Martin Trydell sent me some images in an EM that I wanted to bring to everyones attention. While doing my T-64/72/80 CDs I kept finding more and more loose ends that got me to thinking- Did the Czechs ever make T-72A tanks? Well, Martin just came up with the smoking gun so to speak!



And...



In the first shot you will notice the notch under the 902A Tucha launchers and the hard edge to the right, all T-72A identifiers. The second shot will show an interior view of the same tank which CLEARLY has Czech stenciling in plain view. There are a couple of other interior views and I will be sending a complete set to all that have bought Volume 2 as I feel this is quite interesting and others may well want them. It also looks like the Poles and Yugoslavs might have built some as well. On Volume 2 there are shots of M-84s built on T-72A turrets and the Poles using T-72As. The next question to be solved is- did they use the earlier 2A26 type main gun or a later (and possibly also shorter) 2A46? Mike Burns has gotten measurements from the T-72A at FT Hood and it comes out at 15 ft. What I am wondering is, could this be a Czech build and NOT a Soviet built example? Without being able to take a peek inside and check for stenciling to be sure, it's impossible to be say. It IS known that the Iraqis bought and used alot of Polish and Czech made T-72s and it is looking more likely that the T-72As seen in Iraq may not even be Soviet built as is so often assumed.As I have info from after Gulf 1 that gave a measurement of 16 ft and would like to confirm this as no books mention this at all.
If anyone has access to a T-72A in their area, please drop me a line as I would like to hear from you and help solve this barrel length issue once and for all.
Chris the cabbie

This is a sore spot with many dealing with the T-72...Did Tamiya Screw up, and what did the Iraqi's use? I am glad to see you will not let this rest, I look forward to the pictures.

I haven't had a chance to look through the second CD set yet...sewer issues! Soon enough.

Off Topic: How goes the T-54/55/62 work?

Jacques,
To answer your questions, yes the Tamiya kit is right and here's why. Tamiya measured a Czech or Polish built T-72M1 (the export designation ALSO used by the Soviets for their T-72A tanks!) and it has muddied up the waters and caused confusion ever since! The main difference is the turret between the two tanks as the Czech/Pole version never had the extra armor that the Soviet T-72A had. Tamiya is known to have done their measuring here in the US right after Gulf 1 but I don't know for sure which US base. What IS interesting is that the MB T-72 Battlegroup book by Stansell and Bishop did the same but they measured and photographed a T-72A!! This all gets back to the barrel issue, they measured the barrel and even gave sectional dimensions as well but came up with 16 ft! All measurments have been 15 ft for Czech/Pole/Yogoslav built as they were thought to have only paid for the licence for early T-72 production (i.e. 2A26 barrel) but may have gotten the turret design for the A model as well.
As for the Iraqi connection, it has come out that most of the T-72s bought by them are from Polish (maybe Czech as well) production and the A model rarely seem to be photoed burned out. OIF shots mostly show this version now though! The question I have had is "Do the foreign built T-72A models have the same armor fill on them though?". that is what I am NOT so sure of as well as the barrel issue. I am hoping that this post might get us all a little more info as I do not have access to a Soviet made T-72A locally. If someone does and can see the interior than we may get some resolution on this issue. As for the sewer problems, so sorry as the smell of pooh is not so cool! I think you will go nuts over Volume 2 as the feedback is extremely positive- there are usually explicatives involved!
Sincerely,
Chris the cabbie

P.S. How much longer for the T-80 hull do you think or has Serge said anything else??The T-44/54/55/59/62/69 CD project is coming along nicely at 2GB so far. If I can keep it under 5GB I'll be happy as I will proboably do this one on a DVD but will need to purchase a DVD burning program to that end.

Sergej just sent off the first batch of them to me a few days ago...I am expecting the upper hull to be in by the 15th or so...? Fingers crossed that it is as good as he has said. I am optimistic anyhow, beats having to cut the crap out of the SKIF upper hull.

