The main tank of the middle. Modernization of T-55

March 11 2013 31

For twenty years, during which the production of medium tanks T-54 and T-55, Soviet and foreign tank builders built over 23 thousand of such combat vehicles. T-54/55 tanks have long been considered obsolete, but, nevertheless, are still in service with fifty states. These countries mainly belong to the third world, therefore, for economic reasons, they cannot replace the old equipment with new ones and are interested in modernizing the existing fleet of vehicles. In 2001, the Omsk Design Bureau of Transport Engineering (KBTM) for the first time presented its new project for the modernization of the T-55 tank. The new T-55M6 combat vehicle fully met the criteria of the main battle tank and could become a very interesting offer on the modernization market of existing armored vehicles.

Usually, in the course of such upgrades, tanks receive a new set of weapons and electronics, but Omsk designers went on a more difficult path. They remade almost all the basic elements of the structure. To increase the level of protection of the frontal projection, the armored body underwent a noticeable improvement. Since the original T-55 had a homogeneous reservation, protection was improved by installing a special unit on its front end. It was a metal structure that was welded onto the forehead of an upgraded tank. The length of the hull after this increased, but the contours of the front part remained the same. In the resulting cavity between the T-55 own armor and the sheets of the welded-on unit was placed a kind of filler. Thus, the T-55М6 had composite frontal armor, which greatly increased its level of protection. In addition, on the top of the new forehead, the blocks of the dynamic protection system were clearly visible.

It is worth noting that the additional booking added a couple of tons to the weight of the original tank. Therefore, to maintain the correct weight distribution over the support surface, another pair of track rollers was introduced into the undercarriage. Their torsions placed inside the unit of additional booking. The guide wheels, in turn, moved from the sides of the tank's own hull to the side parts of the additional booking. Thus, it was possible to modify the reservation and the undercarriage of the original T-55 tank, without making any serious adjustments to its design. Interestingly, the exhibition sample of the T-55М6 tank had only four “native” support rollers (two each aboard) from the T-55. The rest were recruited from other tanks - two each with a T-72 and two each with a T-80. With this, KBTM designers demonstrated that almost any existing rollers can be used in the undercarriage of a new tank, regardless of their “origin”.

After all the modifications, the T-55M6 tank, in comparison with the original armored vehicle, was heavier by almost eight tons. The native diesel engine - the B-55 with a capacity of 580 horsepower - with an increased combat mass, could no longer provide the necessary mobility. Therefore, the T-55M6 received a forced version of an old diesel engine with a capacity of 690 hp. Nevertheless, the specific power of the tank remained approximately at the old level - about 15-16 hp. per ton of weight. With such power indicators, the updated armored vehicle retained all the driving characteristics of the original version. The maximum speed of the T-55M6 tank when driving on the highway was 50 kilometers per hour. The capacity of the fuel tanks made it possible to drive about 500 km. A number of sources claim that consideration was being given to installing T-55M6 more powerful gas turbine engines. However, all information about such a refinement remained at the level of unconfirmed rumors.

The most interesting part of the modernization of the old T-55 was the new tower. Instead of finalizing the existing combat module, a new one was created. For the basis for it they took the tower of the main tank T-72B. The tower retained part of the design, weapons and a number of special equipment, such as the control complex weapons or sighting equipment. As a result of this choice of basis for the new tower T-55М6 received 125-mm gun-launcher 2A46, which greatly increased its fighting qualities. The machine gun coupled with a gun has retained its main characteristics. On the back of the new tower, the designers placed an armored ammunition box. Inside it, in isolation from the fighting compartment, it could be up to 22 separate shots. It was argued that to increase the survivability of the combat vehicle on the upper part of the box, expelling plates are provided. To feed the ammunition to the gun Omsk engineers have created their own automatic loader.

