TR-125, Romanian T-72, why not used?

Does anyone know why the Romanian Army only built a handful (30) of TR-125s and decided not to use the T-72 as their next modern tank? The 125mm gun would have been a big improvement over the current 100mm of the TR-85, and not to mention all the other improvements!

I'm curious because they already had the license and successfully built some of them. Did the Revolution of 1989 have anything to do with it?

Thanks!

By the way, I love T-72s! Great tank when used properly. It gets a bad rap because Iraq did not use them correctly or have the modern versions that other countries have today.

Romania buit only 3 TR-125 (prototypes). The 30 ones are bought T-72. Reasons are multiples. T-72 is not that good tank as promoted. Automatic loader that jams, cramped interior (in russian army small people at 1,60 m are selected). The romanians could compare the both and decided to go with the TR-85, from which already had over 300. After the revolution it was planned to build a new tank, TR-2000, with german support, based, or inspired by Leopard 2.

Hello Panzer King and everybody,
I am also a T-72 fan and I agree that this tank still used in NATO countries like Poland, Czech Republic, Bulgaria and Hungary without a plan to eliminate them is not a bad one.
Ok a LEOPARD 2 is certain better but also much expensive ...
Romania was refused by USSR in 1984-85 in buying license for T-72 variant but stil manage to build few in 1989 and maybe later. But mass production -no, after 1990 we had other priorities ... Have no idea which? I also don't know...
The reason to modernise the TR-85 is simple -no other tank was available in big numbers...
Still a question? Why in 1978 when we buy from USSR the T-72 we purchase only 31? Why not at least 100 for a regiment? Just wondering...

Why only 31? Because of Ceausescu's obsession to produce everything in country. He simply couldn't grasp the economics of the fact that you can't produce 100% of everything in country without bankrupting yourself. Remember that TR-580 production started in 1977, it didn't matter that the T-72 was superior, as long as we could produce a tank - any tank - in country.

So, there was less money for aquisition from abroad, resulting in the aquisition of small numbers of advanced weaponry, and even those few were not top of the line. The T-72s we got were the early T-72 Ural-1 version, MiG-23s were MF version when others in the Warsaw Pact were buying MLs. Very few AT-4/5 were aquired because we produced the antiquated AT-3 Maliutka.

They stubbornedly pursued the license production of the useless AA-1 (RS-2US/A-90) and AA-2 (R-3S/A-91) air to air missiles of 1950 and 1960 vintage for our MiG-21s - the backbone of the air force - while our WP neighbours equipped theirs with R-13M, R-60 and R-3R. And examples could go on.

After 1990 we were bankrupt, and only little money was available for upgardes in the second half on the 90's. There were not enough T-72s to upgrade, and not enough money to build TR-125s. Just like it was the case with the MiG-21 versus MiG-29 upgrade.

The T-72 is still the main battle tank in Bulgaria and Czech Rep. (upgraded as T-72 CZ4). In Hungary only 12 T-72 are still in service, the bulk of their fleet was donated to Iraq (77 pcs.). In Poland the backbone of the tank force is made up by 128 Leo 2 A4, T-72s being second line tanks.

This post has been edited by Vici on July 23, 2009 04:20 pm

Hallo Vici,
I agree with you and my belief is that every dictator obssesion is to control everything and not to depend on others -in this case soviet weapons! But I want to talk a bit about the tank that we actually produced in large numbers : the TR-800 or TR-85 and his "father" TR-580 or TR-77. Why? Because I think that even these tanks cannot be build without an outside help -I heard about China! For over 15 years I had the chance to speak with somebody, an military engineer who work at the Bucharest Tank Plant -UM Bucharest -romania main tank producer -who told me that without chinese help we would not produce any tank? If this is true than we understand why we didn't produce the T-72. I didn't excuse them, I don't even know if this is true? And again, if we had no license for a modern tank, we better buy them...
Do you know anything on this subject?

Well, the targeting system (to mention that uses laser telemeter, which lacks from the first versions of the T-72, and would have been for sure not licensed for production by the russians) is of chinese origin. Also the gun is a copy of the chinese (posibly improved) copy of the russian D-10T.
Engine is of german origin, more powerfull (860 hp) as the 780 hp engine of the T-72. For the modernised tank the armor of the turret is 580 mm RHA as compared to the 500 mm RHA of the T-72.
Stabilisation system might be better as the one of the T-72, which is known to be almost useless at bigger speeds than creep. Also T-72 is known to cook off at the first hit, and launch the turret to the sky (automatic loader...)
The only aspect in which the TR-85 is clearly inferior is the cannon.
This could be solved trough an upgrade.

Here a link about TR-125.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-125.

It seems it was intended to be strongly modified, just like the TR-85 compared to the T-55. It would have been the heaviest in the T-72 family.

This post has been edited by Hadrian on July 27, 2009 06:49 pm

Thanks guys. I like the new turret you put on the TR-85. It looks better than original T-55, much more modern and probably less-cramped. The TR-85 would be a fine tank if it had a bigger gun. I know that armor is improved also. Put a 120mm or 125mm and now you're talking!

Are there any plans for new tanks or will the TR-85 serve for a while longer?

There was a plan for TR-2000, based on or influenced by Leopard-2. In the 90`s there were some discussions with the germans. For moment there is no plan to replace the TR-85, maybe also because it was just upgraded (well, 56 from the 315 initialy planned). So I think it will serve for a long time, just like the upgraded Mig-21 Lancer. It is planned to replace 600 armored carriers at the time, this would be the priority (33 Mowag Piranha IIIC were already purchased). The migration to wheeled platform is the new trend all over the world...

This post has been edited by Hadrian on September 22, 2009 07:39 pm

I agree; an Israeli 120mm gun and the LAHAT tank fired ATGM or a Russian 125mm and some Invar-M tank fired ATGM's would bring the T-85M-1 fleet up current standards!

This post has been edited by Stephen Dabapuscu on September 22, 2009 10:30 pm

Can the 120mm or 125mm fit inside the turret? Also there is the auto-loader to worry about. Of course, there doesn't have to be an auto-loader. Most western tanks don't have them and it is not a drawback to them.

The Chinese managed to squeeze a 125 mm gun in the Pakistani Type 59, the resulting machine being called Al Zarrar, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Zarrar
So I guess it would be possible to fit one in the TR-85 in theory. In practice there is no money for that.

There are several examples where a 125mm and auto loader where fitted inside a t-55 or type 59/69/80 turret, Iraq did it in the 80's and the Chinese did it on several models. Also Iran and Vietnam are rumor to have done so on their T-55 upgrades!

If thats true thats its sad, because it would not cost much money and don't we have a license for a 125mm or our own 125mm design from the TR-125 program?

This post has been edited by Stephen Dabapuscu on September 24, 2009 03:53 pm

Now that we are NATO, we should use the 120 mm caliber. Or at least the 105 mm, which is also more powerful as the 100 mm gun. Anyway, it doesn`t makes sense to built several tens of canons. We shoud better buy them.

This post has been edited by Hadrian on September 24, 2009 05:37 pm

No, not tens of 125mm guns, but 300 plus 125mm guns to update the entire TR-85 Fleet. I would have no problem with 105mm or 120mm guns as an ugrade!

This post has been edited by Stephen Dabapuscu on September 24, 2009 09:06 pm