Yes, the T-72 argument is quite a conundrum. And the Warsaw Pact export tank manufacturing/marketing does not help one bit in this. When you find out that there are essentially 3 different T-72M1 with different specifications and then trying to apply it to model building...it is enough to drive anyone mad.

Off topic - No poo, thankfully, but having the sewer backup when the washing machine is draining takes the heart out of you. Especially when the "hobby room" is also in the basement. No damage, other than to my nerves!

Chris,

What are you using now burn your CD's with?


Scott

Mroskos oold programs with the PC purchase from him and its Roxio. I have had no problems with it and very few reject CDs so far. On the order of one or two per 100 pack, not bad really! Any suggestions on a DVD program would be appreciated. Did you get your Volume 2 set yet? I haven't heard from you I think on that.
Have a good weeken,
Chris the cabbie

You should be able to burn DVD's with the software you have, as long as you have DVD Burner drive...and if you don't they give you software with the drive when you do.

How does that stenciling prove this is a Czech made tank? Maybe I am misreading what you are saying and its just a question I am not trying to be rude. To me this shows that the tank could have had the interior relabeled by the Czechs after a refit and repaint? They could still have originally purchased it from the Russians couldn't they? (I have no idea if they bought any or built all theirs which is why I ask the question).

As you say they could have built them but I can't see how the photo proves it one way or the other.

Very interesting photo.

I currently have more than a few internal shots of Czech, Polish, Yugoslav, Indian, Iraqi T-72s and one thing I keep seeing is this- rarely are they re-stenciled. If it was a rebuilt then I might understand it but the T-72A would be the lowest time tanks they had and I still can't be sure that the T-72M4CZ isn't based on these as you can't tell due to the new armor suite. In the case of the interior shot, I didn't post ALL of them. They are pretty high-res and you can enlarge them enough to see that all items are in Czech and none appear to be in Russian. If it was a rebuild then there should be some parts that hadn't been replaced or relabelled somewhere. The funny thing is these parts haven't been repainted but appear to be original issue as most times touch ups are usually plain to see. Ask yourself this, you are a depot mechanic -are you going to replace something that isn't broke just to not have Cyrillic on it? No as you would get your butt chewed for wasting materials by your boss most likely. I am not saying that I know it all but I feel that this looks pretty solid and welcome input from everyone who has any info they'd like to share. It all goes to improving our knowledge base and is the real reason I'm stepping out on a limb here.
Reagrds,
Chris the cabbie

Like I said I was curious too because I know how often stuff can be repainted and the has to be relabeled but with the amount of photos you have then that is compelling evidence to support the theory. Interesting thread am enjoying the discussion. Shame we don't have better access to the people that built these things.

This would also imply that foreign users master the russian language. During the Cold War I'm sure Warsaw pact member states would learn their inhabitants russian in fe high school (like a lot of kids learn english nowadays). These days I'm not sure. Would foreign users actualy be able to read russian labels? Wouldn't these be adapted either by the rusians or some depot in the client state?
Compare this to fe car manufacturers that make cars with both left- and right hand drive, to suit different markets.

best regards,




Marc Brandes

During the Cold War, the USSR rarely if ever made any attempt to accommodate the client states they shipped weaponry to. In a perfect world everyone would give a damn about everyone else, and I think we all finally learned that wasn't so around the time we learned there was no Santa Claus! I remember reading for years about countries that bought Soviet issue weapons having to figure out the stenciling as no one else in the world uses their alphabet! Sometimes the Soviets didn't even send along a manual to help them figure it out! The same thing applies to Czech and Polish T-72s sold abroad and the only exception I can prove is in the case of East Germany as they did go to that extreme length of re-stenciling the inside of the vehicle. They are the only one though, could be that thorough German mind working overtime? LOL In the case of post-USSR Russia, it could well be they ARE making the attempt now but have little to prove they are. Different mindset between then and now needs to be borne in mind. Now they want to make some money, then they wanted to align client states with their ideology and thumb their noses at the US and NATO. My, how times change??
Regards,
Chris the cabbie

