Talk:PT-76: Difference between revisions

Military history: Land vehicles / Technology / Weaponry / Asian / Chinese / Indian / Russian & Soviet / South Asia B‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles B This article has been rated as B-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military land vehicles task force Military science, technology, and theory task force Weaponry task force Asian military history task force Chinese military history task force Indian military history task force Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force South Asian military history task force

I don't know who wrote that the PT-76 was replaced by the BMP-1 but that's not the case. The two were designed for quite different missions and while some operators might have used the BMP as a light tank the Soviets didn't use it for that.

Wasn't the PT-76 replaced by the BMP-R in the reconnaissance role (the statement in the article is still wrong)? —Michael Z. 2005-07-13 14:25 Z

I saw a picture of more than 15 of these going down Moswcow streets,but they could have been the BMP-1. Dudtz 7/20/05 2:19 PM EST

Our article says "Plavayushchy Tank (Плавающий Танк)", but I have a published source that says Plavuchii Tank. Any idea which is correct, or if it even matters? —Michael Z. 2005-10-21 17:09 Z

"Плавающий" literally means "one that swims" (i.e. has one role and that is swimming), whereas "плавучий" is more like "amphibious". Hence logically, it would seem that the tank was called the latter but I have no certain information about this --72.137.194.104 00:09, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the factory's name which built the PT-76 but on the following website it states the vehicle wasn't built there until 1958.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/armored_vehicles/pt-76.htm

According to this the clash at Ben Het took place on 3 March 1970, not 3 March 1969. Meanwhile the WikiCommons image of the destroyed tank gives the year as 1968. Which of these is correct? Drutt (talk) 07:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On closer examination, both the 1969 and 1970 dates are stated by this source, so I'll assume the 1970 date is a misprint. Drutt (talk) 07:17, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just spent most of a weekend editing this article down from a massive 56000 bytes to a more managable (and comprehensible) 48000, a lot more could be trimmed I'm sure, but I'm not the one to do it; what is the optimal article length?

There are still some things that I don't understand. For instance, there are over 60 template and 9 category entries on the edit page. but I can't get at them. Don't they need editing as well? If so, how? RASAM (talk) 18:51, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the data table says approximately 12,000 vehicles were built, but the service history mentions 5,000 with 2,000 being exported; is it possible to clarify the correct number please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.42.131 (talk) 19:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Its V-6, 6-cylinder, 4-stroke, in line, water-cooled, diesel engine..." The engine is a water cooled, 4-stroke diesel, and it has 6 cylinders, but is it a v6, or does "in line" describe the water cooling? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.185.65.202 (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

V-6 is the model number of the engine, which is a straight six - effectively half of the V12 engine that powers the T-54