"SEKRIT" engagement between Chinese and Russian tanks

[@RedEffectChannel]

- 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.

[@DK-ig8zi]

Can you make the bests Russian tanks (T90AM, T72B3 2016,T14 Armata) vs the bests tanks for China?

[@lamalien2276]

Awesome video! More like this please!

[@constantiniasmith4231]

Why in the add those player can run on openfield and barelly getting spotted or hit?

[@matthewadams-richardson6980]

Any way you can get deals for subscribers who are already War Thunder players? I know WOT and War Thunder are always drumming for new players but a lot of people already are players and follow your channel closely because they have a genuine interest in Tanks. Not sure I can say the same about people who are not already War Thunder players.

[@dexterlibson8442]

Im vote russian tank

[@henryatkinson1479]

>their crew was trained up to ukrainian standards I dont think you want crews trained to 2005 ukraine standards

[@lucysky1199]

Better subpar training than none at all I guess?

[@IowanLawman]

@@lucysky1199 Its comparing a shit and a shit sandwich. Both are bad options.

[@massimechoub3343]

Ukraine was a soviet nation so it was not catastrophic at all...

[@henryatkinson1479]

@@massimechoub3343 this was 15 years post soviet, and they had no money

[@londonberry2180]

Considering they did manage to gain initial victories, I don't think the South Sudanese crew were "that" bad

[@matthewye9193]

When you get uptiered.........

[@deathtrooper199]

I feel your pain

[@MrOist]

Every. Single. Time

[@peoplesrepublicofliberland5606]

Cries in Tiger 1 at 6.7

[@andyc3230]

ironically in-game T72AV has a slightly higher BR than the Type96, which is the successor to the Type85.

[@oLevLovesLove]

Uptiered vs the Chinese premium squad.

[@muanlaltunglut6460]

Last time I was this early, RedEffect and Alpha defence were still having a feud.

[@jacobjohnson2603]

Blue Effect lmao

[@ColonizedEthan]

@@avid459 Alpha Defence =/= Alpha Defense

[@dimes7742]

@@ColonizedEthan what?

[@vandansonkar7819]

@@dimes7742 alpha defense idiot created a channel to personally attack red effect, i'm sure red doesn't give a fuck

[@docrex1678]

Both of them need to get a real job and a life

[@PugilistCactus]

S. Sudan didn't have enough RP or SL to research 3BM22 or 3BM29. Probably got cocky about the Type 55's and thought they could treat a new upgrade the same way. Seems more like a training problem then it is an equipment one.

[@rollingthunder6215]

yes yeess!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@thetigerii9506]

s sudan didnt buy the ru251 on sale and now has to take a fat L grinding SL without a premium

[@mohamedelmalih6298]

As a sudanese i approve to that xD

[@deadliftalot]

they forgot to buy the t55am1 on sale xD

[@bickboose9364]

all the noobs had to do was use the map effectively and shoot the LFP on those Chinese tanks but no they finally finish research on a new MBT and they head out like headless chickens

[@gershonbass6004]

in addition to the fact that T72A is an older model , it also was not new tanks taken from the reserve , how long they served before and how long they later stood in storage , considering that Ukraineit never made this type it is not clear how repair was made and it is difficult to say in what condition they were passed especially for barrel wear .

[@underhorse5367]

T85 also is a older model

[@nabara6949]

@B J Yes, type 85 is also old. But compared to T72, as he said, it's more than a decade newer.

[@11vdv11]

@B J Ukrainian can’t produce t72. They sold tanks that were close to end of its life already. Basically very heavily used vehicles. Overall type 85 is way far forward from t72av

[@triatheraider1612]

I really want to see red effect playing war thunder

[@smogdanoff7053]

He wouldn’t be able to handle it psychologically And by that i mean the fuckery of Gaijioobles and the game mechanics

[@triatheraider1612]

@@smogdanoff7053 yea war thunder is kinda triggering sometimes

[@_hoaxx]

@@triatheraider1612 Kinda??? More like "almost every time"

[@bouteilledeau1463]

@@_hoaxx Yes. Might be because I'm a noob, constantly dying because every 1st shell I recieve kills my gunner feels infuriating.

[@mahogany7712]

Stick to ww2 vehicles, moving on is only pain. SPECIALLY WW2 VEHICLES FACING MODERN HEAT ROUNDS.

[@Brother_Nihilus]

My mans maybe a video on the TRUE worst Nato tank. The Tr-85M1 from Romania

[@slavarodu5062]

The worst? Laughs in ariete xD

[@Brother_Nihilus]

@@slavarodu5062 yes, the worst. I mean protection is obsolete. Firepower is horrendous. Mobility is shit, fuel consumption is bad. Availability is laughable, if I'm not mistaken no thermal or panoramic sight

[@Brother_Nihilus]

@Drayn 99 if you can tell me the designations. Like T-72 ural, T-72A, T-72M/M1 T-72B. Then I can tell you. They are most likely M's or M1's which aren't that good. A tank from the 70' to 80' is pretty much obsolete.

[@jetkwan6707]

Worst NATO MBT, maybe. Still one of the top performing T-55 variants around tho, along with that one cursed Ukrainian attempt to shoehorn T-80U parts into a T-55A.

[@Brother_Nihilus]

@Drayn 99 ok so basically imagine a m1 with possibly better mobility and FCS(fire control system) I believe that it has a better rangefinder. Other than that I'm oblivious to the m2 variant :/

[@user-lv3ld5oh6l]

Little story, South Sudanese Civil War also know as test grand for "which shcoll is better" for PLA Command Academy. Joint Operations College of the National Defense University VS National Defense University, Shi Jia Zhuang VS Bei Jing. We are really interested in the results.

