and protection, the guns are the same. They were produced in parallel and it is not correct to assume that the T-64BV is older (in addition, there were also T-80B and 3 (!) tank models at the same time), this is not so. A high-explosive projectile has every chance of damaging any tank because it is a 5-6kg land mine. It can ignite the external tanks, damage the cannon and take everything off the armor, including ERA, which will detonate at the same time. If the tank received several hits at the same time and lost mobility or the ability to shoot, it is thrown because the crew is more priority. And ... yes, in this conflict, the use of AFPDS is rather episodic because high explosive (hash) are quite effective and universal for all purposes, besides there are many of them, and there are practically no afpds, and the old ones are not effective. The exception is the T-72B3, which has much stronger armor, the same ERA and a modern thermal imager arrow, while a new gun and shells. In total, 5 (!) T-72B3 were lost, most likely due to ATGM on board or massive shelling. The losses of the T-64 from all sides are almost 400 tanks. T-72B3 among the old tanks is a fox in a chicken coop at night. All losses of armored vehicles are reflected on the lostarmor website.
@T51B12 жыл бұрын
Ukraine still uses the T64 because they inherited production facilities for them within their country during the breakup of the USSR. They have steadily upgraded them and haven't replaced them because they still work for what they need them to do
@rhystaylor8512 жыл бұрын
T64 was my fav tank to play in AW and imo the coolest early cold war MBT. Sadly dead game now :(
@steweygrrr2 жыл бұрын
In which modes? PvP and PvE or just the PvP scene?
@rhystaylor8512 жыл бұрын
@@steweygrrr PvP for sure, last time I tried to play I couldn't get a match in anything over tier 4 even after being in queue for +10mins
@rhystaylor8512 жыл бұрын
PvE is still a thing because it's so few players, but it gets quite repetitive after a while which sucks the fun out
@steweygrrr2 жыл бұрын
@@rhystaylor851 I never really enjoyed the PvP because it always devolved into pixel hunting back when I played. Shame about the PvE too because it's really the only game of it's type that offers that kind of content.
@rhystaylor8512 жыл бұрын
@@steweygrrr yeah PvE was fun for a while, but the bots really didn't offer much a challenge after you'd memorized where they spawned, and there wasn't enough variety to keep me interested
@darth_elsa66812 жыл бұрын
Soviet/Russian tanks may not be the beat tanks in the world....but they are the best looking. A tank has to have curves 💪🏾💪🏾💪🏾 But on a serious note....their tanks suffer more from poor use and bad tactics....Chechnya is a great or rather poor example of bad tactics. Hell during The October War the Egyptians proved the T-55 was a decent tank when used with combined arms tactics. The Syrians on the other hand just sent them forward by the hundreds against well prepared positions and it turned out as well as you could expect.
@raff2572 жыл бұрын
And they stripped the explosive from the ERA Making it completeley useless
@KorianHUN2 жыл бұрын
I never thought i would see 2014 events in a history video about a cold war tanks combat record... I used to talk to someone on an international messaging app who lived in the city where the Russian-Ukrainian tank battle happened in southern Ukraine. She said they saw "tanks on the streets waiting for the Russians" if i remember correctly. When not in imminent danger local kids climbed up to see them, as tanks are naturally interesting and cool to people in general. She said it was much better when they didn't have to fear a tank battle happening.
@ChristopherWeaver12 жыл бұрын
Surprised Armored Warfare is still around, Especially after they ended their contract with Obsidian and the quality of the game went straight down into the shitter like 4 years ago
@KiLDELTA2 жыл бұрын
Kept alive by EU, CN and some asian players... a few US still
@polygondwanaland83902 жыл бұрын
Yeah, I played it back when Obsidian was involved and it was clear even then that the player base was in trouble.
@@polygondwanaland8390 Which is strange since literally everyone seems to say that Obsidian's direction would have beat WoT, when i've heard they balanced just about as bad as Wargaming.
@werrkowalski29852 жыл бұрын
"We will fight the strongest army in the world" That aged well.
@Joe-lo4rc2 жыл бұрын
Aged like a fine milk
@jerdasaurusrex5572 жыл бұрын
Soviet Union: where making 12000 of a tank is prefaced with "Only".