The main tank of the middle. Modernization of T-55

Automatic loading Omsk FSUE KB "Transmash" (http://alternathistory.org.ua)

Omsk version of the reconfiguration with the modernization of obsolete tanks. On the T-55, a new turret was installed with an automatic loader in the aft niche of the turret; frontal booking was significantly increased; for this, another support roller was added ahead (http://alternathistory.org.ua)

Modernization of the old T-55 tank really turned out to be original and interesting. She immediately attracted the attention of the fact that after not too complicated refinement of the medium tank becomes the main with the appropriate technical and tactical consequences. However, T-55М6 never became the subject of contracts. The main reason for this is the relatively high cost of repairing and re-equipping old tanks. According to some data, in 2001, the conversion of one T-55 to T-55М6 cost at least half a million dollars. For the same money at that time it was possible to buy several second-hand T-72, according to its characteristics close to the updated T-55. In addition, T-72 even of early modifications had several advantages over T-55М6. Therefore, after careful consideration, the modernization of the T-55 ceased to interest potential customers.

As it turned out a little later, the T-55М6 shown at the exhibitions was just a running layout. He received an updated armored hull and powerplant, but instead of an automatic loader and a number of other equipment, there were weight imitators on it. Since no one was interested in the proposed project for the modernization of obsolete equipment, the T-55М6 undercarriage layout remained in a single copy and gradually left the exhibition venues. Information on the further application of any technical solutions of this project - a new automatic loader, an additional block of frontal armor with support rollers, etc. - missing.

On the materials of the sites:
http://armor.kiev.ua/
http://vestnik-rm.ru/
http://alternathistory.org.ua/
http://otvaga2004.ru/

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Mikhado

+10

11 March 2013 09: 05

"News" is ancient, I read it in "Equipment and Armament" a long time ago. For all the seeming tempting, it makes no sense for Russia. It has long been proven that it is economically profitable to simply strengthen the serial production of the T-90 at UVZ.
And from the "oldies" would have long ago been stuck auxiliary machines, for local conflicts. But, alas, everything will end with open-hearth, as we love
1. Reddragon
  
  +8
  
  11 March 2013 10: 02
  
  We have written off 50 and 60 Teshki. And new modernizations are created only in order to modernize the foreign T-55 / 54 / 64 and receive money
  1. bask
    
    +3
    
    11 March 2013 10: 13
    
    Thanks to Kirill. The article is interesting as always.
    And the modernization of the T-55M6, in particular the new automatic loader and ammunition in the stern of the tower. With knock-out plates.
    Not on one of the “newest” modernizations of the T-72 there is nothing like that. Again the BC inside the case is not protected.
    And in the event of a tank defeat or fire. Detonation of a BC with a detachment of the tower.
    Is it really difficult to modernize the T-72 and install the tashna as on the T-55M6, with the removal of the ammunition in the stern and knockout plates?
    1. Alekseev
      
      +10
      
      11 March 2013 11: 17
      
      Well, the ammunition in the t-72 is located at the bottom of the tank. (Almost all)
      That is, where the most difficult to get. This one sage composed. what say, if the cumulative grenade gets between the rollers, then the jet straight into the ammunition AZ. Interestingly, he himself held a grenade launcher in his hands? if I were holding it, I would know that from a distance of 150 m, not only between the rinks, but also into the tank itself it is very difficult to get into, especially with a heavy tandem grenade, and not a very experienced grenade launcher soldier.
      Between the rinks, tanks are only hit where an untrained army criminally neglects tactics ...
      The box behind the tower is much more vulnerable. In it, only carry BPS shots. they have no explosives except gunpowder.
      But the kick plates, unfortunately, are not a panacea. How the suit goes.
      If there is only a "warehouse" in an armored box behind the tower, as in one of the T-90 modifications, then this is one thing. and if there is an automatic loader, then it means a hatch in the BO, through which the supply of ammunition occurs. It is through it that the BC will "kick out" during detonation.
      Right inside the tower ...
      Already tired of my reasoning to the people
      But I can not help but mention another point that is not visible on the photo and is not indicated in the TTX, although it is very important.
      The turret of a tank is a very heavy thing (14-15 tons). She must be well balanced. otherwise the stabilizer will not “hold” properly, especially when heeling, moving at high speed on uneven terrain. Any attachment of additional protection, boxes, etc. will require upgrading the FCS (replacing the STV with a more powerful one) if you want to maintain acceptable guidance accuracy characteristics.
      An example from practice - "Ilyich's eyebrows"
      Of the 55s, do not cheaply make the t-90 (or at least t-72)
      But for scrap them, nevertheless, it is too cheap, albeit just for a number of "comrades".
      It would probably be better to remake them in heavy armored personnel carriers, as in Israel, and sell them to Africa, etc. Any kind of penny ...
      1. lazy
        
