Ad Hoc AFVs

[Raellus]

Not sure where to put this, as it isn't really a gun truck, and I'm not sure it meets the rather broad definition of an AFV.

Behold, an "up-armored" AZ-452 ‘Bukhanka’ (‘bread loaf’) utility vehicle. It looks like sheet metal over some sort of foam.

I can imagine Soviet rear area security troops or marauders scooting around Poland in something like this.

[Bestbrian]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Not sure where to put this, as it isn't really a gun truck, and I'm not sure it meets the rather broad definition of an AFV.

Behold, an "up-armored" AZ-452 ‘Bukhanka’ (‘bread loaf’) utility vehicle. It looks like sheet metal over some sort of foam.

I can imagine Soviet rear area security troops or marauders scooting around Poland in something like this.

WTF?

[Tegyrius]

Well, now I know what a kei truck technical looks like.

- C.

[Raellus]

The Russians are sending turretless T-62s into battle as ad-hoc APCs.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=2acf61c31d63

They're also removing the crane and winch from T-54-based BTS-2 engineering vehicles in order to make room to carry troops.

The Russians still have the capability to mount turrets to these MBT hulls but, at least for some, they're choosing not to. Therefore, it stands to reason that, in the Twilight War, when industry is ravaged by nuclear war, it would be common practice to convert tanks with damaged turrets to APCs.

-

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Raellus

The Russians are sending turretless T-62s into battle as ad-hoc APCs.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=2acf61c31d63

They're also removing the crane and winch from T-54-based BTS-2 engineering vehicles in order to make room to carry troops.

The Russians still have the capability to mount turrets to these MBT hulls but, at least for some, they're choosing not to. Therefore, it stands to reason that, in the Twilight War, when industry is ravaged by nuclear war, it would be common practice to convert tanks with damaged turrets to APCs.

-

I speculated elsewhere that the guns may have been salvaged for use on vehicles that had shot out their gun barrels. The T-62 uses a 115mm gun that's an oddball caliber for Russia, so unlike a 125mm gun that can be fitted into a T-64, T-72, T-80, or T-90, a 115mm gun production line would be solely for a T-62. I don't think any such lines currently exist. They have a fairly short barrel life (~450 full charge equivalents), and if the optics and other electronics on a mothballed T-62 are the older obsolescent stuff, it may have made more sense to pull the guns to keep modernized tanks in the field and find a different use for the rest of the vehicle.

[Raellus]

In spite of shortages of MBTs at the front in Ukraine, the Russians reportedly have around 1,000 T-72s sitting in a long-term storage depot. While they continue to rust, the Russians have been refurbishing T-55 and T-62 tanks are sending them into battle. Why are the Russians prioritizing older models for refurbishment? It could be the T-72's auto-loader. Having sat outdoors for decades, they might be beyond repair- or it's cost-prohibitive to fix or replace them.

So are the Russians just going to sit on 1,000 MBTs? Recent reports point to a new heavy APC design based on the T-72 chassis.

https://www.armyrecognition.com/news...n-testing-area

In most T2k timelines, there's either no "Peace Dividend" draw-down, or it's greatly reduced in scope and scale. So, more T-72 would be kept in working condition. But still, as the war grinds on, it would be harder to repair or replace auto-loading equipment. In that case, it makes good sense to convert operational T-72 chasses into heavy APCs.

-

[Vespers War]

Originally Posted by Raellus

In spite of shortages of MBTs at the front in Ukraine, the Russians reportedly have around 1,000 T-72s sitting in a long-term storage depot. While they continue to rust, the Russians have been refurbishing T-55 and T-62 tanks are sending them into battle. Why are the Russians prioritizing older models for refurbishment? It could be the T-72's auto-loader. Having sat outdoors for decades, they might be beyond repair- or it's cost-prohibitive to fix or replace them.
-

Cannibalization in general could also be an issue. A mostly-good tank might be brought back into action quicker by taking a radio or engine parts or electronics from a not-quite-so-good tank, which then becomes a parts donor for other restorations and is still "in storage" but with fewer and fewer useful components beyond its hull. Less capable models might also have things like gun barrels salvaged for use on more capable models as their original gun's barrel life runs out.

In addition to the other reasons, factory capacity is likely a concern as well. The T-72 is refurbished at Nizhny Tagil (and the T-90 is manufactured there), the T-55 and T-62 at Chita, and the T-80 at Omsk. Bringing the older tanks back into action means using parallel production lines. If they focused entirely on refurbishing the T-72, that would mean taking resources away from T-90 production and reduce the total throughput of vehicles. Ideally they'd be able to work on the T-72 at multiple facilities, but as far as I'm aware they don't have the tooling for that.

[HaplessOperator]

Originally Posted by Raellus

In spite of shortages of MBTs at the front in Ukraine, the Russians reportedly have around 1,000 T-72s sitting in a long-term storage depot. While they continue to rust, the Russians have been refurbishing T-55 and T-62 tanks are sending them into battle. Why are the Russians prioritizing older models for refurbishment? It could be the T-72's auto-loader. Having sat outdoors for decades, they might be beyond repair- or it's cost-prohibitive to fix or replace them.

So are the Russians just going to sit on 1,000 MBTs? Recent reports point to a new heavy APC design based on the T-72 chassis.

https://www.armyrecognition.com/news...n-testing-area

In most T2k timelines, there's either no "Peace Dividend" draw-down, or it's greatly reduced in scope and scale. So, more T-72 would be kept in working condition. But still, as the war grinds on, it would be harder to repair or replace auto-loading equipment. In that case, it makes good sense to convert operational T-72 chasses into heavy APCs.

-

You touched on it there, but it should probably be remembered that Russian long-term storage is not the same as Sierra long-term storage, where the vehicles are sitting in an arid environment and not subject to multiple deep freezing cycles per year, alternately covered in snow and partially flooded, and without even occasional pulls for parts checks. Most of the strategic vehicle reserve of Russia is literally rotting and rusting where it sits in various depots.

That is, there's a good chance there's more than the autoloaders wrong with a lot of these vehicles.