Never knew that,

I can just imagine, the instructor explaining to the gunner in training: to fire the main gun, just press the red button marked "Иеьд", next to the black handle marked "Чміусб"... Must have caused some confusion at the time.

best regards,




Marc Brandes

Chris,
What made you think that a Czech built T-72M1(equivalent to a T-72A) was a rare thing? From all that I've read they manufactured both the T-72M1 and T-72M, mainly for export.
Do you know of any surefire ways to differentiate an M1 from an A? My assumption was short of seeing stamped inspection data or data plates( both unlikely to be altered by the end user)
there is really no way to tell who built a particular vehicle.

Sean

I HAD said(on an earlier thread) is that the odd version of the Czech T-72 with the armor package of the Soviet T-72 (note no M) without the TPD-2-49 WAS the odd version. That turret front was virtually identical to the Ural prototype or the Modelpoint turret and IS the really odd one. What I have said on this thread is- that the pics above are of a T-72A built by the Czechs. The T-72M/M-1 (Czech production) is only a rough equivalent to the Soviet A model due to the armor differences and are not equal. To be fair, most of us will never get the chance to check the data plates on the real article due to the scarcity of T-72s in most countries- there isn't one in St Louis cause I checked!
If you look at the first picture above, you will notice the notch under the 902A Tucha launcher conduit and the HARD peaked edge to the right. All clearly indicative of an A model turret -NOT an M. Sean you have gotten both CDs from me and I thought you'd read the Word document article by now? I spelled this all out at that time and am repeating it now. On Volume 2 check the T-72A file and look at the Finnish overhead shots for a clearer view of why this turret type is very different from the standard T-72M turret as it is clear as day to see.
Sorry if I am coming off on the offensive as it isn't what I'm really doing, just pointing out the goof. I DO know that for many it IS hard to keep the versions straight as when you factor in foreign T-72 production it can get a little hairy! Nice find by the way on the BMR/SU-122-54 post above! Ever find some real good shots of the KPVT??
Regards,
Chris the cabbie

Chris,
haven't searched for any KVPT shots as I'm building the BMR mineclearer as shown in the photo I posted and not the assault gun. No vol. 2 CD set yet so I can't relate to the pics you're talking about. No ,it doesn't seen to me like you're coming off on the offensive, but whats the goof you're pointing out?

Sean

Chris,
not trying to give you a hard time , just trying to get a handle on the subject. I guess I need to be careful in my use of the A vs. M1 designations! Are you saying that you think the hard peaked edge is indicative of a soviet built vehicle? The -M1 at the VmmV in the photos I sent you has this edge as well and I'm fairly sure this is Czech or Polish built ( applique armor on upper glacis and from east german stock).

The Soviets made several versions of the T-72 and here is a rundown with pictures to help explain it for the turrets.

T-72
This model was the first and built with the TPD-2-49 sight and came in several versions, with gill armor, with metal/rubber skirts and the transition vehicle with a T-72A turret

This one is Czech and could be Soviet built



The strange lead in version to the T-72A- NOTE the TPD-2-49 sight??
The armor package may well be the same as the turret shape is T-72A all the way!



T-72M/M-1 (sometimes called the G) Czech/Polish built
This one was the license built tweener that had a different turret shape from anything the Soviets fielded.
Note the turret shapes and that it DOES NOT match that on the Soviet A model below!





T-72A/M-1 Soviet built
This one came in several flavors,
-with out the roof lead laminate
-with the above laminate
-with hull applique armor
-and without said armor
Therefore, you can't say that the bow armor is indicative of anything as it was a re-build item to defeat the M-111 APFSDS round the Israelis were using as the Soviets captured some in 1982 and tested them against T-72A and T-80B tanks at Kubinka.