        0
        
        11 March 2013 18: 32
        
        or do bmpt
      2. bask
        
        -5
        
        11 March 2013 20: 10
        
        Quote: Alekseev
        I am not tired of my reasoning to the people
        
        Alekseev you, what are the people? And I, that French, Koreans, Turks, Japanese
        .All morons. Equip their latest MBT towers with aft BC
        
        Quote: Alekseev
        
        Well, the ammunition in the t-72 is located at the bottom of the tank. (Almost all)
        That is, where the most difficult to get.
        
        Tell me, this is the militants from Chechnya Destroyed hundreds of our tanks.
        For the future, don’t write any kind of unhappiness if there are no brains.
        AMX-56 Leclerc
        
        K-2 ,, Black Panther ,,
        
        BC in aft lining.
        
        TYPE -10 JAPAN.
        
        Alekseev
        
        0
        
        12 March 2013 08: 05
        
        You, a photographer, look like Turks.
        Or some other ouin ... arrogant and stupid ..
        
        Alekseev
        
        0
        
        12 March 2013 08: 35
        
        One would think that if the tanks depicted in the photo were sent to the city in columns, without creating assault troops and groups, in the hope of terrorizing the militants, they would burn worse than the t-72 (t-80).
        By no means, if not even better, and the "lockers" on the tower would not have saved.
        
        bask
        
        -1
        
        12 March 2013 13: 22
        
        Quote: Alekseev
        the city in the columns depicted in the photo tanks, without the creation of assault troops and cargo
        
        Not a word was written about the assault groups, the cover. There is no need to juggle it. It is clear to everyone that without covering the infantry, in ,,,, the conditions of urban battle ,,. and BMPT, any tank is vulnerable.
        And the militants soaked on tanks in Grozny, from all angles and distances .. And the BC exploded as a result of a fire in MBT. I did not hear about a direct hit in the BC
        The modernization of the T-72, T-80, takes into account the mechanical BC in the stern. Only parts of the BC
        .
        
        Quote: Alekseev
        By no means, if not even better, and the "lockers" on the tower would not have saved.
        
        The leading world countries do, but the Kokai is a member = society of Alekseev says that everything, it’s Uinya. Do not overestimate your mental capabilities. ,, strategist ,,
        
        Hunghuz
        
        -1
        
        12 March 2013 15: 53
        
        They have bk in the stern of the tower due to the features of the automatic loader, no?
    2. Captain Pushkin
      
      +1
      
      28 September 2017 22: 57
      
      Quote: bask
      Is it really difficult to modernize the T-72 and install the tashna as on the T-55M6, with the removal of the ammunition in the stern and knockout plates?
      
      You can do something, but it makes no sense - the Abrams have demonstrated. After the detonation of the ammunition, the crew died, and the tank, apparently not too damaged, could not be repaired due to deformation of the armored hull.
  2. Akim
    
    +1
    
    11 March 2013 10: 28
    
    Quote: RedDragoN
    upgrade foreign T-55/54/64
    
    And somewhere besides Ukraine and Transnistria there are 64 matches? In Uzbekistan, as in Russia, they were taken to the reserve.
    1. bask
      
      0
      
      11 March 2013 11: 27
      
      Quote: Akim
      there are 64 Ains and Transnistria? In Uzbekistan, as in Russia, they were taken to the reserve.
      