@LooWa012 жыл бұрын
So part III is incoming soon
@therealrat2 жыл бұрын
Gotta say glad to see you know of the American heritage museum. When I walked into the main hall I thought I died and went heaven
@alexwest25732 жыл бұрын
The t-72 GoPro vids are really interesting to watch
@YoRHaUnit2Babe2 жыл бұрын
I have used the T64B SO MUCH and ofc all Tech tree-72s and oh man was that a true blast in Armored Warfare. (note, now that the M1 Abrams has been buffed to a more Tier 6 standard, I'd say watch out for that thing. use that turret armour, stay very sharp, watch your allies and watch your flanks.)
@vladworldzmason82442 жыл бұрын
T-80 is not direct descendant of anything, Its completely other new tank, different plant, different construction and development company.
@MrMaximkozin2 жыл бұрын
thanks I often find myself looking up data about those cutting edge designs
@BrokenHeart-me5rc2 жыл бұрын
Soviet has legendary turret
@lordphullautosear2 жыл бұрын
Yep, legendary for catastrophic turret separations when fired on by Bradley chain guns...
@oryanhill11352 жыл бұрын
He didn't say it was a GOOD legend
@unbekannternr.13532 жыл бұрын
This active armor makes it superior against Obj. 279!
@Miisairu2 жыл бұрын
Its nice to see mostly czech modifications in videos about soviet tanks :D
@wolfeye27172 жыл бұрын
Honestly i love how this channel is going. Moving from warthunder to quality stuff
@СосоМумладзе2 жыл бұрын
Служил Я на Т-64А. С 1975-1977гг.Весна. Когда я служил...то эти танки даже не были в Группах войск в Германии. Я восхищаюсь танком " Леопард-1". Что удивительно.....в России...,да и на бывшем СССР.... сейчас все ездят на Германских автомобилях .
@Love-wj5vi2 жыл бұрын
T 72 is worth than T 64. Because T 72 was developed as a cheaper version of T64 that can be mass produced in the depth of USSR in case of a war. For example, the engine on T72 is the engine of T34 of the WW2, while the T64 has its own brand new engine. Russian T90s are made of T72 with the t34 engines, which makes them break all the time during the very hot and very cold weather.
@marinodezelak11802 жыл бұрын
the T-34 engine had a Model V-2-34 38.8 L V12 Diesel engine with 500 hp, The weakest engine between the T-72 and T-90, Is in the T-72 which is a V-12 diesel V-92S2F with 780 hp, the T-90 has a V-12 V-92S2K with 1,520 hp... So, no... those are not t34 engines either, not by a longshot.
@Love-wj5vi2 жыл бұрын
@@marinodezelak1180 yes it is the same engine.
@marinodezelak11802 жыл бұрын
@@Love-wj5vi You're telling me they squeezed an extra 1,020 horse power out of a WW2 500 horse power engine? you're mad.
@Love-wj5vi2 жыл бұрын
@@marinodezelak1180 yes. they forced the engine. use google and wiki.
@Love-wj5vi2 жыл бұрын
@@marinodezelak1180 because of this "squeeze" Russian t-90s break all the time and create lots of black smoke.
@TVideoCZ2 жыл бұрын
Why most of the T-55s and T-72s I've seen in museums on youtube are from Czechoslovakia.
@ConeOfArc2 жыл бұрын
The Czechs have alot of old hardware for sale from what I know.
@armchairgeneralissimo2 жыл бұрын
Czechoslovakia recieved lots of tanks from the Soviet Union at their peak they had over 4000 MBTs in service. As I'm sure you can figure niether the Czech republic or Slovakia need armies that big anymore. The Czech army has 50 T72s still in service with 60 in reserve, whilst Slovakia only have 20 T-72s.
@trashcontent96372 жыл бұрын
Thanks for for sponsoring this video!
@nopenope84182 жыл бұрын
Ok, that introduction was really great!
@shadow_entity91912 жыл бұрын
Soviet Bias 2.0 Also: Will there be a Cone-chan anime at some point?
@Kyanzes2 жыл бұрын
4:34 "Thanks children!" or "Thanks guys/boys!"
