Tank War-Central Front (Elite Series No. 26) [Paperback]

Steven Zaloga (Author), Simon McCouaig (Illustrator)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 28, 1989 | Series: Elite

In the late 1980s, with the Intermediate Nuclear Force Treaty in effect, public attention turned to discussions of conventional weapons in Europe, particularly tanks. Though the importance of tanks had dimished since their heyday in the Second World War, on the modern battlefield they remained the dominant weapon.This text, enhanced by colour plates and photographs, examines the NATO and Warsaw Pact tank forces of that era, focusing on tank firepower and crew training, and speculates as to the possible outcome had a conventional land war been fought between them.

Editorial Reviews

From the Publisher

An unrivalled illustrated reference source on fighting men and commanders, past and present. Each volume is packed with full colour artwork, making military history uniquely accessible to enthusiasts of all ages.

About the Author

Steven J. Zaloga was born in 1952, received his BA in history from Union College, and his MA from Columbia University. He has published numerous books and articles dealing with modern military technology, especially armoured vehicle development. His main area of interest is military affairs in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the Second World War, and he has also written extensively on American armoured forces.

Product Details

• Paperback: 64 pages
• Publisher: Osprey Publishing (September 28, 1989)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0850459044
• ISBN-13: 978-0850459043
• Product Dimensions: 7.3 x 0.2 x 9.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 7 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #198,482 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Steven Zaloga is a senior analyst for Teal Group Corp., an aerospace consulting firm. His professional specialization is the commercial and technological aspects of the international trade in missiles, precision guided munitions, and unmanned aerial vehicles. He also serves as an adjunct staff member with the Institute for Defense Analyses, a federal think-tank.

Mr. Zaloga has published numerous books and articles on military technology and military history. His books have been translated into Japanese, German, Polish, Czech, Romanian, and Russian. He has been a special correspondent for "Jane's Intelligence Review" and is on the executive board of the "Journal of Slavic Military Studies". From 1987 through 1992, he was the writer/director for Video Ordnance Inc., preparing their TV series "Firepower" that aired on The Discovery Channel in the US.

Mr. Zaloga was born in 1952 and received his BA in history from Union College, Schenectady, NY. He received an MA in history from Columbia University specializing in modern East European history, and did graduate research and language study at Uniwersitet Jagiellonski in Krakow, Poland.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Ok let's be fair, the russian are not stuipid, March 27, 2011

By 

Raven - See all my reviews

This review is from: Tank War-Central Front (Elite Series No. 26) (Paperback)

ok,overall this is a good book with detail breakdown of figur and number of total number of tanks and AFV for both side. couple things to watch out through:

1.the author have not read (or had access) to all the tech the soviet had. book repeat point out that reactive amor do not work vs APFSDS round, which is not true as US latter find out after could war. (To be effective against kinetic energy projectiles, ERA must use much thicker and heavier plates and a correspondingly thicker explosive layer. Such "heavy ERA," such as the Soviet-developed Kontakt-5, can break apart a penetrating rod that is longer than the ERA is deep, again significantly reducing penetration capability.)Introduced on the T-80U tank in 1985 the Kontakt-5 are one of such armor.

The effectiveness of Kontakt-5 ERA was confirmed by tests run by the German Bundeswehr and the US Army.The Germans tested the K-5, mounted on older T-72 tanks, and in the US, Jane's IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness confirmed that "when fitted to T-72 tanks, the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the depleted uranium penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which were among the most formidable tank gun projectiles at the time." the the book point that use of reative amor as a sign of soviet tank loss it's effective is at best questionable.

So the Fictional battle is highly unlikely to play out before like the book wrote, as in 1990-2000 fictional time line the soviet will most likely have kontakt-5 ERA
on not just all it's T-72 tank (t-72BM it's now call t-90) even newer ERA would have been build into the T-80 Tank (As a response to the M829A3, the Russian army have designed Relikt, the most modern Russian ERA, which is claimed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5 It detonates on command before the round hits based on information from radar.) so just to be note on this when read the book.

4 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Truth is in the middle, August 22, 2009

By 

cpt matt (tanktown, DE) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Tank War-Central Front (Elite Series No. 26) (Paperback)

I bought this book because I served in M-1 tanks in Germany 83-86. Back then, we knew we were going to fight outnumbered. We expected to win. We knew we had better training, a better tank (better gun, the M-1 can fire accurately on the move, has better firepower and protection). Oh, and better tactics, command and control.

I agree the fictional war scenario in the beginning is silly. That is only a few pages, and was popular writing style back then (this was first published in 1989 before Gulf 1).

The author Steven Zaloga is an armor expert, especially on Soviet equipment. We know now that everything the Soviets put out in the field is junk. The T-72 is vastly inferior to the NATO tanks. Hit it and watch the turret fly 50 feet in the air. It does not have good night vision and cannot fire accurately on the move. US tankers are better trained and can fire more rounds per minute. The book captures these facts, outlines numbers of each country that would have fought.

The book addresses all of the critical factors in a "what if" war with NATO and Warsaw pact. Numbers of tanks, tranining, equipment. The US Army has professional soldiers, officer and NCO corps. That leads to a better army. We trained more in the field than any other army.

The NTC? Every tanker who visits there will tell you the same thing. The "OPFOR" (bad guys) are the best trained tankers in the world, have "home field" advantage. They know the terrain. And, no one, not even the Soviets, uses reconaissance as well as the OPFOR. US and Isreali tankers who have been to the National Training Center all say it is tougher than war. It's supposed to be. Better to learn in peace than the hard way. Ask the Iraqi's. Or anyone the Isreali's fought against.

There are many excellent color diagrams showing the camoflague schemes of the tanks and uniforms of the soldiers as well.

This is an overview of the facts, but at 64 pages, that's all it's supposed to be. I enjoyed this book, especially looking back at the opinions that were being written 20 years ago. Recommended for those just getting into armor history or collecters who want to add something different to the libray.

4 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars Yes, I think it's lop-sided too., December 13, 2008

By 

JAG 2.0 (IN United States) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Tank War-Central Front (Elite Series No. 26) (Paperback)

As usual, the color plates are very good and the photos of equipment are plentiful. It's what one could expect from an Osprey title.

However, I must state for the record that a small unit of American M1A1 Abrams tanks decimating a much larger Soviet unit is simply not credible. At NTC (Fort Irwin), the units simulating the Soviets and using simulated Soviet equipment and Soviet tactics usually win. They do so even though outnumbered and with exercises always scripted to the advantage of the blue forces.

Methinks the author needed to be a little more objective lest his view of the Soviets/Russians become "All we have to do is kick in the front door and the whole rotten ediface will fall in!" I wonder who said that and how it turned out for him?