Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "Putin banks on Soviet-era T-62, tanks taken out of storage amid Ukraine war; Developed in 1950s" video.

Compared to the T-90, the T-62 armor is wafter thin AT-4, M72 and Carl Gustav would easily penetrate its armor Hell even round from anti-material rifles would be lethal to it Even if they beefed it up with ERA, it still wouldnt last
37
@badbad-cat Its very simple The T-62 built in the 60s when thinking that the only way to kill a tank is with another tank it 2022 and weapons have changed substantially where 1 solider 1 missile can kill a tank in one shot The T-90 has layers of defenses as it was built for modern warfare while the T-62 is relic and woefully ill equipped for modern combat India learned that lesson They tried to send MIG-21 against F-16 and the MIG-21 despite its upgrades still got its ass handed to it
5
Wrong on all counts First the T-62 armor compared to the T-90 is wafer thin Its thin enough that anti material rifles would easily penetrate The T-72 without ERA armor has 380mm of armor while the T-80 and T-90 armor is about 600mm without ERA The T-62 is 200mm on down Like the T-72, the T-62 wasnt designed with ERA in mind, as such its has very shitty ERA application Second the 115mm gun has considerably shorter range than 125mm and vastly inferior ammunition In Urban combat, weapons like the AT-4, M72 and other disposable once shot weapons well and Carl Gustav would easily penetrate its armor The T-62 stores additional ammo on left side ,space behind the turret In urban combat, its easy to pop up and put missile into that area as the hull has less than 100mm of armor They have 115mm gun ,while Ukraine troops have NLAWs and JAVELIN and as well whole variety of anti-tank hardware
5
@pranabjohn8110 The MIG-21 did not shot down anything no one piece of wreckage has ever been fond Even open source sites confirm no shoot down
1