@Orca199042 жыл бұрын
I would dare say this tank is anything but a "benchwarmer" now, as it has seen intense combat on both sides of the current invasion of Ukraine, being used by both the Ukrainian and Russian armies with only the paint schemes and certain now-infamous markings being the only way to distinguish them.
@nsort30092 жыл бұрын
The T-64 was withdrawn from service with Russia. It's 🇺🇦 only now.
@wonkagaming87502 жыл бұрын
@@nsort3009 he means DPR and LPR
@cornetinu42032 жыл бұрын
@@wonkagaming8750 nah. They captured a T-64BV near Kharkov, the Russians themselves are using them
@wonkagaming87502 жыл бұрын
@@cornetinu4203 captured T 64s are being given to the DPR and LPR, but the russian dont use T 64
@cornetinu42032 жыл бұрын
@@wonkagaming8750 Nah. They do use it. I literally told you where, the separatists only operate in the southeast of the country
@PanzerChief2 жыл бұрын
Can u not distort the aspect ratio of old video I want to see them in their actual size and beauty. Cheers your channel is still one of my favorites
@pjduker052 жыл бұрын
Mad props to your video. Very comprehensive with out boring me to sleep. And sorry to hear about your friend. May the souls of the faithfully departed rest in peace. And may perpetual light shine upon them. Amen.
@Bluehammer322 жыл бұрын
Ain’t gonna lie the T-64 is my favourite Cold War MBT.
@fleekrushyt94102 жыл бұрын
The bulat isnt the newest T-64 variation of ukraine. They have the T-64 BV 2017, which is an upgraded T-64BV. The Bulat is also produced, but there also some other variations. Just recently, they passed tests with an modernisation of the T-64BVK (kzbin.info/www/bejne/e4PIqZ59gsacjsk). I hope you could also talk about all of ukraines BTR modernisations and BMP modernisations.
@marinodezelak11802 жыл бұрын
I guess Ukraine is just trying to make the best out of what they got.
@the_burger2 жыл бұрын
Noone cares about crappy ukrainian vehicles lol
@scandited27632 жыл бұрын
@@marinodezelak1180 That’s how it is, can confirm (except for APCs such as BTR-4)
@MikoyanGurevichMiG212 жыл бұрын
At least some factories means Ukraine can do something with their armor, however when it comes to the air they are hopeless.
@gaiofattos2 Жыл бұрын
@@the_burger Yeah, Russian turrets tosses are way cooler.
@CH3TN1K3132 жыл бұрын
First widely adopted smoothbore goes to the T-62's 115mm U-5TS. As for Ukraine and their T-64's, Kharkiv (now known as Malyshev) has all the tooling for T-64's and it would cost Ukraine too much to retool their factory, from what I have read, which is why they continue to design tanks based off the T-64 and also the T-80, which Kharkiv was also building before the USSR breakup.
@terrynewsome66982 жыл бұрын
For 7 months it has been in a baptism of fire. And all things considered it has done quite well. Is it amazing, no. But is it good enough for a army that needs mostly modern tanks on mass, yes.
@Orcawhale12 жыл бұрын
The T-64 has been used in combat since 2014, so this is by no means it's baptism of fire. And Ukraine actully plans to phase them out, after the war is over, and standardize on the T-72 and T-80.
@andersonklein3587 Жыл бұрын
The similarities between the T80 and the M1A1 Abrams should be a tip that when the soviets tried to build something up to the same standards as NATO, it didn't go well because their economy and high tech industries were weak. Thus the T90 being yet another refresh of the T72, which is another refresh of the T62, which is a direct upgrade from the T55... The T64 and T80 are great tanks, just aren't backed by a strong economy that can make them reliable enough. They were the soviet attempts at quality over quantity for elite forces, which went against their natural advantages and doctrines.
@definitelyfrank9341 Жыл бұрын
You have no idea what you're talking about. What do you mean the T-80 was the Soviets' attempt to build a tank to match the Abrams? T-80 entered service several years before Abrams even entered the production phase. T-72 isn't even in the slightest bit related to the T-62; the only thing it has in common with it is the similar doctrine it was designed around. T-80 was never meant to be USSR's primary tank. It was meant to serve kind of as a force multiplier. Similar to how the US Navy consists of a high-low mix of ships. T-90 is basically a T-64 without the reliability issues and over-complex design.
