Jump to content

Talk:T-84

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How many have been built?

[edit]

How many have been built? If anyone knows, please add it to the article (YoungRoger 00:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Category:Russian and Soviet tanks

[edit]

User:AKMask added category:Russian and Soviet tanks to this article, with the edit summary:

It's a development of a russian/soviet base, I believe the category helps with finding it. And the Ukraineian development is in the first sentence, so its not confusing

While I understand AKMask's justification for ease of finding Soviet-legacy AFVs, we haven't been using categories this way. If we did, for example, the following copies and derivatives of Soviet tanks would belong in this category or equivalent ones, and I don't think a single one is. Likewise, the Ukrainian BTR-94 also doesn't belong in category:Russian and Soviet armored personnel carriers. Categories are clearly used to group AFVs by country of origin or main country of employment (sometimes both).

To be clear: the original features distinguishing the T-84 model were developed in independent Ukraine after the Soviet Union no longer existed, during the process of delivering T-80UD tanks to Pakistan, in order to make production independent of supplies from the Russian Federation. The T-84 was first built in 1994. The original design was based on the earlier T-80UD, T-80, and T-64 tanks all designed and first built at the Malyshev Factory in Soviet Ukraine, although the current T-84 Oplot model is clearly not just an advanced T-80 but a fundamentally new tank. So, although the T-84 has a Soviet Ukrainian technical legacy, this model originates in independent Ukraine.

And Ukraine cannot be considered to have been part of Russia, at least since the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1917, so the T-84 is not by any stretch Russian.

I believe that that category:Russian and Soviet tanks should be split in two anyway, since there is no category for the Russian AFVs which are not Soviet ones, but the details of that are a separate question. —Michael Z. 2006-07-10 18:38 Z

Well, Im not going to edit war over this, but would you mind listing this on the Wikiproject Military History talk for some further input? I may very well just be crazy here, and will most graciously concede that if it seems correct as is to those guys, but I'd like some people familiar with military development to weigh in :) -Mask 04:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sure—it would be good to re-examine that category. I left a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Conflating Soviet/Russian in fighting vehicle categories. —Michael Z. 2006-07-11 19:29 Z
I don't really see a reason why this should be listed under Russian and Soviet tanks. The purpose of that category was to provide a means for people to be able to easily trace up/down categories and help link modern Russian vehicles to historical Soviet vehicles cleanly. Basically to help them conform with the way we do it for American or German vehicles, tracing back to one parent (Category:American tanks etc.). The parent isn't usually supposed to have any articles in it as it should go into one of the daughter categories for which major war-era's it was used in. Oberiko 21:02, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense. But how to satisfy AKMask's concerns? Category:Ukrainian armoured fighting vehicles does not belong under category:Russian and Soviet tanks. Perhaps there should be another sub-category category:Soviet-legacy armoured fighting vehicles, but this starts to get complicated. —Michael Z. 2006-07-11 21:14 Z
Also, perhaps category:Russian Empire armoured fighting vehicles should be split off on its own. It would only contain the Tsar Tank and Vezdekhod, which have little relationship to Soviet/CIS tank design and production. —Michael Z. 2006-07-11 21:19 Z

Allright, I'm now satisfied that this doesn't belong in the Soviet/Russian cat... but there should be some country-specific category for it... Just seems kind of lost in its current categories. -Mask 22:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And thats happened now. My concerns are addressed, thank you all :) -Mask 22:07, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Specs

[edit]

User:Deepak gupta added a {{fact}} template to the following statement, and questioned some of the specs in this article at user talk:Mzajac#T-90 and T-84:

Its high-performance engine makes it one of the fastest existing MBTs in the world, with a power-to-weight ratio of about 25 horsepower per tonne (19 kW/t).

I'll try to address the issue here.

The T-84 is based on the T-80UD, a high-performance diesel-engined version of the gas turbine-powered T-80U.

Top speed: various sources publish top speeds for the T-84 of "65–70 km/h", "70 km/h", and "85 km/h".[1] The manufacturer's site states 65-70 km/h and 26 hp/t for the latest in-service T-84 Oplot,[2] 65 km/h and 25 hp/t for the prototype T-84-120 Yatagan.[3] These may or may not be recommended maximum speeds: Vasiliy Fofanov's page states the T-80U's "Max Road Speed: 70 km/h (governed)",[4] so it's not unreasonable to assume that other CIS tanks have engine governors built in to keep the tank to a speed that's safe for control of the vehicle and/or prevents excessive wear or danger of catastrophic suspension breakage (the U.S. M1 is likewise governed).