      All T-54/55/64 part of T-72 go only to the production of BTR-T
      If you upgrade only T-80 and T-72. The rest is not economically viable
      The modernization of the T-72, T-80, should be carried out, as on the T-55M6
      1 Booking Strengthening
      2.New diesel T-72 V-92S2,1000 l / forces T-80 GTD-1250
      3. The tower with the removal of BC in the stern. ,, Object 640,, Black Eagle ,, T-55M6
      4. Strengthening the bottom-mine protection.
      1. cth; fyn
        
        +2
        
        11 March 2013 12: 18
        
        Bask, on 80-ke and 72-ke, and so combined reservation, the engine already has 1050 hp, but the last two points are carried out now on the T-90, which is essentially the T-72BU. T-90 is now a modular design, at the request of the customer, at least T-90MS can be created from a bare can, do you want a contact instead of a relic? yes please do you want a relic? fine! Want an economical 850 horsepower diesel? on !, want a 1000 strong engine excellent!
        The whole essence of the issue is Money, and the RF Ministry of Defense does not want to spend money and therefore everything remains as it is. although you can drive on such sweets that the whole world will bite your elbows.
        
        bask
        
        0
        
        11 March 2013 13: 13
        
        Quote: cth; fyn
        sk, on 80-ke and 72-ke, and so combined reservation, the engine is already 1050
        
        This is the main question. Why MO takes the cheapest version as an upgrade.
        The issue with the tower is simply not breaking through. Until the BC is resolved. The detonation of the BC will mean its complete destruction.
        20 Chechen wars have been completed, there is a ready-made technology and a tower. Why not put ?????
        Happen again, war. Again, our tanks with torn towers will turn on all channels. But no one will explain what it is after 5-6 hits from RPGs.
        T-80 BV No. 180 at the railway station 2.01.1995 goda. 7th, -MEASURES. Sent for major repairs. BC did not detan
        
        T-80BV No. 199 Along Chekhov Street. 31.12.94 years. 4; e hits. 5th detonated BC
        
        If there was a tower with a stern arrangement of VK, destruction of MBT and separation of the tower did not follow.
        IT IS NECESSARY TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM AT ALL NEW MODIFICATIONS.
        
        dixicon
        
        +1
        
        11 March 2013 13: 58
        
        I’m wondering if these tanks had a turret with ammunition on the back of the head, would they have fought a lot under the same conditions? they were also hollowed out from various angles, in particular more often not on the forehead, but on the sides, i.e. 1/2 hit this nape (it’s still large) and ... everything, the tank is for repair, i.e. the tank dropped out of battle, because he cannot shoot.
        
        bask
        
        +1
        
        11 March 2013 14: 18
        
        Quote: dixicon
        mount, i.e. the tank dropped out of battle, because he cannot shoot.
        
        That's right. I got out of the battle. Perhaps on my own.
        Ukrainian modernization of the T-72B ... T-72B-120
        Diesel two-stroke 6TD-2 .1200l / s
        BC in the stern of the tower.
    2. the47th
      
      0
      
      12 March 2013 08: 12
      
      There are all sorts of Pakistan, Syria and other Arab and African republics.
Yarbay

0

11 March 2013 09: 40

*** Modernization of the old T-55 tank really turned out to be original and interesting. *** - in my opinion it will be a little expensive !!
the engine is new, the tower is new and in general almost everything has changed!
1. the47th
  
  +1
  
  12 March 2013 08: 13
  
  But cheaper than a new tank.
cth; fyn

+2

11 March 2013 10: 16

some placeholder

Oh, you don’t just have to darken, it’s perfectly clear that this is the same textolite as on the T-64.
the relatively high cost of repairing and re-equipping old tanks.