@christian9125abd7 ай бұрын
@@definitelyfrank9341 The T-90 is basically the new workhorse of the russian/soviet army and a modernisation of the T-72 and the T-80 is the russian/soviet premium tank and used for special units.
@SuspiciousSniff2 жыл бұрын
Let’s gooooo T-64
@gareththompson27082 жыл бұрын
It is worth remembering that the T72 isn't actually any better than the T64 on a tank for tank basis. It's just a lot cheaper. From what I understand the T64 and T72 are basically the same tank, except that the T72 has a new autoloader (for the time) and uses cheaper materials in its composite armor. So, prior to the more advanced Soviet/Russian ERA overtaking the base composite in importance (the base armor of the T64/72/80/90 hasn't changed in decades, they have just slapped on more advanced ERA), the T72 actually had somewhat inferior armor to the T64. If the Cold War had gone hot in 1980, American M60s loaded with M735 APFSDS rounds would have found that they could fairly easily penetrate the frontal composite armor of the T-72, but would have struggled to penetrate the frontal composite armor of the T-64.
@harmdallmeyer64492 жыл бұрын
I think this is the case. I have also heard that Russia generally has on generation of expensive advanced tanks (T-64,T-80) and one generation of cheap, numerous tanks (T-72, T-90). This doctrine might continue with the astronomically high costs of T-14s
@Orcawhale12 жыл бұрын
Depends entirely on the year and variants your comparing. Because from 1985 and the T-72B, your looking at much better tank than T-64B. Also, base armor of all T-tanks changed, due to composite armor. So it's not true that it hasn't changed.
@artycat08112 жыл бұрын
USSR: 64s too expensive, give me 1000s of cheap 72s
@adamscease41262 жыл бұрын
It began with the KVs
@SlavaUkraini3452 жыл бұрын
For you cursed by design series. Would it be possible to do one on the M1 TTB. That tank is one of my favorites ever. It would be interesting to see how you would take it.
@old_guard2431 Жыл бұрын
Looks like Armored Warfare is making a comeback(?). It is the only tank game I played much several years ago, but seemed like it was dying. Which was a shame, as it seemed like the only one to escape the overpowered fake tank gimmicks of the more popular tank games. Good luck to Armored Warfare.
@LayronPK Жыл бұрын
It`s a russian propaganda game, i do not recommend spending your time on that.
@CorporalAdrianShephard.2 жыл бұрын
I hear HOI4 music. Nice!
@Swellington_2 жыл бұрын
Damn,$230,000.00 for a T-64? That's cheap
@MyTran-gn4rk2 жыл бұрын
It depends on inflation but it might still be cheap even if stuff like the T-72 were as much as 40% cheaper.
@armchairgeneralissimo2 жыл бұрын
@@MyTran-gn4rk You're looking at about $250,000 for a very out dated but in good mothballed condition T-72M
@buckstarchaser23764 ай бұрын
5:30 This seems to be a common saying among countries who want them dollars.
@honda63532 жыл бұрын
Man, 200k for each Tank, wouldn't mind if I do.
@doogustrog2 жыл бұрын
This video aged like fine milk
@Creppystories1232 жыл бұрын
Well not... Beacuse Russia isnt using the t64....
@doogustrog2 жыл бұрын
@@Creppystories123 it will happen eventually, Russia is exhausting their supply of vehicles
@doogustrog2 жыл бұрын
@@Creppystories123 hell, they’ve already deployed the BMP-T and the only T-80UM2 EVER, with the Drozd 2 APS
@Creppystories1232 жыл бұрын
@@doogustrog there are like 30 of them
@doogustrog2 жыл бұрын
@@Creppystories123 Nah, there’s one UM2 prototype
@theboreditamar21082 жыл бұрын
THIS INTRO IS AMAZING
@randomlyentertaining82872 жыл бұрын
Fun Fact: Bulat is a Russian transliteration of the Persian word fulad, meaning Steel. So the T-64 Bulat means T-64 Steel. Humorous.
@LayronPK Жыл бұрын
russian transliteration? For the tank, that was named in Ukrainian?
