Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Help needed: current use of T-34's

This is a discussion on Help needed: current use of T-34's within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by nikola_281 Hey Falstaff, the T-34's (as a combat unit) were used by the Yugoslav People's Army in ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old February 13th, 2009   #16
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
Falstaff's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Aachen, Germany
Posts: 524
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikola_281 View Post
Hey Falstaff,

the T-34's (as a combat unit) were used by the Yugoslav People's Army in 1991 for the siege of Dubrovnik. They were of a size of a tank platoon and they were coming from Podgorica (capital of Montenegro). Later on the T-34's were augmented by the T-55's (I can't remember from where those guys came).

While the T-34's were approaching Dubrovnik they were going in column as the configuration of terrain didn't allow them to spread out. Somewhere near Dubrovnik first tank was hit and the column was stuck there for some time (until they managed to pull out the crew and remove the tank from the road). That tank was most probably hit by an M80 "Zolja" (Yugoslav made 64 mm RPG which is similar to the Soviet RPG-18). All of the crew were injured.

Regards
Nikola,

thank you,
that's exactly the kind of stuff I'm looking for. Do you know if there are any available reports or books about it?


@eckherl:
I know you were a tanker over in South Korea, have you been briefed you might be facing T-34's?
Falstaff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2009   #17
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,249
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falstaff View Post
Nikola,

thank you,
that's exactly the kind of stuff I'm looking for. Do you know if there are any available reports or books about it?


@eckherl:
I know you were a tanker over in South Korea, have you been briefed you might be facing T-34's?
I have attended OPFOR briefings that T-34/85s were in storage, we could only speculate that they would of been given to reserve type units. Also they still manufacture 85mm ammunition for their Type 63 and T-85 light tanks.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2009   #18
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,249
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by F-15 Eagle View Post
North Korea still uses Mig-17s,19s, 21s and 23s. The only modern fighter is the Mig-29 but only 40 are in use I think and those are not even the new ones just the old ones from the 80s.

Seriously why Mig-17s and 19s? What use could they have?

And its not just their Air Force its their entire military not only do they have out dated and obsolete weapons but they have very little fuel, spare parts and very poor training. The 1 million men in their military probably only get one meal a day for food so their probably not even in fighting condition because their starving for God's sakes!

South Korea's 600,000 or so strong military could wipe them out in just a few weeks because the North still plains for the old Cold War style military doctrine.
One question I would like to ask you, if around 85% of their artillery is massed around the DMZ and at condition red how does ROK handle this without getting their capital wiped off the face of the earth. Also who ever stated that their active military recieves one meal a day.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2009   #19
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,249
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
From what I can gather the food shortage is over.

I don't think they can deliver their nukes. I'd use them as nuclear landmines rather then as conventional nuclear bombs.
I can only hope that they do not have the means to deliver them effectively, but the nuke issue is something that ROK or the U.S is will to take any risk on especially with them working with Iran inregards to rocket technology.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2009   #20
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
Beatmaster's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 506
Threads:
i do not know or this is the right information but take a look:

T-34 Tank
The T 34 battle tank was the mainstay of the Soviet tank armies throughout the Second World War and the most important tank produced during that conflict.

Created in 1939, the T 34 design aimed at mechanical simplicity and an ease of manufacture in large quantities. Production began in June 1940. Between 1941 and 1945, 39,698 were built which comprised 68% of Soviet tank output. The new tank was fast, with a top speed of 32 mph, strongly-armed and benefited from well-sloped protective armour which had a maximum thickness of 3.5 inches (100mm).Its diesel engine gave it greater range than its German counterparts, a vital factor in the vastness of Russia.

In action from the end of 1941, the T 34 played crucial roles in the encirclement of the German 6th Army at Stalingrad in 1942-3 and the Battle of Kursk in 1943, eventually coming to dominate the war on the Eastern Front. From the end of 1943 onwards, the T 34 was re-armed with an 85mm gun mounted in a redesigned turret, thicker armour and an extra crew member (commander, gunner, loader, driver & hull gunner).

