Who would it effect western tank design?
Now for those that don't know heres a thread that tanks about the T-74
But he TLDR is that the T-74 was one of the contestants for the replacement of the T-64 for th high end of the Soviet tank force. It was built very much like the T-14 armata vaper ware we see russia showing off to day. Unmanned 152mm turit, 2 person crew in the hull. Specifically designed to be less then 40 tons (less then the most modern verents of the T-64) and simpler to build and maintain as well (3,000 less parts to make!).
Now interestingly enuff the T-74 was actually in the lead during most procuring prosses, the T-80 was considered by Andrei Grechko (head of the red army) as a tank that couldn't do anything that a t-72 couldn't but with a fuel intensive engine, wille the T-74 had both better armor and a better gun. not that it was considered perfect, putting the crew in a box at the bottom of the tank wasn't a issue sense the Soviets considered any war to happen in a nuclear hell hole so nobody was going to have good vision, but they didn't like the idea of a tank with out a comander, leading to the tank being changed over the years into the object 477, also known in the west as FST-2 which the block III abrams was going to face.Unfortunately he died before the program was completed and his successeser decided to go with the T-80 design. Mostly because the lenengrad factory didn't have a tank in production wille the keyv factory (wich made the T-74) had the T-64 (indeed they were still producing them until like the 90s!) And the other one had the T-72. Theres also the fact that the us had gust made a terbine powered tank and this is the same leadership that made a copy of the shuttle despite not really understanding why we biult it the way we did.
Now what I'm curious about is what the west would do if Russia did choose the T-74 over the T-80. While the T-80 was really a small abrams and a increase in gun caliber from 105mm to 120mm was enough to handle the better armor, the T-74 is a very different beast. Not only dose it have a much more powerful gun (like how do you even fier that thing, they use it for artliarly for gods sake) but much better armor, enough that they can't be sure 120mm can handle it (at lest until they fight one anyway). Now the smart answer would really be the abrams block III but haveing already had to pull teeth inorder to get congress to pay for the abrams, I doubt congress is going to turn around for a basically brand new tank (name not withstanding). Plus what are Germany France and Britain going to do? Maby will finally get a euro tank (after all that program wasn't canceled until 82)?
Block III abrams
Now for those that don't know heres a thread that tanks about the T-74
But he TLDR is that the T-74 was one of the contestants for the replacement of the T-64 for th high end of the Soviet tank force. It was built very much like the T-14 armata vaper ware we see russia showing off to day. Unmanned 152mm turit, 2 person crew in the hull. Specifically designed to be less then 40 tons (less then the most modern verents of the T-64) and simpler to build and maintain as well (3,000 less parts to make!).
Now interestingly enuff the T-74 was actually in the lead during most procuring prosses, the T-80 was considered by Andrei Grechko (head of the red army) as a tank that couldn't do anything that a t-72 couldn't but with a fuel intensive engine, wille the T-74 had both better armor and a better gun. not that it was considered perfect, putting the crew in a box at the bottom of the tank wasn't a issue sense the Soviets considered any war to happen in a nuclear hell hole so nobody was going to have good vision, but they didn't like the idea of a tank with out a comander, leading to the tank being changed over the years into the object 477, also known in the west as FST-2 which the block III abrams was going to face.Unfortunately he died before the program was completed and his successeser decided to go with the T-80 design. Mostly because the lenengrad factory didn't have a tank in production wille the keyv factory (wich made the T-74) had the T-64 (indeed they were still producing them until like the 90s!) And the other one had the T-72. Theres also the fact that the us had gust made a terbine powered tank and this is the same leadership that made a copy of the shuttle despite not really understanding why we biult it the way we did.
Now what I'm curious about is what the west would do if Russia did choose the T-74 over the T-80. While the T-80 was really a small abrams and a increase in gun caliber from 105mm to 120mm was enough to handle the better armor, the T-74 is a very different beast. Not only dose it have a much more powerful gun (like how do you even fier that thing, they use it for artliarly for gods sake) but much better armor, enough that they can't be sure 120mm can handle it (at lest until they fight one anyway). Now the smart answer would really be the abrams block III but haveing already had to pull teeth inorder to get congress to pay for the abrams, I doubt congress is going to turn around for a basically brand new tank (name not withstanding). Plus what are Germany France and Britain going to do? Maby will finally get a euro tank (after all that program wasn't canceled until 82)?
Block III abrams