[@Hakasnakeman212]

You have any reports we can also read ?

[@lolasdm6959]

@@Hakasnakeman212 If you can read Chinese

[@user-ic8dk5sg5b]

@@Hakasnakeman212 We trained officers and soldiers on both sides of them

[@hippoace]

This is why T-34 tanks perform better ingame than historically due to mouse aim and gameplay UI, equalising tank crew training and optics amongst its opponents. Once you have better fire control and situational awareness, it makes a big difference.

[@joshjonson2368]

Not to mention Stalinium which magically works ingame while historically they tend to crack

[@ravenouself4181]

It also helps that Germany Mains are braindead 90% of the time

[@ravenouself4181]

@@joshjonson2368 Honestly? The T-34 is not as insufferable as the Cast Hull Sherman or the Panzer IV. The former being able to bounce shots from Tiger I's and Panthers like it's the IRS when asked to explain it's budget usage and the latter being able to shatter shells that touch it's armor.

[@lukabogdanovic4658]

Type 99 would be nice to see in the future

[@zhaviator]

They wouldn t export it anytime soon

[@andyc3230]

@@zhaviator I think he is referring to the game.

[@zhaviator]

@ғєαʀʟєss. exe well... VT4 is an upgraded MBT2000 with some tech from type 99, and MBT2000 itself is developed from the type 90. They are connected for sure, but I wouldn't say that VT4 is the export version of type 99

[@thekaiseroftheeast3895]

@ғєαʀʟєss. exe Kek, look whose here. But I can't blame you, I'm a War Thunder fan myself.

[@badgermcbadger1968]

@ғєαʀʟєss. exe they added the ztz 99 to wt and it isnt that strong, its not even on the highest br

[@rexluna4533]

On tank to tank engagement, One has to consider the experience and skills of the crew, the stratedy employed and the available technology present.

[@billyb501stlegion5]

1:59 lmao look at Crimea

[@pawEHO]

He forgot about Donetsk and Lugansk republics

[@Abanamat85]

​@@pawEHO its not the same, thats more of a Transnistrian-type frozen conflict, unrecognized even by Russia itself.

[@mtf_nine_tailed_fox385]

¯\_( ツ)_/¯

[@telurkucing5006]

He dont want to get burned by angry ukrop or russian, better make that weird statement to make it neutral

[@HanSolo__]

As much as Crimea was always in Russian (waaay before Soviets) borders and should stay Russian land this looked like Russia got so weak influence out there all-around so that they had to use the military argument. While they were the ones that gave Crimea to Ukraine. Weak move - acting like an ass. Donetsk and Lugansk - Jesusless, what they were thinking about? Seriously? The whole Ukraine got beaten by two its regions and Putin says: "What? When? 2 days ago? Are they really fighting for their independence? Interesting, who knew huh?" - and this piece of horse shit went off into the air as official Russian govs statement XD And this Specnaz guy - "We are from Russia and we fight with Ukraine. Locals don't give two fucks anymore. They want peace and they say both sides act unmatured way." Wester press - "O reely?!"

[@mohamedbaradji7504]

I’ve always been a fan of the T-72s, T-80s and T-90s because of their looks and also how agile they are.

[@sini0071]

Reverse speed lmao

[@FPK___]

@@sini0071 it is agile for the time way faster than the M60 and the T95E1, also its much smaller and harder to hit

[@fdjw88]

Americans: sold arms to both the Brits and Nazis and made a lot of money. Chinese: sold arms to both Sudan and South Sudan and made a lot of money. Americans: my young padawan has learned well from the dark side.

[@yuluoxianjun]

China learn everyone

[@shanewatson2670]

I’m waiting for VT-4 MBT video

[@zszs100]

Thatd be awsome.

[@shanewatson2670]

Hunter6213 yes that’s right, 1500 Hp And 300 in number

[@arhumzia6360]

@@shanewatson2670 and fy4 armour

[@2waterbottles227]

Pakistan just bought 300 VT-4 from China. Pakistan VT-4s also have better configurations than Thailand version, such as FY4. Would be an interesting topic in my opinion.

[@shermanfirefly5410]

Yup, the Pakistans' Vt4s also came with new rounds that brings higher penetration

[@pawEHO]

"trained to Ukrainian standards" kinda laughed

[@puffypegion7815]

Arthur Morgan cause Ukraine’s army standards are kinda shit tbh with you

[@texx1985]

@@puffypegion7815 how do you know?

[@puffypegion7815]

texx1985 look at their military and all the things they have done since the collapse of the Soviet Union

[@puffypegion7815]

texx1985 not that I hate Ukraine or anything

[@puffypegion7815]

texx1985 because their military was disorganized and horrible back in 2005

[@velvetthundr]

I bet Ukraine wished it didn’t sell those T-72AVs it had now.

[@mbtenjoyer9487]

Well they couldn’t keep every single tank they have from USSR so they had to sell some ( maybe they sold too many )

[@HeavenlyMandate]

​@@mbtenjoyer9487 nah they can turn the non-operable ones into spare parts

[@ondry7801]

Any possibility you'd do more ifv videos in the near future like warrior, bradley etc. I really enjoyed the previous ifv vids

[@aravindc102]

Whenever Russian weapons are defeated , it's definitely not the vehicle's fault. It's either "downgraded" version or crew went for "lunch " or crew is not properly 'trained" . They will never accept that the said weapon is thoroughly inferior . Case and point : recent pantsir in Syria

[@sengwesetogile6054]

Funnily enough, when the abrams performed poorly in saudi use, it was blamed on the export abrams not having depleted uranium armor like the US ones.