Power-to-weight ratio: I can't find a definitive citation at the moment, but the whole idea of the T-80 was to have a very high-performance gas turbine engine, to increase mobility. Apparently it was successful, with the T-80U's 27 hp/t power-to-weight ratio, compared to the T-72's 18 to 20 hp/t, earning it the moniker flying tank. The gas turbine had all kinds of problems, most notably severe fuel consumption, which were seen as trade-offs for increased performance. The initial T-80 had an unprecedented 1,000 hp engine in a 46-tonne tank, the T-80U increased that to 1,250 hp. The Morozov Design Bureau in Ukraine created the more conventional 6TD 1,000 hp diesel engine for the T-80UD, and improved that to 1,250 in the T-84 tanks. By adopting the T-90, the Russians have abandoned further production of more gas turbines, but are catching up in diesel performance at ChTZ, replacing that tank's 840 hp diesel engine with a 1,000 hp engine in the T-90S, and apparently have demonstrated a 1,200 hp version.[5]

There are also other newer tanks with comparable power-to-weight ratios (Leclerc, Type 99), both in the 55-tonne range with 1,500 hp power plants, and the M1 Abrams is up there, although it weighs well over 60 tonnes with the full modular armour package installed.

Please note that such statistics published anywhere are probably quoted from manufacturer's marketing materials. —Michael Z. 2006-07-24 21:14 Z

modern tanks

[edit]

Who's messing with the modern tanks thing at the bottom, why rearrange it? And if you feel like you need to please label your catigories accordingly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Counterstrike69 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Development of the T-84-120

[edit]

There is blatantly contradictory and potentially incorrect information in the section titled Development of the T-84-120. The article claims that 120mm gun of T-84-120 can fire AT-11 Sniper missile designed for 125mm gun. The AT-11 Sniper article itself says the missile was designed for 125mm gun. Also, the source is very suspect and cites a user post on the War Thunder Forum — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baljeet931 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In service of the GAF

[edit]

Does anyone have infos about how many tanks the GAF wants to buy in total or if they plan to replace their whole amount of T-72s with T-84s ? There is no info at all about GAF wanting to buy T-84s, other than an allegation by Konovaliuk, which was dismissed by Minister of Industrial Policy. Ceriy (talk) 05:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


The story of Georgia aquiring T-84s is most likely nothing else but hoax - TheMightyGeneral (talk) 14:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oplot

[edit]

So, what does Oplot mean? A few sources state that it's Stronghold but I can't find anything definitive, and it doesn't seem that oplot translates solely and directly into stronghold. Official name, wan-fank, or what? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's official name. Oplot mean stronghold.--Юе Артеміс (talk) 06:19, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsrussia-t90s-battle-tank-peruvian-army
    Triggered by \barmy-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist
  • http://www.army-technology.com/projects/oplot-m-main-battle-tank-ukraine/
    Triggered by \barmy-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 12:51, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 19:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Service during the East-Ukranian conflict

[edit]

So far the only account claiming that the T-84 has seen service during the Ukrainian Crisis 2014- has been The Daily Beast. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/13/as-the-key-battle-looms-a-report-from-ukraine-s-front-lines.html) I find this controversial and propably its a misidentification. Most likely he has seen a T-64BV, which are seen in various footages from Mariupol, but a BM Bulat would be possible too.

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on T-84. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine de facto can not produce tanks

[edit]

10 tanks were delivered by beginning of 2016.[19][20]

For 5 years, all was done in less than 15. Order 49. Actually all T84 is cut from the corpses of T80, to build one of several pieces. And it confirms Google. http://vz.ru/world/2016/4/29/807986.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.162.80.47 (talk) 15:50, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

T-84 'Oplot' Autoloader

[edit]

Hey all, bit new to editing for wikipedia so I'm gonna leave this in talk for a bit but I wanted to make something clear. It's a misconception that the T-84 'Oplot' and its derivatives including the Oplot-M and Oplot-T feature a bustle mounted autoloader. The new Autoloader design was only ever present on the T-84-120 Yatagan prototype, as a ready rack separated from the crew via a blowout box was a requirement for NATO standardization, and this required a redesign of the autoloader. As for sourcing, there's an image on this website that clearly shows an Oplot-M turret with the conventional Carousel autoloader inherited from the T-80. (Use page translation here) http://btvt.info/1inservice/bm_oplot.htm http://btvt.info/1inservice/bm_oplot.files/mz2.JPG http://btvt.info/1inservice/bm_oplot.files/mz1.JPG. Furthermore, an official 3D rendering of the Oplot-M from UkroBoronProm shows a carousel autoloader during a transparent "look-through" of the tank (youtube link /zhPZOU_iS1E?t=63). Several official sources also claim a "ready rack" (read: how many rounds are stored in the autoloader) of 28 rounds of ammunition, identical to conventional T-80s. The Yatagan meanwhile only had a ready rack of 22. Given that that original claim in the article is unsourced, it seems clear to me that this was a case of misinformation, I believe it's a problem of miscommunication as the Oplot turret does feature a blowout ammo storage compartment in the turret bustle, in a similar concept to the T-90M, but this is not a change to the autoloader. http://btvt.info/1inservice/bm_oplot.files/image014.jpg http://btvt.info/1inservice/bm_oplot.files/bunker2.jpg BlowoutPanel (talk) 09:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:T-84&oldid=1258083349"