Here are the pics and make note of the front shapes and peaks on the sides at the 3 and 9 positions as the G/M doesn't have these!











And here is the proof that the Poles fielded the T-72A!



Please let your new EM friend (Dir)know that his identifier of the mount points is a lame duck as I have quite a few images of T-72A tanks that have 2 mounts as well as 4 mounts. Therefore, no cigar as it can't be used.If he'd like to open a Network54 account, then ask him to post some images to back up his assertions as it would be appreciated! The turret shapes are plain to see here and the reason is that the Soviets added internal armor that increased protection levels over that the Czech and Poles were licensed to build at that time. The real question is about whether or not they DID build them. Here is a shot of the drivers station on the first vehicle I posted about.




After EM ing with Cookie it looks like this IS Soviet produced as evidenced by the 3X marking on the gear selecter.
To quote Cookie the 3X stands for "Zhadniy Khod" for reverse in Russian. It would therefore appear that this tank WAS built by the Russians and HEAVILY re-built at a later date guys. Hey a guy can hope for a new lead- right?
The strange thing is that the Yugoslavs built some of their M-84s on the T-72As gotten from Russia and some went to Kuwait during Gulf 1. Check your photos as it IS there to see. Volume 2 has several such shots and I was surprised no one noticed this one.
Hope this will help clear the air and confusion,
Chris the cabbie

UPDATE
After getting an EM from James Warford, I should have clarified that the above pictures were for seeing the differences of the turrets. NOT to indicate the armor fill differences as that would be a book unto itself! The Finns did get their T-72M-1 tanks from the Soviets BEFORE 1990 as I've had the Tank Special long before then and those are the only T-72s the Finns bought!
See you guys at AMPS,
Chris the cabbie

...First, hiya Dirk. Long time since we have conversed. Hope all is well. You have GOT to get a account and weigh in on this conversation.

Second, How absolutely sure are we that the single identifier being used, the 3X on the gear shift, is original to this vehicle and not a scavanged or replacement piece? Part of the problem of using only 1 piece of evidence, either way, is that there is the problem that these vehciles were used by crews AND repaired/rebuilt. So there is a chance of some mis-information...

As an example, are all the M1A2's shipped to Egypt and Saudi Arabia stenciled/printed in english in the interior? I would bet that even the locally built (from kits) tanks have a mixture, for ease of the crews, unless all crews have learned english? Might be true but it seems a tad bit like the tail waggin the dog...Hey, we don't want to restencile the tank. so everybody has to learn english. Then again, that does sound like military thinking...

T-72's are such a pain to ID...

I have no idea if anyone is still following this discussion, especially now the thread has moved to page three but I found something interesting today that might be an answer to Chris' post:

"After EM ing with Cookie it looks like this IS Soviet produced as evidenced by the 3X marking on the gear selecter. To quote Cookie the 3X stands for "Zhadniy Khod" for reverse in Russian. It would therefore appear that this tank WAS built by the Russians and HEAVILY re-built at a later date guys."

One of my contacts who has talked to a technical service officer of the former Yugoslavian JNA wrote me:

"What is most interesting is the fact that the servicing instructions on all tanks (including the Czechoslovakian ones) were in Russian, so an average tanker could not tell wheter the tank is a Soviet or a Czechoslovakian one." In the early 1980's, the JNA got 18 Soviet-build T-72M and 75 Czechoslovakian-made T-72M.

Dirk

Hello Sean,



I saw your question about the T-72A and –M1 on MissingLynx. For some odd reason I’m not able to create an account so this is why I’m mailing you directly (you can post my answer on ML if you want).