[@aravindc102]

@@sengwesetogile6054 but with Russian equipment, it fails even when Russians were using it . It's not like that with US equipment

[@marcusott2973]

@@sengwesetogile6054 there's no uranium in any M1's armor, Chobham armor is a sandwich out of steel, ceramic and composite.

[@Mandrak789]

well there's a reason T-72s are dirt cheap

[@lordgrey3749]

No they are not

[@Mandrak789]

@@lordgrey3749 sure they are, 150-250k euros is peanuts for a main battle tank; ex-USSR countries including Russia may even give few dozens for free if you pay for refurbishment and transport.

[@lordgrey3749]

@@Mandrak789 no t72 cost 200k euro let alone 150k

[@TheIdiotPlays]

@@lordgrey3749 Even a civilian can buy them for that money. Although disabled (i dont remember if it is done before or after you receive the tank, depends on your countrys laws I quess.)

[@TheIdiotPlays]

Welp I've seen some for cheaper, but this one is in pristine condition. mortarinvestments.eu/catalog/onStock/like-new-t-72

[@mammothmk3355]

According to what I heard people talking, it is quite normal, *for a Western military to look down Asian one* , unless that Asian nation is aligned with Western interest. They think that there is no way Asian military and Asian produced weaponry is equal or superior compare to Western one. *Until the Imperial Japanese military and Chinese People Volunteer Army prove otherwise that yes, they can stand up against Western military.*

[@ianismusat9406]

Bro,do the TR-85 M1 next

[@Berbecu69]

You are from romania no?

[@Yuri_Bodlovic]

trash can

[@Jump-Shack]

They also have the TR 125 aswell

[@Yuri_Bodlovic]

@@Jump-Shack copy of t72?

[@Jump-Shack]

Yep

[@philippe8160]

Thank you for the research. In WW2 it happened that "inferior" tanks could take out a larger number of "superior" tanks. Simply by a tacticaly outmaneuvering of the enemy, superiour battlefield awarness by one side, Ambush, better crew, ..... The T72 was built as a easy to mass-produce cheap tank. It was not ment to be the best of the best of Soviet engineering .

[@shermanfirefly5410]

The best of the best at that era would be the T64s

[@philippe8160]

@@shermanfirefly5410 I think the T64 was ment as a high end tank for elite troops. The T72 was ment more like the T54/55 or T34. A simple easy to mass produce tank.

[@russkatherealoriginal6904]

Ironically, the T-72 became superior to the T-64 thanks to constant upgrades.

[@SteveSmith-wm4qy]

You often mention T-55 and Type 69 etc in your videos.. Could you make a video on these and the main variants which were the best and how they performed?

[@longyu9336]

Nice

[@hzc8942]

If we need entertaining i suggest do Type 59D1 (Chinese) vs Arjun

[@lolasdm6959]

T-34(Chinese variant) VS Arjun?

[@radjaaddakhiel2755]

@@lolasdm6959 sherman would be more apple to apple

[@SAUBER_KH7]

Wow, I'm early! Also, what did China do to make Russia angry, eh? Just Kidding.

[@Alamdar-]

Faqers

[@arbeiterz8491]

China didn't support Soviet sovereignty in East Europe and Warsaw Pact, meanwhile collaborated with France

[@werrkowalski2985]

Mao thought he was the ideological successor to Stalin.

[@tk9060]

Russia forgot that it was one of the Eight Nation Alliance countries that wanted to calve up China, and raped Northern China as well. But past is past and the current relationship is good

[@arbeiterz8491]

@@werrkowalski2985 In which case he is if you go ask the Polish

[@pabcu2507]

I sexually identify as a main battle tank

[@mr.waffentrager4400]

Me as tank destroyer...

[@davidegazzaniga7558]

I’m a 185mm demolition charge projector !

[@imwatchingthisvideo7023]

I am a strong independent black Abrams who don't need no infantry support.

[@kmagentbolo]

I’m a dying breed of medium tanks

[@unreal4273]

They call me Ballistic missile

[@Mite204]

I dont know , The looks of Kontakt-1 on the Tanks is just ... magnificent , love them ! (T-72AV/B T-80BV and T-64BV) :) Again perfect video , RedEdfect :)

[@RadecKZHF]

Can you either review the Al zarrar or the VT4?

[@zszs100]

VT4 and its associated series please!

[@istoppedcaring6209]

i would also like to note that the south sudenese are more tribal minded, meaning that there were a lot of rivalries within their ranks, which is pretty much why, with the common enemy (the arab northerners) out of the picture, they started infighting again, mostly over natural resources and government controll itself

[@treyebillups8602]

hell the entire reason they split off from sudan was because the sudanese government were arab muslims and south sudan was mostly nilotic and either christian or following traditional faiths

[@mhmdsuliman473]

@@treyebillups8602 Nope that’s the excuse for not Muslims..it’s always the natural resource and the western support that south to get the resources

[@peterwilson5528]

Hi, your videos are so well made and presented. Well done and keep up the great work :)

[@rootin222]

One thing you completely leave out is that the south Sudanese army bought A handful of early production model T 72s due to the fact that most of the army your ex rebels and have no training in armored warfare other than using highly mechanized technicals with ZPU guns. Also given the fact the Sudan has a long military relationship with the Chinese bus as a result many of the tankers have higher experience operating heavy armor compared to the south Sudanese who are mostly skilled and guerrilla warfare many of the south Sudanese soldiers were able to knock out Chinese made tanks through the same guerrilla tactics that help them defeat the Sudanese state during their 30 to 40 year guerrilla war

[@yuluoxianjun]

@B J wow,that is a win-win

[@upforgrab7688]

"1930's to 1990's" *gaijin be like* LETS ADD A 2010 TANK

[@ooz.8884]

hi Readeffect, would u like to make a episode about tank biathlon?