And simply put, with the same money, you can buy a T-72 from some Czech Republic or Poland, especially since Poland buys German kittens (Leopards).
The only sensible solution is to cast iron on the front sheet, cheaply and cheerfully.
1. Patton5
  
  +5
  
  11 March 2013 10: 29
  
  The only sensible solution is to cast iron on the front sheet, cheaply and cheerfully.
  Speaking of nano cast iron, I guess?
  1. cth; fyn
    
    0
    
    11 March 2013 12: 04
    
    Pretty boy! Well, a sense of humor is certainly a class, but I think that there is the same textolite as on the T-64, but what else could be if not it?
  2. bask
    
    +1
    
    11 March 2013 13: 31
    
    Quote: Patton5
    Whose nano cast iron I suppose?
    
    Jokes here to nothing.
    We are talking about modernization that will save the lives of our tankers.
    With the performance of a combat mission.
    
    Quote: cth; fyn
    am the same textolite as on the T-64, and what else could be e
    
    Yes, at least, that the main thing DZ ,, Relic, that would stand.
    And once again the tower with the removal of BC in the tower bark.
    When breaking through the armor and fire, there is a chance to escape, the crew and restore the tank.
    1. cth; fyn
      
      +2
      
      11 March 2013 14: 26
      
      There is always room for humor everywhere, it won’t help our tankers, because it’s all there, but they simply don’t buy it because of savings, this is our MO.
    2. Patton5
      
      0
      
      11 March 2013 14: 52
      
      We are talking about modernization that will save the lives of our tankers.
      With the performance of a combat mission.
      If only the highest echelons thought about this, why not replace the "relic" with a "knife" of Ukrainian development (well, or create something like this http://btvt.narod.ru/4/noz/noz.htm at home!) Why until now they will not equip KAZ tanks, etc. Everything, as usual, rests against bank notes and this is very sad (all that remains is ironic!)
Kars

+2

11 March 2013 14: 38

However, initially the T-55 modernization program did not compete directly with the Chinese tank. in Peru, from the very beginning they wanted to upgrade the existing T-55 + to buy new tanks. The main struggle was just for the supply of new tanks, in which they leaned towards the Chinese tank, but then the Peruvians generally decided to postpone the purchase of new tanks until better times. All that remained was the T-55 modernization program, which was previously planned to be done with the help of Kharkiv citizens. The essence of collaboration with the Peruvians will be as follows. The Ukrainian company will supply car kits, and the Peruvian company Casanave will carry out modernization at its facilities. That is, the assembly of finished tanks.

The main weapon of the Tifon-2 tank is a KBM-1M 125 mm caliber gun, equipped with a fire control system with an integrated Buran-Katrin thermal imager and an automatic loader (you can see it in the photo at the rear of the turret), providing up to 8 rounds per minute. The tank can hit targets with armor-piercing shells at distances up to 3500 and with the Combat guided missile up to 5000 m.
1c-inform-city

+2

11 March 2013 17: 30

Not a single tank in the world has all of its ammunition in the tower. For some reason everyone forgets about it. Explode 10 or 40 shells to the crew anyway.
fweadcSZ

0

12 March 2013 00: 39

It seems to be so bad, but no, we have to do worse. The authorities do not cease to amaze. This site just recently came across: http://search-russia.org/main.php?s=20177 where information about each of us has been posted publicly. I don’t know why to do this, but it personally scares me. Nevertheless, I somehow managed to delete my data, though I had to register, but no one could "dig up" anything on me.
Alekseev