The tanks in Czech and Polish etc. service of course are not T-72A (as Cris the Cabie wrote) but are licence-build T-72M1’s. Indeed the T-72M1 is almost exactly the same as the Soviet T-72A (the 1979 model), albeit somewhat simplified. It also has the improved turret armour, so this is not a recognition feature. I noticed however that there is an easy to spot difference between the T-72A and the T-72M1. Whereas the former has 8 mounting points for the KMT mine clearing systems on the very front of the hull, the T-72M1 has only two (the same by the way goes for all the export models; the T-72B has 8 attachments, the T-72S only 4. The T-72M of course also has only 4). Also, late production T-72A’s (1983 model) have anti-radiation lining, a feature which is never present on the T-72M1.



Note that T-72A’s were initially not exported outside the Soviet Union, but in the 1990’s, some were sold to Bulgaria and Hungary (who also have the –M1 model). On the other hand, some Soviet units received the T-72M1 instead of the T-72A. So although the Tamiya model is of a T-72M1, you could make a Russian tank.



I hope this helps a little. If you have further questions, do not hesitate to contact me.



Best regards – Dir Caemerlynck (Belgium)

This time I won't go into all the different T-72 models. I think the most important issue for all those modellers is: what type is Tamiya's "T-72A" based on? I'm pretty sure I found the answer. The Tamiya model has some features that you do not find on a standard Russian T-72A, most importantly the flat-chested turret that is typical for the export version T-72M. On the other hand it has the additional 16mm glacis armour. Note that this steel plate has cut-outs around the towing hooks etc. and that there are two ribs in front of the driver's hatch: this is typical for the T-72M1. It also is missing the 4 central KMT mounts, a feature of all export versions.

So the Tamiya tank is a hybrid version: a T-72M turret on a T-72M1 hull. Did this version ever exist? Yes it did: in 1986 the East-German army received 23 Polish-build T-72M tanks with the additional glacis armour from the T-72M1. This type was known as "T-72M Übergangsversion" (intermediate version). After the brake-up of the DDR, many of these tanks were send to museums around the world. So while Tamiya didn't screw up, they managed to take measurements of a type of which only 23 ever existed (I have no proof that this type entered Polish service)! And so, OOTB you can only build an East-German tank.

I wanted to post a picture here of one of these East-German tanks, belonging to the Belgian Royal Army Museum but it didn't work so if someone would like to have it, send me a PM.

Dirk

Here it is:

What you just did was say the Tamiya kit is- is a Czech/Pole/Yugoslav built export tank. That's what I HAVE been saying for years now. What I feel you have confused is that the above mentioned group were making a T-72 variant that the Soviets NEVER produced and the only similarity is that they (the Soviets) used the same EXPORT DESIGNATION. That is not to assume that it is the same tank! A T-72A(M-1 for export) has a different turret casting (with completly different armor values) and little in common with the T-72M (again an M-1 export designator!) that the Czechs, Poles, and Yugoslavs (very briefly) produced. The Tamiya kit is buildable for those versions OOTB as well as for ones used outside the Warsaw Pact as most of their production went to those clients.The glacius armor was added by them as they weren't using the combination armor as the Soviets were. At times when the T-72A WAS exported by the Soviets (FINLAND) you will notice that those also have the glacius applique added. This is one area to modify when building the kit as it WILL define which user it is for! Examples of export users include Iraq, India, Libya, Malaysia (PT-91),Hungary, Albania. Not an all inclusive list but I'm sure you get the picture.The East Germans also apparently used the T-72A/M-1 - just look at the picture!







This one is the odd duck as it has applique but has all the mounting points! It was found in a file on East German armor but I can't ID it for sure. The applique could make it export but feel it maybe Soviet due to the odd set of markings.