[@timothy1949]

yes thats wt i was asking too in the previous video

[@defencebangladesh4068]

yes

[@mottscottison6943]

They are actually the same generation of tanks. T-72 entered service in 1979, while Type-85 entered service in 1980. But you are right the one knocked out are not upgraded like the Chinese tanks.

[@matthiuskoenig3378]

what source did you use? NORINCO officially announced the orginal Type 85 in 1989 (claiming to have started its development in 1985), and the PLA claimed to have trialed the vehicles later that year. the Type 85-IIM supposedly came into service in 1991 (and was announced in 1992) so yeah the Type-85-IIM is more than a decade older than the T-72A perhaps you were confused, the Type 80 is supposed to have entered service in 1981.

[@Kalashnikov413]

and also, wtf? T-72 entered service in 1979?

[@mottscottison6943]

@@Kalashnikov413 T-72A. T72B is 1985.

[@Kalashnikov413]

@@mottscottison6943 should've said the model from the fucking beginning

[@tomk3732]

Long time ago, in the 2nd Polish Republic a single 20mm heavy MG (auto canon) armed TKS flanked by two MG armed TKS faced a platoon of invading Panzer IIIs. Within 30min 3 panzers were burning and a German prince was dead. RedEffect immediately concluded TKS is superior to Panzer III.

[@LegaRoSS]

>Ukrainian standards >Ukrainian army which was surrounded 7 times during active war phase in Donbass

[@tusk9132]

It happened twice and they got surrounded by the Russian army which invaded Ukraine from Russian territory. I am not Ukrainian tho, but I always stand with the truth.

[@JASHVEER22]

Ultimately ukraine belarus and kazakstan will return to Russia.

[@tusk9132]

@@JASHVEER22 learn some basic history and you will know that these countries were never Russia.

[@kastelukannumollom5289]

@@tusk9132 Russian empire???

[@tusk9132]

@@kastelukannumollom5289 so they were part of the empire but that doesn't make them russian. By your name I suppose that you're from Finland, which used to be a part of the empire, does that make you russian now? :)

[@jackyzou630]

Just saying, the map of USSR you used around 2:18 is a pre-WW2 map of USSR, where you can see that the Western part of Belarus and Ukraine was still under Polish administration.

[@yagdtigercommander]

Honestly China and Russia both had tanks that would have been considered crap to more modern tanks. But the thing is China and Russia could both be considered military powerhouses even rivaling Nato and western nations even when in periods of unrest and economic struggle. And I think we often for get that tanks are in a constant arms race. Sure Russia had better tanks at one point than China but then China had better tanks than Russia especially during the fall the soviet union and Russia was left to pick up the pieces and try survive on. I mean I read that the first T90 model was meant to be a short term design to maintain its tank fleets post soviet union and it was a means to flatten the unemployment curve that affected 2 major cities vital to the Russian Economy. which was an interesting way to slow or stop a bleeding economy and a feet in itself when considering the state a post USSR Russia was in. Which can explain for why initial models looked very similar to T72 B and B3 models. While china was able to have an economic boom allowing for the government and the military to experiment and come up with new tank designs over time. But yes the Type 85 II m is not to Abrams standards even though the turret looks similar kind of the type 96 models and 99s turrets look closer to the Abrams style turret. But the Type 85 II m and Type 96 are decent designs that are more than a match for any earlier T72 models and would slaughter tanks older than the T72. T55s , M60 pattons and leopard 1 tanks would be easy prey even for these second gen Chinese mbts. Even the Type 90 II can still be a pretty nasty tank for tanks of its generation or older and same with Chinese MBT 3000 or VT 4 exports. However most of these would struggle with 3rd and 4th gen mbts. The t14 armata is considered a 5 th gen but its in too small of numbers to really know how much of a top tier powerhouse mbt threat it could be on the battle field. And China now has the newer Type 99A which would be on par with most current gen tanks or at least a lot of them. I just think that China and Russia are going have a very small fleet of current gen tanks that will be at least competitive in the top tier mbt throw downs that could happen at some point without factoring in external elements and support for the tanks on the battlefields. However the bulk of their tank forces will probably be heavily modernized 2 gen and early 3rd gen mbts . And since Russia is relying still on the meh T72B3 and T72B3 2016 for a lot of its bulk tank forces along with some probably decent T80 BVMs and pretty good T90a models at least. They still would be at a disadvantage to china since I don't know how big the Russian T90A fleet is and well T80 BVs aren't at as good as T80U models even if they are upgraded to a modern standard. And I just think China just has more solid tank designs even for second line bulk forces that will most likely use T 90 IIs and various Type 96 mbt models and maybe even some MBT3000s/ VT4s depending if they produced them in sufficient numbers to be worth it. But that is just my opinion I do think China has improved its tank designs drastically over time and same with Russia but I do think China has learned a lot from Russian tank designs and built their own very capable designs from those foundations and continued to improve upon them. Which in fact made for pretty robust designs that were often superior and could out fight their Russian Counterparts. And I think they have even bested Russia several times during its hosted TankBialithion events over the years. But again just giving my opinion and that if I made some factual mistakes to then correct me lol. Personally I think tanks are cool and they have own design doctrines that they can use effectively in situations that they excel at. like Red Effect said both Russian and Chinese tanks are good in their own ways and when the crew is trained properly the tank can be used to its full potential because the crews have learned what their tank does well and what doesn't do well in battlefield environments.