Production of the T 34/85, of which this is an example, continued until 1964 and totalled 12,000, with many being supplied to Warsaw Pact countries and their allies. It served in the Korean War and the Arab-Israeli Wars until 1973.

This is a Quote from a English book, Hope this helps
Beatmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2009   #21
Senior Member
Colonel
F-15 Eagle's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,296
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
They use MiG-17s and MiG-19s because they probably can't replace them with anything more modern.
They can do what everyone else does and buy new Su-30s from Russia, I'm sure they will sell them after all they let Iran buy them why not North Korea?

Quote:
Originally Posted by eckherl View Post
One question I would like to ask you, if around 85% of their artillery is massed around the DMZ and at condition red how does ROK handle this without getting their capital wiped off the face of the earth. Also who ever stated that their active military recieves one meal a day.
The ROK has a very powerful air force and their army has much better tanks and artillery. Not as big in numbers but much more advanced and modern. Plus I doubt more than 10% of their artillery is operational at any given time and those are out dated from the late 50s and early 60s.
________________
"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing."

-- Albert Einstein
F-15 Eagle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 13th, 2009   #22
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,249
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by F-15 Eagle View Post
They can do what everyone else does and buy new Su-30s from Russia, I'm sure they will sell them after all they let Iran buy them why not North Korea?



The ROK has a very powerful air force and their army has much better tanks and artillery. Not as big in numbers but much more advanced and modern. Plus I doubt more than 10% of their artillery is operational at any given time and those are out dated from the late 50s and early 60s.
What does ROK capabilities have anything to do with what I asked you, everyone knows how much advancements in war fighting technologies that they have, my question was what do you do with the artillery that is already massed along the DMZ pointing to the south, speculating that only 10% of it is operational could be a fatal error on your part along with the average North Korean soldier eats only one meal a day and is starving to death. There is a big reason why the ROK and U.S would just rather leave them alone.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2009   #23
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 15,012
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by F-15 Eagle View Post
They can do what everyone else does and buy new Su-30s from Russia, I'm sure they will sell them after all they let Iran buy them why not North Korea?
Well lets see.... how much money would it cost? And Iran did not buy ANY Su-30 from Russia. If you're referencing the Jerusalem Post article about a ~200 Su-30 deal with Iran, they're full of sh*t.

Quote:
The ROK has a very powerful air force and their army has much better tanks and artillery. Not as big in numbers but much more advanced and modern. Plus I doubt more than 10% of their artillery is operational at any given time and those are out dated from the late 50s and early 60s.
The question here is what to do with large numbers of WWII level unguided artillery pieces. Why do you think they're inoperable? They're simple to maintain, don't require anything advanced to keep them running, and don't need any real targetting systems given the quantities we're talking about.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 14th, 2009   #24
Junior Member
Private
Crunchy's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Outer Heaven
Posts: 50
Threads:
T-34/85

Currently Vietnamese People's Army uses the remaining T-34s as targets for exercises.
Crunchy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 19th, 2009   #25
New Member
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falstaff View Post
Nikola,

thank you,
that's exactly the kind of stuff I'm looking for. Do you know if there are any available reports or books about it?
You are very welcome Falstaff, but you are fishing in the dark here. You will hardly find any credible source for this one and many other events that occurred during that war.

Let's start with those tanks from Podgorica. The army (mainly reserve units) were sent to Dubrovnik with support of the prime minister who has been the biggest supporter of Slobodan Milosevic and his politics. Later on the same guy who is still the prime minister (imagine that, this happens still in Europe) changes his POV and tends to become a very good friend of Croatians and almost everything (I mean here on the more detailed events) that has happened there has never been published and will hardly ever be.
BTW, beside that RPG ambush and loss of one tank that platoon didn't encounter any serious resistance during their mission.