To sum up Dirk, your point about the mounting points (as far as export goes!) is valid but may only confuse some modelers even more! The Tamiya kit is correct for a non-Soviet produced T-72M/M-1! If I HAD said T-72A/M-1 then I'd be wrong- but I didn't. That is why you need a replacement turret for a T-72A (Blast, JS Models) to go beyond that and do something other than WarPac or export users.
Hope this clarifys things for you,
Chris the cabbie

Hiya Cris,

We're almost on the same page but not not quite and I think there are two reasons:

1. You might still be using obsolete Western literature as reference. They reffer to the Soviet early T-72A as T-72M and the standard T-72A as T-72M1 and so forth. Very confusing, since the T-72M and the T-72M1 in reality are very different models. This is why you write things like: "A T-72A (M-1 for export) has a different turret casting (with completly different armor values) and little in common with the T-72M (again an M-1 export designator!) that the Czechs, Poles, and Yugoslavs (very briefly) produced." You keep comparing the T-72A with the T-72M, something I never did because they are two different tanks. And T-72M is not an export designator for the T-72M1! But, again, I think we're just on different pages. As a sidenote: the former Yugoslavia never produced the T-72M. They got a small number from the former Soviet Union and then build their own M84 model.

2. Judging by the B/W picture and your comment in your latest post, some of your images have the wrong capture (T-72M or -M1 instead of T-72A and vice versa). That "East German" tank is a Soviet T-72A during the Zapad-1981 war games (the East Germans got their similar T-72M1 only from 1987). No wonder that you are confused by my recognition features, when you have T-72A's labelled as T-72M1.

I will post some images of the different types I've identified later, with short descriptions. That should clear things up. But I will answer some of your questions first:

"What you just did was say the Tamiya kit is- is a Czech/Pole/Yugoslav built export tank. That's what I HAVE been saying for years now."

No, I said it's a Polish-build tank for East-Germany. A one-of-a-kind that was never produced by other countries. You are right about the export part though: you can't make a (Russian/Soviet/Ukrainian/...) T-72A.

"The Tamiya kit is buildable for those versions OOTB as well as for ones used outside the Warsaw Pact as most of their production went to those clients.The glacius armor was added by them as they weren't using the combination armor as the Soviets were."

Again no. Those other countries only had the T-72M and T-72M1, not the hybrid type that was specially made for East-Germany. The tanks with additional glacis armour are T-72M1's that also have the Dolly Parton turret, which is missing on the T-72M Uebergangsversion.

"At times when the T-72A WAS exported by the Soviets (FINLAND) you will notice that those also have the glacius applique added."

Finland got the T-72M1, not the T-72A. And since the T-72M1 also has the "glacius applique", I don't see the problem. Note that Finnish tanks have only 4 KMT mounts, cut-outs in the applique and only two ribs in front of the driver, something typical for the T-72M1.

"Examples of export users include Iraq, India, Libya, Malaysia (PT-91),Hungary, Albania. Not an all inclusive list but I'm sure you get the picture."

The PT-91 is a completely different tank (I will only talk about the T-72A/M/M1 series) and Albania never got the T-72. Their most modern tank is/was the Chinese Type 59.

"The East Germans also apparently used the T-72A/M-1 - just look at the picture!"

When you talk about your colour pictures: indeed that's an East-German T-72M1 (not an A model!). EGA got 136 of them from 1987.

"This one is the odd duck as it has applique but has all the mounting points! It was found in a file on East German armor but I can't ID it for sure. The applique could make it export but feel it maybe Soviet due to the odd set of markings."

As I wrote before, that's a Soviet standard T-72A (1979 model): it has three ribs for the driver, no cut-outs and the full set of KMT mounts. It's no odd duck since I have many pictures of this version.

"The Tamiya kit is correct for a non-Soviet produced T-72M/M-1!"

That's what I meant: you write T-72M/M1 whereas those are two very different models. And again: you can only build an East-German T-72M Uebergangsversion OOTB.

"That is why you need a replacement turret for a T-72A (Blast, JS Models) to go beyond that and do something other than WarPac or export users."

If you add a T-72A turret, then you would still have a T-72M1 hull so you still cannot make a real T-72A. But since the turret for the T-72M1 is the same as for the T-72A (model 1979 without anti-radiation lining), you could make a T-72M1.

To be continued

Dirk