[@typingthis30]

This armchair general analysis is mostly speculation.

[@BigSmartArmed]

"'their crew was trained up to ukrainian standards" - well there's your problem

[@stc2828]

Type96 = M1A1 at gulf war sounds reasonable, considering Type 96 went into service many years after the gulf war.

[@little_lord_tam]

In training we shoot our old Leopard ones. They still use tanks from that age. Wow

[@mangoknight5035]

Give us the Old Leopard 1s , dont shoot them 😪😪

[@docrex1678]

All tanks are 'obsolete' and 'wurst' tanks in the 'wurrld'. Still waiting for Red Effects' best tank in the wurrld prototype to be rolled out!

[@babani8418]

There's rekt T62 in Beijing military museum which china capture in a border dispute, along with the shot down U2 recon plane reckt from the US in Serbia

[@babani8418]

@098765 Craper maybe, it should be shot down during kosov war in the 90s

[@tonger7018]

3:51 you can see a dent on the right (our left) side turret cheek

[@sincereeastman6972]

I use this as an example when I argue if the “T-72 is better than the Type 85-II\Type 96” Argument China had the better tank

[@divinesan7786]

Consider Type 96 is older than T-72A but B model might not be so easy. In short, the model types.

[@DeathsDynamic]

imagine another war happens between these two countries but they both got newer tanks VT-4 chinese tank for sudan and T80 for south sudan

[@sharequsman596]

The vt2 is more advance then the base t80.Maybe a newer variant or the t90 would be a more fair comparison

[@elexanderbauson]

When you are at tier 8 but you went to a battle with tier 9's and 10's

[@mr.waffentrager4400]

Second ... because red effect first .

[@gottmituns9652]

Shit u got a point

[@GK11415]

Excellent video, great information, thanks for your time and work

[@user-mt8rr3jk6q]

To judge the T-72 tanks in the context of the war in Iraq in 1991, at least, is incorrect. American troops then had a General organizational superiority over the Iraqi ones. There was superiority in intelligence systems, communications, and command and control. There was a clear superiority in aviation and precision weapons. If Iraq had Leopard-2 or Leclerc tanks, it would not change anything at all - if an army unit cannot receive data from intelligence or an order from the command, it is not combat-ready. It is also worth saying that most of the T-72 tanks were then destroyed by the retreating Iraqis themselves, after they ran out of fuel. A number of T-72s were then destroyed by aircraft. Relatively few T-72 tanks were destroyed directly from the fire of american armored vehicles. Also, a few of Abrams tanks were then destroyed by T-72 fire. By the way, the chinese type 85/Type 96 tanks are based on the T-72. Of course, they can not be called copies, but they use V-shaped engines, in many ways similar to the russian V-46, V-84 or V-92S2F, and have an electric autoloader for 22 shots, similar to that on the T-72. Modern modifications of the Type-96B and T-72B3 have a similar passive armor protection, similar ERA principle and a similar sighting system in its functionality. In general, they can be considered approximately equivalent machines. But the T-72B3 has a more powerful 1130-horsepower engine and an automatic target tracking system. In the late 80's, the USSR created its own thermal imaging sights "Agava". They were installed on part of the T-80U and T-90 tanks. And recently, at the Zenit optical plant, a thermal imager ТПК-К was presented with a thermal imaging matrix of the 3rd generation ФЭМ18М, superior to the French one.

[@tzeentchnianexaltedsorcero2041]

Not to mention that Iraqi t-72s are export versions, thus significantly weaker than the t-72b that the Soviets were using.

[@user-mt8rr3jk6q]

@@tzeentchnianexaltedsorcero2041, Absolutely correct. In addition, more secure T-72B with the "Kontakt-5" ERA were already developed at that time. And only the T-90 that appeared had a similar armor protection, and a fairly modern 1A45 sighting system with an "Agava" thermal imager and a "Shtora" optical jamming system. The T-80U, in terms of armor protection and firepower, is quite comparable to the T-90. At that time, Soviet tanks already had feathered armor-piercing and sub-caliber shells 3BM42 with a penetration of 500 mm and 3BM32 with a penetration of 560 mm. This was quite enough to hit modern armored vehicles at that time. And the 9M119M "Invar" missiles had a penetration of 700 mm and could attack the enemy at a distance of up to 5 km. They could be used T-72B, T-80U and T-90.

[@tzeentchnianexaltedsorcero2041]

@@user-mt8rr3jk6q Moreover, when the collapse happened, the USSR is working on its new generation MBT, things like object 187, t-95 black eagle. T-90 is just cheaper and less advanced alternative compared to what could have be.

[@news_internationale2035]

Iraq lacked motivation. Kuwait did alright with their Yugoslav T-72 variants.