+1

12 March 2013 17: 52

Wise thought!
There is no way for one virtual field marshal that there are definitely no good solutions, especially when upgrading tanks. winning in one almost always gives a loss in the other.
But he is fixated on the "rear of the tower", and others (including the designers of our tank design bureaus) are fools ... Just some kind of "peace" ...
Here is a kid poking her finger at the Ukrainian modernization of the T-72, with his favorite "tower stern" (I repeat that it makes sense, but not a panacea)
And that AZ is not in this tank? Or else he was "taken out" somewhere. And where did they take almost 800 liters of diesel fuel out of the building? I will modestly keep silent about a 2-stroke diesel engine (the most heat-stressed in the world), many 64-ks from it burned out without any Chechnya.
In order to get rid of the shortcomings, which, unfortunately, still exist in our MBT (and other BTT) there are no simple ways.
To do this, you need to make a new car with a modular layout, a new level of protection and "other, other"
Let's hope that all this will be in a tank based on the "Armata".
gallville

+1

12 March 2013 18: 23

Here I look at such upgrades and no words. In the old box they stuffed everything that could be done by practically making a new car, while eliminating all the advantages of the basic version and still not achieving the advantages of later models.
The concept of T-55/54 at the present time is an economical option. For armies that have not only money, but also normal personnel.
The personal opinion of what is needed on the T-55 is the modernization of cheap and angry:
1. Night sight in the appendage to what is
2. DZ + lattices
3. Separate parking battery
4. Conder
5. Turret for anti-aircraft machine gun as on the T-80.
6. New tracks
1. Bad_gr
  
  0
  
  12 March 2013 20: 30
  
  Quote: gallville
  1. Night sight in the appendage to what is
  
  In T-55, in addition to daylight, there is also a night sight, but I think the gain will give a replacement for sights with more modern ones (with image stabilization + thermal imager).
  
  Quote: gallville
  3. Separate parking battery
  
  There they are already 4th at 140 A / hour.
  
  Quote: gallville
  4. Conder
  
  Only for regions with very hot climates (thick armor heats up for a long time and cools for a long time, so there is no strong heat in the tank).
  
  Quote: gallville
  5. Turret for anti-aircraft machine gun as on the T-80.
  
  Part of the modifications of the T-55 came with anti-aircraft machine guns DShK
  
  Quote: gallville
  6. New tracks
  
  And what did the old RMSh not please? (they are in the photo, and the anti-aircraft machine gun there)
gallville

0

12 March 2013 20: 49

Quote: Bad_gr
In T-55, in addition to daylight, there is also a night sight, but the replacement of sights with more modern ones (with image stabilization + thermal imager) I think the win will give.

Allocated more expensive than the tank itself. I deliberately did not write such things, motivating precisely the economy option.
Quote: Bad_gr
Quote: gallville
3. Separate parking battery
There they are already 4th at 140 A / hour.

The fact is that with old tanks all systems work only with the engine turned on. And this: 1) motor resources 2) visibility due to temperature.
Quote: Bad_gr
Only for regions with very hot climates (thick armor heats up for a long time and cools for a long time, so there is no strong heat in the tank).

Conder is needed. There are practically no T-55 operators with a non-hot climate.

Quote: Bad_gr
5. Turret for anti-aircraft machine gun as on the T-80.
Part of the modifications of the T-55 came with anti-aircraft machine guns DShK

Not a part, but almost everything with a DShK. That's only from the T-80 turret you can fire without protruding from the tower - remote control.

Quote: Bad_gr
And what did the old RMSh not please?