@randomlyentertaining82876 ай бұрын
@@LayronPK While Ukrainian is its own language and is the official language of the state, most Ukrainians either prefer Russian or speak both languages interchangeably. It's actually considered a problem by the Ukrainian government, who have had to mandate Ukrainian be used in all school classes that do not require a second language. Plus the meaning of the word doesn't care about who used it, it still means the same thing.
@LayronPK6 ай бұрын
@@randomlyentertaining8287 Ukrainian tank = Ukrainian transliteration. It's that simple
@quinlanal-aziz61552 жыл бұрын
Bro this footage is from the American Heritage Museum in Holden Mass
@Hugh.Gilbert2 жыл бұрын
That code looks like the name of an Ibanez guitar
@Vadym_952 жыл бұрын
The T-72 is not the older brother of the T-64)) it is a Russian simplified version of the tank developed in Kharkiv. they simply could not (and did not really want to, due to the lobbying of their projects in the Communist Party of the USSR) put into production a tank that is much more complex than everything they had done before. its production required a much higher level of production culture than UralVagonZavod could provide. therefore, they simplified the control system, grounded the opposite turbodiesel engine, for the next iteration of the engine from the T-34 (they still use them). In Transnistria, the tanks had a Russian flag, because it was the Russian army, they created their puppet (Transnistria) in Moldova in order to control Moldova. The T-80 is the same T-64 with updated instruments and a gas turbine engine installed (because the Leningrad Design Bureau had to lobby for its projects). The engine destroyed the suspension and tracks due to high power, so it was strengthened. This is how the T-80U appeared. In Ukraine, highly mobile troops are armed with it due to its high speed, but the resource of this engine is several times lower than that of the T-64 engine. THAT'S WHY - the T-84 appeared))) T-84 is T80U, from which the gas turbine engine was removed, and an engine from T-64))) or its next version was installed)). As a result, on the basis of the T-64, Russian design bureaus and factories could not do anything normal in Soviet times. or the "sick from birth" T-72, or the cool T-80U with a short period of use. in Ukraine, we used to make military podcasts about tanks, if you can translate it, you will get a lot of information. T-72 T-64 T-80 kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4bMh5KKqa96jqM kzbin.info/www/bejne/qGWwdZ6qg8t8adk kzbin.info/www/bejne/apK3qWxvhch4psU
@LayronPK Жыл бұрын
До речі, чудові подкасти, сам їх слухав раніше, пан Микола дуже цікаво розповідає!
@davonmulder84582 жыл бұрын
that intro confused the hell out me ngl, i was not expecting a woman's voice
@prehensileman72542 жыл бұрын
It began with the TV-1
@hyenahallstrom70342 жыл бұрын
Oh shit I was just at the museum you used for B-roll in the opening
@mikepette44222 жыл бұрын
well I might just take you up on that AW offer. I recall the game was amazing at the start. Not sure how it is these days but this is a good chance I think.
@Aconcernedrifleman2 жыл бұрын
It's mostly active overseas, but the PvE content is something you won't get anywhere else. It really just needs good marketing in the states, as it seems to do a very good job attracting WT and WoT players
@boymahina1232 жыл бұрын
PvE is where it's at, and the grind is far faster than either WoT or WT
@zooweemama9112 жыл бұрын
Bro got the BF1 end game announcer lmfaoo
@monsieurduquack54402 жыл бұрын
1:32 Is that the War Museum in Ottawa?
@thelonestranger14742 жыл бұрын
It’s the American Heritage Museum in Hudson, Massachusetts. Fantastic place!
@albertogiavani752 жыл бұрын
Imho the t64 is the best and the most popular dont know if served for longer than the 55 tho
@Galmoori2 жыл бұрын
Lets do the hidden gems of the ukrainian armor development while we’re at it :)
@superwout2 жыл бұрын
Amen. The best protected MBT in history, the revolutionary 2T Stalker, the Ukranian Merkava, ...., just wow
@raff2572 жыл бұрын
T-84 yatagan basically a ukrainian T-80 with diesel engine,a 120mm gun, and a turret bustle autoloader.
