T-72 vs T-74

[WHM]

Hey Guys;

I've recently discovered I have a pack of T-74 tanks (Cat" W28) which is shown as a variant of the T-72. So what is the difference? Did the USSR use it? I think Yugoslavia had a home made version and called it the T-74. Is this it? Can you accuratley use the T-74 in place of the T-72?

Thanks

[TAMMY]

I have checked a fast refernce source: Taschenbuch der Panzer (Tanks of the world) and there is no trace of a Soviet T-74 tank.

The Yugislavian version of T-72 is called M-84 and is bAsed on the T-72M.

[Cav Dog]

I suspect the t-74 is western nomenclature for one of the T-72 versions discussed on this thread:

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=227540

[Mk 1]

Agree. No reference to a T-74 from Soviet / Russian sources.

The term T-74 derives from a NATO / US Intelligence assesment in the late 1970s / early 1980s. It was applied as a recognition label to one of the upgrades to the T-72, was used for a few years, and then discarded as a label.

I have a full battalion of the model that GHQ describes as a T-74 in my active forces box. From memory (haven't looked at the question for a few years now) I believe that I concluded that the model is closest to what the Soviets classified as the T-72M1. Even so, it would have been a fairly early production T-72M1. Could well be a T-72M, as TAMMY has suggested.

Major recognition factors:
- Running gear protected by continuous "fabric" guard, rather than the "gill armor" of earlier models of the T-72.
- Smoke grenade launchers, a feature not present on earlier versions of the T-72, indicating either a late-production T-72M or a T-72M1.
- Smoke grenade launchers positioned low across the frontal turret arc, rather than clustered vertically to the sides (beyond the frontal arc), and no mounting for ERA blocks, indicating it is not a later production T-72M1.
- No pronounced overhang of front turret armor, as characterized the up-armored T-72M2 (the "Dolly Parton" model).

I believe both the T-72M and T-72M1 are lumped together into the Red Army designation T-72A.

It looks much like the version of the T-72 which was license-built by East Germany. The US Army called this a Soviet T-72G export model, but it appears it was in fact an interim version between the T-72M and the T-72M1, but with degraded filler in the turret armor cavities.


Here is a representation of the T-72M1 tank in large scale. This is the 3D model used by the game SteelBeasts. For those of you who don't know, the SteelBeasts game is highly regarded for its accuracy on nearly all technical issues, to the point that the "Professional Grade" version was funded as a training aid for the US Army, and was originally licensed only for sale to militaries in the US military assistance program. It remains very popular among former and current tank crews, although it has never gone very far in the commercial gaming market.

(Sorry that this is such a large image, hope I didn't abuse too many folks' download data limits! )

For those interested in a more complete discussion of modern era Soviet, Russian and Ukrainian MBT development, you might try finding your way through this TankNet thread:

http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=14200

The thread is some 5 years running, is over 150 pages long, and has contributions from several tankers or former tankers in Russia, the Ukraine, Finland and the Eastern provinces of Germany.

[WHM]

Thanks guys, appreciate the response.

Final question what are the differences in the models?

[Mk 1]

Final question what are the differences in the models?

The differences "in the models"?

Which models? The GHQ models (old vs. new), or the different models of the T-72 (and its derivatives, like the M84)?

The new GHQ model purports to be a model of the T-72M1. But as I have suggested, to my eye the old model, labelled T-74, was also a representation of the T-72M1 (vs. other models of the T-72 family). So this makes the question of what the differences are between the GHQ models a bit of a curiosity. Having not seen the new castings, I can offer no perosnal observation as to how it differs.

As to the various models of the T-72 in real life, well that's a question that takes a whole book to describe. There are some dozen or more versions that have seen significant production runs, and another couple of dozen that have at least seen prototype or pilot runs. Of those mentioned in this thread, the T-72M1 was about the highest level of production and capability before the widespread use of ERA tiles made the whole series look very different.

Also worth noting that the present day T-90 and T-94 MBTs are essentially upgraded T-72 models, that have been re-named for the sake of marketing them to a worldwide export market. That does not mean they are any less capable -- they are quite impressive tanks. But they are, essentially, an upgrade to the T-72M2 that is not so much distant from the family roots than the M60A3 was from the M60 and M60A1.

[jakec]

Funnily enough, there was actually a T-74 designed in the fUSSR. It never saw service though. Perhaps NATO intel picked up some whispers of it and assumed it was the next model of T-72 that appeared?

The actual T-74 design looked more like what NATO intel called FST-2.

[WHM]

Think I found the answer to my question. Think you guys were right.

Per the Osprey Military book their title T-72 Main Battle Tank 1974 - 1993 the T-74 was the designation by the US Army when it was modified with increased frontal turret armor. The unoffical nickname was "Dolly Parton". And then there was the "Super Dolly Parton".

Wonder if she knew?

[Cav Dog]

Don't know about Dolly but I'm sure she would be flattered; I mean who wouldn't want a tank named after them, Stuart, Lee, Patton, Sherman, Abrams, Dolly...

Witty bunch those ordnance guys.