[@user-mt8rr3jk6q]

​@@tzeentchnianexaltedsorcero2041, If the USSR had survived, by 2000 it would have been armed with much more advanced equipment than Object 187 or the "Black Eagle". What was the Object 187? It was a classic tank layout, similar to the T-72. But unlike it, it had a more advanced booking scheme for the forehead of the hull. The tower was welded, similar to the one that was later put on the T-90A and T-90S. But the increased mass of the Object 187, led to the need to install a more powerful engine. To remove from production the T-72, which still had considerable potential for modernization, only for the sake of increased hull armor of Object 187, was considered irrational. The new tank required a new engine, which was not yet mastered in the industry. As a result, Object 187 remained an experimental machine. Preference was given to continuing to improve the T-72. So the T-90 appeared. topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2019-03/1551445870_187-2.jpg But the development of the ideas laid down in Object 187 was continued. So there was Object 195 (T-95)-the predecessor of the modern T-14. Having, similar to Object 187, an X-shaped 16-cylinder engine, with a capacity of 1500 HP. and similar in its scheme to the passive booking of the forehead of the hull, it had an uninhabited tower with a 152-mm 2a83 gun. A projectile called "Grifel" fired from this gun could penetrate more than a meter of armor! In addition to powerful passive armor, protection was provided by the Shtandart active protection system, which can shoot down not only missiles, but also kinetic ammunition. The aim of the gun was carried out by a radio target system, as on a fighter. The tankman only had to press the button to hit the target. shots. Being in an armored capsule, the crew of 3 people was completely separated from the ammunition and had unprecedented protection and comfort. The events of the 90s delayed its development, but by 2010 the tank was ready. ic.pics.livejournal.com/bmpd/38024980/6039392/6039392_original.jpg?from=ic.pics.livejournal.com/bmpd/38024980/6039392/6039392_original.jpg But then it was decided to redo it somewhat. After all, the tanks that the T-95 was created to fight did not appear. The 152-mm 2A83 gun was replaced by the 125-mm 2A82, which had a slightly smaller penetration (900 mm), but allowed the use of not only new ammunition, but also available in arsenals. Also, the size of the ammunition carried increased. The complex of active protection has been improved and became known as "Afghanit". The radio target system was removed, and the electronics began to use a more modern element base. So the T-14 appeared. It was ready by 2015, and was subsequently refined and tested in the military. Soon, it will be officially adopted. militaryarms.ru/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/t-14-armata.jpg Speaking of the "Black Eagle", it is worth saying that this is not a T-95. This is an experimental tank based on the T-80. It had a new turret with modular armor protection "Cactus", which is a "symbiosis" of passive multi-layer armor and ERA. The tank had a new autoloader, similar to the Leclerc tank, installed in the aft part of the tower. Undercarriage, for better distribution of the increased mass, 7 rollers were made on one side, instead of 6, as on the T-80. avatars.mds.yandex.net/get-zen_doc/1687249/pub_5e8c5f68a88a202bafefc340_5e8c61d641638c101f61e391/scale_1200 Of course, it was quite possible to create a tank with modular armor not only on the tower, but also on the hull. As well as the installation of a 152-mm gun. Moreover, there were experimental versions of the T-80 tank with a 152-mm gun. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52/Объект_292_-_Kubinka_Tank_Museum_%2837944777522%29.jpg There were even projects to modernize Russian tanks, using the technological reserve from the "Black Eagle". But the placement of ammunition in the aft part of the tower was considered unsuccessful and even dangerous, which is now confirmed by the fighting in the middle East. This is what the upgraded T-90A might look like. alternathistory.com/files/users/user459/-90М_4.jpg In any case, the Object 195 was a next-generation machine and was much more promising. And the developer of the T-80, the Leningrad Kirov Plant, then worked on a much more advanced Object 299, the degree of automation of which was such that the crew consisted of only 2 people! It even looks like it came out of a fantastic comic book! topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2014-11/1416798715_tpp-01.jpg

[@enter_username1312]

Hey Redeffect, can you make a video about the type 99 and type 99a?

[@kevinkuang2292]

he made one already about....... a year ago?

[@enter_username1312]

@@kevinkuang2292 He did but it wasn't in great detail, it was only a little bit about every chinese tank

[@zszs100]

@@enter_username1312 He said a lot of information is classified and not available. Since its their latest tank a lot of information is not released.

[@zszs100]

@098765 Craper Yup.

[@enter_username1312]

Dang that's unfortunate

[@ualuuanie]

Hiya with mounting tension between India and China is it possible for you to make a vid comparing both their MBTs? I heard that some of their tanks cannot be used if war were to break out due to the terrain and height. Thanks

[@shermanfirefly5410]

I think that's why they built type15 LOL

[@user-lr9vz1wq4r]

Thank you very much for the video, I've always wanted to know something about tanks on both sides of Sudan's civil war.

[@JustPeasant]

But, then again, T-72 was back then, and still is (T-72B3M, mod. 2016) a quantity over quality tank. Edit: After all, Soviets/Russians never produced a thermal imager. Not until Thales produced and sold licence for their Catherine FC 2nd gen thermal imager. Electronics and semi-conductors were always a sore spot for the Soviets/Russians. Something they cannot catch up with the west, or even PRC.

[@PugilistCactus]

Not all T-72's are like this however this is why the A model is one of the most common out there for this reason.

[@JustPeasant]

@@PugilistCactus true. But again, the Russians have half-assed their T-72 modernization (T-72B3M, model 2016).

[@user-mt8rr3jk6q]

In the late 80's, the USSR created its own thermal imaging sights "Agava". They were installed on part of the t-80U and T-90 tanks. And recently, at the Zenit optical plant, a thermal imager ТПК-К was presented with a thermal imaging matrix of the 3rd generation ФЭМ18М, superior to the French one.