@superwout2 жыл бұрын
@@raff257 yeah and the small crew compartment at the back, right? Earning the nickname Ukranian Merkava
@raff2572 жыл бұрын
@@superwout no it's a different tank, the ukrainian merkava is obj 488,i'm talking about the t-84 yatagan
@superwout2 жыл бұрын
@@raff257 ow, should do my background checks again
@JO-ch3el2 жыл бұрын
Hi! I always enjoy your videos and they are only getting better. Though I would suggest cutting down on the intro/preambles. That and the sponsor segment took 3 minutes of a 12 minute videos which is a bit long.
@ddegn2 жыл бұрын
I really disliked the intro. I realize the sponsor segment is needed to make money but the rest of the intro is annoying for no good reason. Switching to the female voice doesn't add anything to the video.
@davidwilliams77232 жыл бұрын
Welp....
@1joshjosh12 жыл бұрын
Nothing can go wrong-go. T-64 in the Congo.
@maverick_gold23772 жыл бұрын
Hi I really enjoy your content
@devendoffing70042 жыл бұрын
Not so much of a bench warmer anymore
@Kruegernator123 Жыл бұрын
This video is currently 15 months old.
@mbtenjoyer9487 Жыл бұрын
It’s an old tank
@OnxGrid7 ай бұрын
@@mbtenjoyer9487 But it's still in used by both side
@mbtenjoyer94877 ай бұрын
@@OnxGrid Mainly by Ukraine
@WarSecrets2 жыл бұрын
Technically superior tank 😎
@xcritic96712 жыл бұрын
Any of you Ukrainian brothers watching this: I'm rooting for you from across the pond, stay strong!
@matthiuskoenig33782 жыл бұрын
why? both sides are shit. i mean Ukraine's own propaganda is ultranationalist, their own propaganda to American journalists is Blood and soil shit.
@xcritic96712 жыл бұрын
@@matthiuskoenig3378 I'm not standing with their policies but with their people.
@tasman0062 жыл бұрын
Been hanging for this vid. Excelent. Can't wait for the next one keep them coming.
@leflavius_nl53702 жыл бұрын
Cool video, Cone, thank you!
@originalSPECTER2 жыл бұрын
“Conelyfans” LMFAO
@badhippo2 жыл бұрын
Good video. Informative, insightful, and visually satisfying.
@Independentfellow Жыл бұрын
Evil Genie: oh you want to see the t-64 and t-72 go head to head in a war? … DONE!” 😈 February 2022
@bad-ideas50902 жыл бұрын
6:50 did þat guy just walk out of a mortar misfire?
@hugo8851 Жыл бұрын
Very interesting, when is a video on the T72 coming? I’ve always felt curious about why the wheels of the t64 and t72 are so different and what advantages each wheel design has. Also it would be interesting to know if there is a big difference in armor protection between the t64 and t72 in the early variants.
@namefamily2748 Жыл бұрын
Fast answer: T-64 wheels were made to accoplish weight reqirements. T-72 were heavier,but much more reliable, durable, and better
@andron2348 Жыл бұрын
Very informative video, How about a little freeze frames highlighting each model?
@jammygamer89612 жыл бұрын
T-64 go let's
@quirkymender09532 жыл бұрын
i think they were more scared of a bt 5/7 with those artillery rockets on the turret rather than the is 3.
@normanarmslave51442 жыл бұрын
based on our details found from Ukrainian offers to our country Philippines: Theres no indicator on what tank offered to us, but based on the price range you shared when Ukraine sold T-64's to Congo, Its possible that its either the Bulat or the Oplot offered to us, and also in all contenders in our medium tank acquisition project (yes, MEDIUM tanks) surprisingly, the Ukrainian offer is the cheapest and the best, (obviously, because those tanks are already MBT's in standard). but Ukraine offer didnt go thru because of our government's worries about the terrible aftersales support of Ukraine
@Ry-bo9hi2 жыл бұрын
Bruh if we got tanks and China invades we finna fight in a stand off as armored pillboxes because bet both Chinese and our (if we ever do aquire) just gonna get stuck on some ricefield
@normanarmslave51442 жыл бұрын
@@Ry-bo9hi you forgot. we got urban cities and urbanized towns too.
@Ry-bo9hi2 жыл бұрын
Yeah but tanks stuck in ricefields is are funnier
@normanarmslave51442 жыл бұрын
@@Ry-bo9hi Indonesia suffers also in that same manner, but they resolved it by getting more recovery vehicles. we can also get the same solution if we want to.