The T-34's were used in the Yugoslav People's Army until 80's when the Army started to put them in reserve. Some of those retired T-34's were used to form independent battalions and platoons intended to protect airports and strategically important locations. As soon as the war broke out the T-34's were again reactivated and engaged into actions. They were mainly used as infantry support units or for a stationary fire support. Because of their poor armour thin sheet metal plates were mounted to enhance their protection. But in reality, as there was a lack of those metal plates the crews were mounting anything that could have enhanced their protection (wheel tires, wood, sandbags, empty ammo boxes...). The T-34's were too old and they couldn't endure this war and most of them were quickly retired.

During their withdrawal from Kosovo in 1999, armoured units of Yugoslav Army left one specially modified T-34 that served as an engineer vehicle. It's not known if that T-34 was used to fit its purpose or was just left on the field as a target (decoy) for the NATO jets.

Regards
Attached Images
File Type: jpg t34inz.jpg (28.8 KB, 21 views)
File Type: jpg t34inz2.jpg (26.6 KB, 19 views)
nikola_281 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2009   #26
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
the taliban operated anything they could get their hands on in 2001 including t34-85s they were probably destroyed before they even reached the frontlines though
lancejackCF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2009   #27
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
eckherl's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,249
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by lancejackCF View Post
the taliban operated anything they could get their hands on in 2001 including t34-85s they were probably destroyed before they even reached the frontlines though
Really, that is a first for me, are you sure that they were not T-55 and T-62 tanks.
________________
"Here, across death`s other river
The Tartar horsemen shake their spears"
eckherl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2009   #28
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by eckherl View Post
Really, that is a first for me, are you sure that they were not T-55 and T-62 tanks.
serving family member told me hes not 1 2 exaggerate he was operating around Kabul before it fell 2 NA i was suprised maybe he meant a variant of some sort but still
lancejackCF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2009   #29
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6
Threads:
on earlier posts the KPA isnt exactly modern but they still have enough material, personnel and defenses to give the ROK a run for their money, with massive american support its a different story, like feanor said u dont need targeting systems if u have such huge(i honestly don t kno the number) amount of fire (rockets systems and guns) on such a relatively small piece of frontage, the mig 17s 19s r all 4 ground attack - not effective but eventually some will get through
lancejackCF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 17th, 2009   #30
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant General
kato's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,989
Threads:
T-34 in the East-German Army (KVP and NVA):

T-34/76:
- received starting around 1953 for KVP, used (about 220 units?)
- most (all?) units transferred to NVA 1956
- likely phased out 1958-1960
- at least 156 chassis rebuilt to T-34T, remainder probably sold

SU-85:
- received around 1953 for KVP, used (46 units); also several dozen SU-100, no clue where they ended up
- phased out 1958
- all chassis rebuilt to T-34T/TB (SFL)

T-34/85:
- acquired likely 1953: 360 used units for KVP; 1955-56: 280 units from Polish production for KVP; from 1956: 600 used units for NVA (all used units: from USSR)
- most KVP units transferred to NVA, around 70 units retained for border troops
- phased out from general service around 1969-1970
- retained for border troops until ~1985
- about half of border troop units put in storage then, 33 units scrapped in 1989/90

T-34T armored tractor / T-34TB armored salvage tractors:
- not identical to Soviet SPK-5 and WW2 T-34T/TT-34
- rebuilt from T-34/76 and SU-85 (SFL) chassis 1959-1962 (202 units total)
- phased out from general service around 1970
- about 60-80 units stowed in two new reserve "salvage battalions"
- "salvage battalions" dissolved 1989
- all units sold for civilian use or scrapped in 1989/1990

---------------------------------------------------------

Austrian T-34:

- 37 units (all T-34/85) taken over from USSR in 1955
- 19 units put in fixed positions in early 70s
- fixed positions consisted of the complete tank in a concrete bunker (not just the turret, like done with Centurions)
- last unit removed from fixed position October 2007 (!!) - [pic]
kato is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:38 AM.