Well, I don’t like them. I want rubber.
1. Aaron Zawi
  
  +1
  
  12 March 2013 22: 15
  
  gallville
  There were several modifications of the T54 / 5 and T-62 tanks in Israel
  Tiran-4 - T-54 with a standard 100-mm gun. Two - three 7.62-mm Browning M1919A4 machine guns (coaxial and on pivot mounts near the commander’s and loader’s hatches) and one 12,7-mm Browning M2NV machine gun (rigidly above the gun’s barrel, with remote electric launch), 60-mm mortar mounted on machine parts), volumetric boxes for equipment on the starboard side and aft of the turret and aft of the hull, new radio station and PPO system.
  Tiran-4Ш - "Tiran-4" with 105-mm gun M68. Here, "Sh" (the letter "shin" in Hebrew) - from the word "Sharir" (strong) - as the AOI called the 105-mm English gun (both the original L7 and its American version M68, as well as the version produced in Israel licensed by IMI). Ammunition modified for 105 mm shots.
  Tiran-5 - T-55 with a standard 100-mm gun. The rest is similar to the Tiran-4 tank,
  Tiran-5Ш - "Tiran-5" with 105-mm gun M68.
  Tiran-6 - T-62 with a standard 115-mm gun. Three 7,62-mm Browning М1919А4 machine guns (coaxial and on pivot mounts near the commander’s and loader’s manholes) and one 12,7-mm Browning М2НВ machine gun (rigidly above the gun’s barrel, with remote electric launch), 60-mm turret are installed for equipment on the starboard side and aft of the tower and aft of the hull, new radio station and software system.
  Model "8" - an export version of the modernization of the tanks "Tiran-5Ш" and "Tiran-6". appeared in the year 1984. The tank is equipped with: Detroit Diesel 8V-71T engine with 609 horsepower ,; semi-automatic hydromechanical transmission; Blazer dynamic protection weapons stabilizer company HR Textron Incorporated; OMS Matador; heat-insulating cover of the gun; new commander's cupola; passive night devices of the commander, gunner and driver. new tank controls (helm); new equipment boxes, etc.
2. Bad_gr
  
  0
  
  12 March 2013 22: 29
  
  Quote: gallville
  Well, I don’t like them. I want rubber.
  
  RMSh - rubber-metal joint.
  This is a caterpillar and was put on the first T-72s, but then, for the sake of unification, they changed the T-72-90 into a caterpillar as on the T-80, only without a rubber track, although in many respects it loses the old one.
Aaron Zawi

0

12 March 2013 21: 53

During the 1967 Six Day War, Israeli troops captured up to 820 Egyptian tanks and self-propelled guns in the Sinai, among them several hundred T-54 and T-55 (according to some sources - 291 T-54 and 82 T-55). Another 15 T-54 and 5 T-55 were captured in the Golan Heights. About 200 captured vehicles were fully operational, among others there were many tanks with minor damage. Experiencing a constant need to replenish the tank fleet, the Israelis decided to adopt captured Soviet tanks into service. Already in July 1967, the first 130 tanks were commissioned; 81 T-54 and 49 T-55. At the first stage, repairs were carried out, machine guns and radio equipment were replaced, as well as a number of other minor changes were made (parts were partially produced on site, partially purchased in Finland). The Israel Defense Forces have T-54/55 tanks. and then the T-62, called Tiran. Moreover, this name was borrowed not from the island at the exit from the Gulf of Eilat in the Red Sea, but "tyrant" in the sense of a cruel ruler.
In total, in 1968-1969, 146 tanks were adopted by the Israel Defense Forces - 139 in 1968 and 7 in 1969, in the course of further modernization and bringing the tanks to the standards of the Defense Army, the original 100-mm cannon was replaced with a 105-mm American M68. T-54/55 tanks participated in the War of Attrition in 1969-1971, including Operation Raviv on September 9, 1969 - a raid of 6 T-55 and 3 BTR-50 paratroopers along the African coast of the Gulf of Suez, and then in Yom Kippur War in 1973 By the beginning of this war, they constituted 7.6% of the Israeli tank fleet. Irretrievable losses of T-54/55 amounted to 7 vehicles. It should, however, be noted that the brigade equipped with these tanks entered the battle only on October 12, 1973.
In the 1973 year, Israel captured about 1500 Arab tanks (including about 200 T-62), of which 550 was in technically sound condition. Of these tanks, the 400 were put into operation, including the 72 T-62.
In the mid-1970s, T-54/55 and T-62 accounted for up to 20% of the Israel Defense Forces' tank fleet, while the Israel Defense Forces had T-54/55 tanks. and then the T-62, called Tiran. Moreover, this name was borrowed not from the island at the exit from the Gulf of Eilat in the Red Sea, but "tyrant" in the sense of a cruel ruler.