[@REgamesplayer]

That is very technical analysis. War is a lot more complex than comparing which vehicle is better in a vacuum. Neither those capabilities which you had mentioned are of any use. Thermal imaging, fire control systems. These things are useless outside of specific types of engagements. What matters is how you employ said tank. In war, there were many aces who had performed far better than your average commander. Yet, we do not value performance of a vehicle based on performance of a commander. Nor we consider a Sherman tank to be superior machine just because it decimated German armor during one several battles during WW2.

[@ke._njil.o.h2458]

Can you compare Russian mbt to Chinese mbt Ztz99a vs t14 armata

[@stilpa1]

LOL, even T-72B3 is better than that

[@ke._njil.o.h2458]

@@stilpa1 WTF man have your brain haywire or....?

[@tk9060]

@@stilpa1 that was type 96 vs t72b3

[@Get5ome]

It’s not surprise at all. Basically T-72AB it’s just T-72 with K1 era. Type 85 more comparable to T-72Б or more modern versions

[@emperorofmankind2475]

People : "copied?" Matsy : "well no, but actually yes"

[@felipescheuerman614]

Isnt funny that T64's and T-80's already had the "lead" in fire support while T-72's didnt?

[@beishui4480]

Stalinium vs maolinium

[@metalmadsen]

Never heard of this before. Thanks for the video 🙏

[@zhuravl-m2285]

The Type 85-IIM lost by Sudanese army was against rebel forces, not South Sudanese army. The tank was definitely hit (you can see the burn marks) but it was not destroyed. Other images that were shown of it had the turret in different positions, different photos show the tank in two different locations (this latter point is debatable). Nonetheless, it is easy to conclude that the tank remained mostly operable, and the most significant damage that was visible was to the gun (had a hole in it). It is possible that the rebel forces who captured the tank purposely drilled the hole in order to prevent the tank from being used by Sudanese army forces, if the Sudanese army were to recapture the tank. At the very least, they would have to replace the gun, which would at least temporarily put the tank out of action. It should be mentioned that the rebel forces had very few tanks of their own (and if they had them, they were most probably T-55s or Type 59s) and that they had no access to better ATGMs than what South Sudanese forces used in 2012.

[@sxs5762]

can you make a video on the Type-15 light tank?

[@oscarl2334]

已经出了

[@taysondynastyemperor5124]

It’s funny to see the comments complaining about Ukrainian training now, lol.

[@benneron8403]

You're like the Mark Felton of tanks

[@oxdorf]

This is "funny" conflict to be forgot from the common people....

[@hugomixmax1]

T-72 in Ukraine is very bad, is the same as the Irakis T-72 during the gulf war, to be more precise would be the T-72B3 and the Type 85 only that is fair to compare, not some "new" agains some recyle tank

[@vulgar_potato4992]

The T-72b3 would date much better due to the upgraded everything it has

[@hugomixmax1]

@@vulgar_potato4992 I am sure of that, iraki t-72 coming from Poland some of them, they were just butter armour, soft, easy to kill, those T-72 from Sudan... the same

[@maxkronader5225]

It shows the effects of a generational difference. It's not really Chinese tanks vs Russian tanks, so much as it's more advanced tanks vs less advanced tanks. If it had been Leopard IIs, Challengers, LeClercs, or even current Russian tanks against older T-72s, the outcome would have been the same. If you can see and shoot the other tank in conditions where the other tank can't see and shoot you, you win.

[@rolliedyer458]

Hey redeffect can you do a video about the Australian Abrams thanks and show how obsolete they are

[@zmogustapke1753]

You clickbaited me man, was waiting for the engagement...

[@battlecomputer]

The Chinese tanks were type 96 version and not type 85 tanks.

[@saika4043]

we are already in year 2016 with vehicles in WarThunder ' - '

[@aceofhearts573]

Great video I never knew the t72 went against chinese tanks.

[@jasonz7788]

Thanks

[@konakona420]

or maybe one sides crew was just better? a bunch of fancy tech doesnt really mean much when the crew cant use the shit.

[@Raptor-yl6kh]

fun fact: the T55s that iranian had in iran-iraq war actually were iraqi's T55s that were captured by iranians.

[@zhuravl-m2285]

Ye. Most of those 'T-55's are probably Chinese Type 59s, and China only sold 300 of such tanks to Iran (as opposed to 1000 Type 59s and 1500 Type 69s sold to Iraq).

[@SiameseTankist]

We also have a lot of ukrainian and chinese tanks in thailand

[@scottyfox6376]

Ammunition budgetary expenditure is a critical factor with Mbts I feel. If you go cheap & buy older munitions then you have handicapped your offensive performances.

[@rubenr.g9963]

early question: where's RedEffect from?

[@radonsider9692]

Serbia or Slovenia i think

[@karldergrosse-333]

I believe he is Serbian.

[@randomthot125]

@Arpan Abinaswar I thought he's from the holy roman empire.

[@arbeiterz8491]

@Arpan Abinaswar It's a fact that modern Chinese tanks are designed to meet higher standards than their Russian counterparts, so it's no surprising to lean towards Chinese tanks.

[@arbeiterz8491]

@Arpan Abinaswar Youve just made so many mistakes in ur statement

[@feliscatus5161]

How tf do you manage to lose a tank? "Oopsies i forgot where I put it"

[@agentwhite1]

hey, ive finally found ur channel again

[@FoxElliott]

After seeing how badly even the T90M's have been getting folded in Ukraine even when matched against non-Nato supplied weapons, it's entirely possible that Chinese tanks aren't just evenly matched against modern Russian vehicles, but even likely superior to them. Though, it's yet to be seen in combat.

