KMDB T-55-64

Am I alone in thinking it would be simpler to just buy the T-64 and get a better vehicle?
 
Foo Fighter said:
Am I alone in thinking it would be simpler to just buy the T-64 and get a better vehicle?
Click to expand...

I think the idea is to 'modernise' T-55 tanks with worn out engines and running gear, but where the turrets and guns are still usable, by replacing the complete hull, rather than the individual components.
Also, I think the intended customer base is users for whom the T-64 fire control system would be too 'high-tech' (autoloader, missiles, laser, etc.), as well as those who do not have access to the T-64's specialised ammunition.

cheers,
Robin.
 
Wouldn't it make more economic sense to mount the T-55's turret onto the cheaper and numerous T-72's hull?

It also wouldn't hurt to up-gun the T-55 turret with the 105mm L7 / M68 as was done by several countries such as China, India, Israel, and Slovenia with their T-54s / T-55s / Type 59s.

And if the T-55's and Type 59's turrets are similar, it may even be possible to squeeze a 120mm L/44 or L/48 smoothbore gun into the turret as was done with China's Type 59 Gai or BW120K.
oww0ps55bwk51.jpg

Source: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/503955-bw120k/
 
Andrei_bt said:
It was not easier to by T-64 as it will require – training of crews, new ammunition and a lot of other things. This was designed for Africa countries which don’t want a cant train for T-64B autoloader, FCS and so on.

http://btvt.info/7english/t-55-64.htm

Turrets from 64B were planned for remote controlled gun system coastal defense – http://btvt.info/7english/turret_module.htm

Hulls from T-55 – into IFV http://btvt.info/7english/afv55.htm
Click to expand...
Since the T-72 is abundant and cheaper compared to the T-64, wouldn't it make more sense to mount the T-55's turret onto the T-72's hull?
 
It's very likely an attempt to capitalize on the fact that Kharkiv had a large number of disused T-64 hulls that could be serviced and put to good use, possibly with Kharkiv's own T-55AGM package on top of that. The less work that Kharkiv has to do to make a tank, the better the result, as the manufacturing capacity of new AFVs of the KMDB is measured in the single digits per year (or less). It took the Thais something like 10 years to get their 48 T-84s, to the point that they just went ahead and bought VT4 tanks instead from Norinco, who delivered something like 50 in a year or two or so IIRC (on top of all the other orders of various models of tanks they make).

Because Kharkiv cannot make anything new in a very timely fashion, they rely on being able to take old turrets and put them on old hulls, call this an upgrade, and then no one buys it. That said, refurbishment is much easier than new construction, just ask the U.S. Army and KMW who are basically living off it. Also because the T-72 is a UVZ tank, not a KMDB tank, Kharkiv obviously cannot do anything with the T-72. You would need to ask Uralvagonzavod instead, and they seem more interested in begging people to pay for the Armata or at least buy T-90s. Because UVZ is still mostly functional as a tank manufactory, they have actually new vehicles to offer like the T-90M or T-14, instead of simple refurbishments of older vehicles (although they can do that too).

People who would want upgraded T-72s would probably look to foot the bill for a -B3 or something if they don't just buy Norinco tanks. OTOH KMDB is just suffering from compounded decades of neglect/lack of investment and weird things like this are an attempt to capitalize on what they have because they can't make anything anymore. I think the Thailand debacle send up a giant red flag to anyone looking to buy T-84s, and the Iraki BTR-4s had huge hull weld cracks, so both of these makes new revenue streams hard to find. Supposedly there is (or was) some big spat between Ukroboronprom and KMDB about this, with the former saying it's awful and still is a problem and the latter saying they fixed it, but who knows. Something something weld 10-15mm of armor plate over the crack it'll hold etc etc.

Even if KMDB has fixed up the quality of its products, it still has the problem of serial production to get over, which requires money for new staff and new machines, which is not easily found if people do not want to buy your products, for whatever reason. OTOH badge engineering a T-55AGM turret onto a T-64B hull, zero houring the hull and engine at the factory, and calling it good is a much safer option in general, as there are plenty of T-64 hulls and T-55 turrets to be found around KMDB perhaps even on the physical premises. It would likely be quite a decent vehicle, provided anyone was willing to buy it, too.

Unfortunately, no one seemed to want to buy T-55AGM, so I doubt people would pounce on the T-64-55, despite its high potential, probably because it isn't new. As capable as it is, a lot of countries that are poorer want the newest things, rather than making do with slightly improved but still effective old things.

tl;dr KMDB can't work on T-72 because it doesn't have the machines, plans, tooling, etc. that UVZ has. KMDB has tooling, plans, machinery, etc. for T-64 and T-55, so it makes this. This is unfortunate because, to be quite honest, a T-64-55AGM-type vehicle would probably have a very high combat potential if given applique armor similar to T-62M.
 
Last edited:
Could a similar T-55-64 conversion be done with the abundant and cheaper T-72? There are several nations such as India, Iran, Iraq, etc. which have both the T-55 and T-72 in their armies' inventories. Assuming that the KMDB T-64 and the UVZ T-72 share the same turret ring diameter (1934mm), it may be possible to mount the T-55's turret onto the T-72's hull.
 
Do you think, given current economic (let alone political) trends, that getting UVZ and KMDB to work together and share information about their vehicles is a viable prospect?

Iraq uses M1A1s and T-90s, not T-55s. Their stockpile of Type 59s and T-55s was divested courtesy the VII U.S. Corps and V U.S. Corps in two notable re-capitalizations. India is more interested in buying T-90MS and trying to make Arjun. Iran would rather build Zulfiqars. Anyone who is interested in potentially buying a upgrade to the T-55 or whatever is too busy buying far more modern vehicles from reputable manufacturers of America, Russia or China, or making their own things, to be bothered spending money upgrading old vehicles.

The last major order for highly upgraded T-62 from a notable manufacturer, that wasn't Russia, was Cuba from North Korea, that I'm aware of, which happened a few years ago. I don't think anyone has seriously looked at things like T-55AGM either. Aside from that, no I don't think there's any technical reasons that someone couldn't put a T-55 turret on a T-72, it would simply require there to be any incentive to do this. There isn't.

No one wants T-64-55 or any other combination of old tanks because they would prefer to buy M1A1s or T-90s. These probably cost about the same and are better tanks.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom