Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Insights from an ex-Soviet tank crewman

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Insights from an ex-Soviet tank crewman

    I am a grad student studying foreign policy, and one of my classmates is a 37-year-old Russian man who served in the Soviet military from 1989-91 as a tank gunner. I asked him some questions about his experiences, and would like to share them here. His name is Valeriy.

    Valeriy first started out with the T-64 tank. The tank has a reputation for unreliability, and he confirmed this. He said the T-64 was terrible and was constantly breaking down, especially the track/suspension system. He said that a typical live-fire drill would consist of three tanks lining up and firing at targets in sequence. There were actually a couple times when all three tanks would experience malfunctions at this point and none would be able to fire.

    Valeriy later upgraded to either a T-72 or T-80 (I think he might have been unsure about what the designation in English was). Whatever it was, his did not have the turbine engine and instead had an underpowered diesel engine. He said this was a major problem because the tank couldn't move through difficult terrain fast enough (I imagine this would be very disconcerting in combat) and he could tell the vehicle really strained to clear steep hills. Valeriy said this new tank was better than the T-64, but it still had problems.

    He actually did not complain about the safety of the autoloader but said that it was possible to smash your hand accidentally if it got between the stabilized cannon and the ceiling of the turret. He believes that the "dangerous to user" nature of most Soviet/Russian equipment developed because the Soviet leadership was able to cover up friendly casualties by controlling the press, so no one would ever find out if some weapon was really bad, making it worth it to field something with a lot of problems. Valeriy believes this weapons design tradition unfortunately continues today.

    Valeriy confirmed that there was a lot of abuse within the Soviet military, and he compared it to how gangs developed in prison. He said that the Caucuses recruits were always very quick to take control of units at the unofficial social level while the Russian commanders would of course be in official control. The unit commanders rarely challenged the gang leaders of the units and instead worked with them. He says that the violent, harsh lives of the Caucuses peoples probably gave them an advantage in barracks situations over Russians because the latter had more rule-laden and orderly upbringings. Abuse within the Soviet military typically meant that the gang leaders in each unit, even at the squad level, would make the new guys do chores for them and give them their salaries. Noncompliance triggered beatings.

    Valeriy kept close track of the Georgian War and said that the Russian tanks used in the operation were mostly of Cold War vintage and looked the same as when he had been in the military.

    I'll post more info. as I get it--I intend on speaking with him more about his military experiences.
    Last edited by Proyas; 05 Oct 08,, 14:42.

  • #2
    Interesting stuff Proyas,thanks for posting it and I'll be waiting to hear more:).
    "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

    Comment


    • #3
      Really goes on to show how Russia is failing as a nation.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Proyas View Post
        Valeriy later upgraded to either a T-72 or T-80 (I think he might have been unsure about what the designation in English was). Whatever it was, his did not have the turbine engine and instead had an underpowered diesel engine.
        Sounds like a T-72...I don't believe that any models of the T-80 had a diesel.
        (Anybody out there with better info, give a shout)

        Hey, you know what's funny? After Operation Desert Storm, where hundreds of Soviet-designed tanks were massacred by Western designs (sometimes a handful of a coalition tanks being outnumbered by their Iraqi opponents but still slicing through them like so much soft cheese)....

        ...the Russophile world immediately (and to this day) started complaining that the Iraqis were equipped with dumbed down export monkeywrench versions and that 'real' Soviet tanks were made of much more sterner stuff.

        This ex-tanker seems to at least partially put the lie to that claim.
        “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

        Comment


        • #5
          T-80UD (D for diesel) - production started around 1987, couple hundreds made during Sov.era. So the timeline would fit.
          If i only was so smart yesterday as my wife is today

          Minding your own biz is great virtue, but situation awareness saves lives - Dok

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
            Sounds like a T-72...I don't believe that any models of the T-80 had a diesel.
            (Anybody out there with better info, give a shout)

            Hey, you know what's funny? After Operation Desert Storm, where hundreds of Soviet-designed tanks were massacred by Western designs (sometimes a handful of a coalition tanks being outnumbered by their Iraqi opponents but still slicing through them like so much soft cheese)....

            ...the Russophile world immediately (and to this day) started complaining that the Iraqis were equipped with dumbed down export monkeywrench versions and that 'real' Soviet tanks were made of much more sterner stuff.

            This ex-tanker seems to at least partially put the lie to that claim.
            1. Yup, it sounds like a T-72.

            2. The export-downgraded version explanation is true. The Soviet equipment would be made of incrementally sterner stuff, which does not become equal to the Western equipment by default, but certainly somewhat better than what Iraqis fielded. Remember that the Soviets handed out those monkey-versions at highly subsidized rates (sometimes incurring huge losses in case of allies like PRChina (before 1960), Vietnam, and India (after 1967)) - no way they could export same quality equipment as they themselves used.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Cactus View Post
              2. The export-downgraded version explanation is true.

              The Soviet equipment would be made of incrementally sterner stuff, which does not become equal to the Western equipment by default, but certainly somewhat better than what Iraqis fielded.
              Oh no dispute on either point.

              My observation was more based on the somewhat-ironic protestations of pro-Russian folks that either imply or outright claim that had the Western forces been facing first-class Soviet equipment that things would had turned out very very differently.

              Which I personally think is wishful thinking (to put it mildly)
              “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't think the export models are 'dumbed down' as much as they are hand me downs. T-72M1 was a slightly less well built T-72A, the basic design features are the same. According to some folks more tuned to the technicalities of armor than I, how good your monkey is depends on how much you spent on it.
                All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
                -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Wow, I like the outpouring of interest in this thread.

                  I had this tank conversation with Valeriy about 4 weeks ago, and I now remember something else he said: The Soviet tanks didn't have air conditioners or heaters inside of them. You simply have to sit there and deal with extreme temperatures. He said it was more bearable in the winters, when the engine would eventually heat up the interiors of the tanks after a while.

                  I haven't spoken with him since about his military experiences, but we have talked about his impressions of life under Communist rule. Some of his stories are inadvertently funny, I think. A couple more insights from Valeriy:
                  -In the USSR, there were no supermarkets. People bought all of their food from little corner grocery stores that have kind of lost their niche in America. He said there was always enough food, but the variety was really limited and the shelves always seemed on the verge of running empty.
                  -Clothing was also very limited in quality, appearance and variety. There was always some kind of a problem (awkwardly cut, fits badly, looks bad, made of cheap material or stitching so it rips easily, etc.). In the late 1980's, some Soviets--mostly young people--started to rebel against the system by dressing well. There technically weren't any laws against this, but it nonetheless undermined the government, so public campaigns were launched portraying these people as "selfish" and "unpatriotic." I can now understand why the Russians went so crazy of blue jeans once the USSR collapsed.
                  -Soviet-era restaurants were too expensive for the majority of people to go to them with any regularity, but even when you managed to get in, they were "pretty bad" anyway (his words).
                  -Soviet schools were excellent when it came to scientific and technical subjects, but the curricula for history and the arts and humanities were very distorted for political reasons. Valeriy said that Soviet people were aware that their government's presentation of the world was skewed.
                  -Soviet-era movies were usually terrible, though Valeriy seemed to indicate that he believed the better ones had more intelligent plots than typical American movies. There were only a handful of U.S. movies that were ever shown in the USSR, one of which was "Tootsie." Valeriy said that everyone went to see American movies whenever one was approved for viewing.
                  -Valeriy said that one of the greatest things about communism was how it genuinely eliminated envy by forcing everyone to be equal. In a small way, he said this brought real happiness at times. But simultaneously, the destruction of market forces in the economy and the inability to accumulate wealth ran counter to human nature and was extremely frustrating. Valeriy observed directly how the inability to excel in life destroyed personal initiative among many people. Coupled with the low living standards and limited options for recreation and personal expression, the human spirit was constantly crushed in the USSR. The Soviet people instinctively knew something was very wrong with their lives even though most of them had no external basis for comparison (they knew almost nothing accurate about how people lived in the West).
                  -Valeriy theorizes that this sort of depressing existence contributed to the Russian alcoholism epidemic: People needed an escape from reality and could only find it in drunkenness. This is especially bad in remote areas. The elimination of vodka rationing and the drop in vodka prices following the collapse of the USSR made the problem even worse.
                  -Valeriy says that Moscow is a depressing city and that even the buildings are designed in such a way to intimidate and depress people. He couldn't quite explain what specific features about the buildings created this effect, but from what I have seen of communist architecture, I think I understand.
                  -Valeriy thinks that communism was really bad overall, and he is critical of Russians today who demand a return to the old system. He believes that those people only consider the positives of communism while forgetting the overwhelming negatives. But at the same time, I think Valeriy might harbor the belief (apparently widespread among Russians) that the USSR's demise was a tragedy, and that Gorbachev should have used force to keep it together for the sake of Russian power.
                  I know you guys probably aren't as interested in this stuff, so my next post will be about military stuff I hear from him. I'll talk to the guy again next Tuesday.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Proyas Reply

                    Interesting thoughts and happy to read them all.
                    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
                    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Triple C View Post
                      ... how good your monkey is depends on how much you spent on it.
                      And how knowledgeable the end user is about what they are getting. Money was always the primary and central issue, as often those who were getting these technologies and at these prices were often too isolated and/or too cash-deficit to aggressively demand anything. But in the cases when they had options and funds (as some Arabs did in 1980s), they could demand quality goods... if they knew exactly what to ask for.

                      PS: "Monkey" doesn't refer to the equipment here, it is a generic ethnic/racial derogatory reference to the importer.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Proyas View Post
                        I know you guys probably aren't as interested in this stuff, so my next post will be about military stuff I hear from him. I'll talk to the guy again next Tuesday.
                        Not at all, I would love to hear more about anything Valeriy has to share, not just military-related.

                        I have heard/read a little bit about life in the Communist Bloc, from books on defectors such as Viktor Belenko and Alexander Zuyev, as well as talking to my roommate, who grew up in Czechoslovakia, but I am always interested in learning more.
                        “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                          Not at all, I would love to hear more about anything Valeriy has to share, not just military-related.

                          I have heard/read a little bit about life in the Communist Bloc, from books on defectors such as Viktor Belenko and Alexander Zuyev, as well as talking to my roommate, who grew up in Czechoslovakia, but I am always interested in learning more.
                          I agree TH,I find this inside look at life in Russia very interesting.Keep it coming Proyas:).
                          "Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves, therefore, are its only safe depositories." Thomas Jefferson

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Proyas View Post
                            I haven't spoken with him since about his military experiences, but we have talked about his impressions of life under Communist rule. Some of his stories are inadvertently funny, I think. A couple more insights from Valeriy:
                            -In the USSR, there were no supermarkets. People bought all of their food from little corner grocery stores that have kind of lost their niche in America. He said there was always enough food, but the variety was really limited and the shelves always seemed on the verge of running empty.

                            Well, you certainly did not die of hunger, but if you wanted anything special , like sausage , then you had to spy on store backdoors, when a delivery truck came. Then the news spread like wildfire, the workplaces emptied and suddenly there was a really long line of people standing on store. Kind of like the ´flash mob´of today. In the end of 80´s my local shop usually had 1 3-litre glass jar of pickeled Bulgarian tomatoes as only sign of them selling foodstuffs. Rest of the counter was empty by mid-day.
                            -Clothing was also very limited in quality, appearance and variety. There was always some kind of a problem (awkwardly cut, fits badly, looks bad, made of cheap material or stitching so it rips easily, etc.). In the late 1980's, some Soviets--mostly young people--started to rebel against the system by dressing well. There technically weren't any laws against this, but it nonetheless undermined the government, so public campaigns were launched portraying these people as "selfish" and "unpatriotic." I can now understand why the Russians went so crazy of blue jeans once the USSR collapsed.
                            My dad was in america in Sov.space technology exhibition back in 1988. When their group flew back to Sov.Union, the 747 they boarded was late for couple of hours, because the airline could not fit their baggage into the plane. In the result of this i saw first time a TV with remote control !
                            -Soviet-era restaurants were too expensive for the majority of people to go to them with any regularity, but even when you managed to get in, they were "pretty bad" anyway (his words).
                            -Soviet schools were excellent when it came to scientific and technical subjects, but the curricula for history and the arts and humanities were very distorted for political reasons. Valeriy said that Soviet people were aware that their government's presentation of the world was skewed.
                            But still this skewed view filtered into peoples minds and still is there
                            -Soviet-era movies were usually terrible, though Valeriy seemed to indicate that he believed the better ones had more intelligent plots than typical American movies. There were only a handful of U.S. movies that were ever shown in the USSR, one of which was "Tootsie." Valeriy said that everyone went to see American movies whenever one was approved for viewing.
                            And Russian actors are second to none. Well, maybe some British.
                            At least in this corner we had little access to outside world. The Finnish TV covered northern Estonia and in my childhood i had access to ´Knight Rider´. And later enjoyed enormous popularity by telling other similar-aged kids (5-8) about it. Endlessly. :)). Oh and i saw ´Shaft´ too once. And there was one legendary occasion when the whole city of Tallinn (400k people) stayed at home and the streets looked post-apocalyptic - on the Finnish TV was the premiere of ´Emmanuelle´

                            -Valeriy said that one of the greatest things about communism was how it genuinely eliminated envy by forcing everyone to be equal. In a small way, he said this brought real happiness at times. But simultaneously, the destruction of market forces in the economy and the inability to accumulate wealth ran counter to human nature and was extremely frustrating. Valeriy observed directly how the inability to excel in life destroyed personal initiative among many people. Coupled with the low living standards and limited options for recreation and personal expression, the human spirit was constantly crushed in the USSR. The Soviet people instinctively knew something was very wrong with their lives even though most of them had no external basis for comparison (they knew almost nothing accurate about how people lived in the West).
                            I don´t think that´s accurate. Not by forcing, but by cutting the society off from better-off parts of the world. Therefore people believed, that they lead good lives. I´ve no doubt that in Nor.Korea many millions believe the same.
                            -Valeriy theorizes that this sort of depressing existence contributed to the Russian alcoholism epidemic: People needed an escape from reality and could only find it in drunkenness. This is especially bad in remote areas. The elimination of vodka rationing and the drop in vodka prices following the collapse of the USSR made the problem even worse.
                            The things got esp. bad during the stagnation-era - during Brezhnev rule. 1968 closed the doors for change and the mental deterioration started really.
                            -Valeriy says that Moscow is a depressing city and that even the buildings are designed in such a way to intimidate and depress people. He couldn't quite explain what specific features about the buildings created this effect, but from what I have seen of communist architecture, I think I understand.
                            -Valeriy thinks that communism was really bad overall, and he is critical of Russians today who demand a return to the old system. He believes that those people only consider the positives of communism while forgetting the overwhelming negatives. But at the same time, I think Valeriy might harbor the belief (apparently widespread among Russians) that the USSR's demise was a tragedy, and that Gorbachev should have used force to keep it together for the sake of Russian power.
                            One of our posters (Mr.First?) described it best - something like: ´it was what it was, but it was home.And the only one we had.´
                            Still i have absolutely no regrets that thing finally collapsed and is dead.

                            I know you guys probably aren't as interested in this stuff, so my next post will be about military stuff I hear from him. I'll talk to the guy again next Tuesday.
                            .
                            If i only was so smart yesterday as my wife is today

                            Minding your own biz is great virtue, but situation awareness saves lives - Dok

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                              Not at all, I would love to hear more about anything Valeriy has to share, not just military-related.

                              I have heard/read a little bit about life in the Communist Bloc, from books on defectors such as Viktor Belenko and Alexander Zuyev, as well as talking to my roommate, who grew up in Czechoslovakia, but I am always interested in learning more.
                              Ah the Czech! Only other country in the world where i could imagine living besides my own home country. :)). Was he(she?) from Czech or Slovakia ?
                              If i only was so smart yesterday as my wife is today

                              Minding your own biz is great virtue, but situation awareness saves lives - Dok

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X