[@mbtenjoyer9487]

Only like what 1 t-90m destroyed? And it was by the Russian to avoid it being captured

[@terozontondu]

​@@mbtenjoyer9487 lol stop watching Russia today

[@mbtenjoyer9487]

@@terozontondu ??

[@alifchowdhury2937]

Hello red effect. Please make a video on Bangladesh military MBT2000, type59 DURJOY, and type 69s. You have a large number of viewers from Bangladesh and we would love you to make a video on our tanks. Thank you :)

[@rocky9609]

no one cares

[@maxkronader5225]

It seems that Russia/USSR had a long history of emphasizing armor and powerful main guns over advanced fire control systems. Perhaps they were not up to the technology, or perhaps it would simply have been unaffordable to include cutting edge fire control systems in their vast fleets of tanks. But even so, 1st gen night vision with infra red searchlights in 1979? Come on! That tech was 25-30 years old in 1979. I notice that more recent Russian tanks include good fire control systems.

[@puffypegion7815]

This is like putting a grandma against a young boxer, of course a modern Chinese tank would defeat an older t-72 variant. However I would like to see a t-14 go against a type 99

[@Bottleman1999]

T-14 would defeat most modern tanks and that would include Chinese type 99

[@puffypegion7815]

Bottleman yeah it such a nice tank, I’m hoping they make a variant someday with the 152mm gun along with the 30mm auto cannon for anti infantry

[@user-yt5xc2sn3d]

@@Bottleman1999 lol....Russia tanks is a joke, In tank competition they can't even complete the race without missing all the shooting target. German's Nazi said they have better tanks too, until they get raped in Berlin during ww2

[@Bottleman1999]

@@user-yt5xc2sn3d 你是在装傻吗？Tank competition is a meme and Type96 performed better at target shooting only, that's expected because type96 had a better and a more modern fire control system. Germany in ww2 did have better tanks (notably tiger + panther) but they both suffered from logistic and maintainance problems + Russians were pumping out T34 so fast they could easily replace their losses. 智商丢人

[@puffypegion7815]

Bottleman another thing to add is that T-14 has good fire control system (3 gen thermal) which makes it significantly better than old Soviet tanks. But even then old Soviet tanks where hella good, the problem is that most of the battles we seen with them, the user was using shitty versions of old export models

[@alepepe5714]

Mmm I have a theory..... T72 Had no anti armour ammo.... The damage on those T55 appears to be other ammo, the Chinese tank has it and thats what you see there.

[@2waterbottles227]

I'm pretty sure even 125mm HE can be very effective against armor targets. There's at least one T64 was knocked out by 125mm HE in Ukraine.

[@news_internationale2035]

@@2waterbottles227 I think it was this video the presenter was saying one of the sides was having sucess using artillery for direct fire against tanks. kzbin.info/www/bejne/Z2WvfqB4qKmqY8k

[@2waterbottles227]

@@news_internationale2035 Yes, artillery can hurt tanks a lot. US did an experiment in 1988, 2600 155mm HE rounds fired (not direct fire) and destroyed 50% of the targets. A direct hit will destroy a tank without a doubt. If I remembered correctly, a 155mm HE may disable a tank 10 meters away (6.8kg explosive, but nowadays 155mm HE may have ~9kg explosive fill).

[@alepepe5714]

I agree with you, What I wanted to say Is that when you confront two tanks and one has regular ammo or artillery ammo and the other has armed piercing ammo the second wins. I think that was what happened.

[@callumbush1]

When your tanks are bought from Wish!

[@hasselnttper3730]

What I learnt from Arma 3 using RHS: The fire control system is paramount! Thermal sights make you a God on the battlefield, especially if your enemy doesn't have it. You'll see the enemy before they can even assume you're there. But this is useless if your gun and ammo can't penetrate the enemy. Turret traverse speed is also very important if the difference is large and you're engaging several targets. Reload time is also important if engaging several targets. In case you do get spotted first, you'll also want good armor.

[@cyclonebuzz8172]

In the gulf war Bradleys did the majority of the tank kills using tow missiles. So it would be more like the Chinese tank is as good as a bradley fighting vehicle.

[@mwtrolle]

it was not even T-72B3's so not really an interesting comparison.

[@fulcrum2951]

Essentially, he who sees the other and shoot first wins

[@yuluoxianjun]

Most time

[@MrNebelschatten]

The First time Red Effect saw the fire control system as a factor. That fire control system is the factor that makes Nato standard tanks with their crews dominate on modern battlefields against their counterparts.

[@JaM-R2TR4]

Any tank can be destroyed in ambuch... side armor is not strong enough to survive hits from KE penetrators... especially the side hull... Whooever shoots first, wins..

[@yunshugao664]

Chinese tanks older than type 96 are just modified Russian tanks though newer Chinese tanks started deviating from Russian design and leaning more towards western design. Latest Chinese tanks generally have more advanced weapons systems and electronics than their Russian counterpart

[@TheGranicd]

How about tactics? Or who saw who first?

[@Al-ng2wn]

They forgot to install a good gaming chair and word.exe.

[@xky8124]

lofl, remeber the indian team

[@luciankristov6436]

I wonder how a t90 proryv would do against the type 96 B

[@jackyzou630]

In frontal engagements it would 100% win. T-90M is on par with Type 99As.