[24] The Military-Industrial Commission (VPK) authorized work on two alternative engines for a wartime T-64, a so-called "mobilization model" that could be produced more quickly and at half the cost.

[24] Finally, an idea from 1960 was used, when a modification of the T-62 had been discussed: In 1961, two prototypes of "Object 167" had been built by Uralvagonzavod to test a stronger hull and running gear combination for that tank.

After 1985, all newly made T-72s came with reactive armour as standard, the more powerful 840 bhp (630 kW) V-84 engine and an upgraded design main gun, which can fire guided anti-tank missiles from the barrel.

With these developments, the T-72 eventually became almost as powerful as the more expensive T-80 tank, but few of these late variants reached the economically ailing Warsaw Pact allies and foreign customers before the Soviet bloc fell apart in 1990.

Depleted uranium armour-piercing ammunition for the 125 mm (4.9 in) gun has been manufactured in Russia in the form of the BM-32 projectile since around 1978, though it has never been deployed, and has less penetration than the later tungsten BM-42 and the newer BM-42M.

[36] In 2018, the 3rd Central Research Institute in Moscow had tested a proof-of-concept demonstration for robotic tank mobility, and was planning to further develop it based on the T-72B3 and other platforms.

Some of the roads and bridges in former Warsaw Pact countries were designed such that T-72s can travel along in formation, but NATO tanks could not pass at all, or just one-by-one, significantly reducing their mobility.

The inside of both hull and turret is lined with a synthetic fabric made of boron compound, meant to reduce the penetrating radiation from neutron bomb explosions.

Like all Soviet-legacy tanks, the T-72's design has traded off interior space in return for a very small silhouette and efficient use of armour, to the point of replacing the fourth crewman with a mechanical loader.

[48] The basic T-72 design has extremely small periscope viewports, even by the constrained standards of battle tanks and the driver's field of vision is significantly reduced when his hatch is closed.

The original T-72 "Ural" Object 172M's (from 1973) turret is made from conventional cast high hardness steel (HHS) armour with no laminate inserts.

According to retired major, James M. Warford, variants developed after the T-72 base model and T-72M/T-72G MBT, featured a cast steel turret that included a cavity filled with quartz or sand in a form similar to US "fused-silica" armour.

Several T-72 models featured explosive reactive armour (ERA), which increased protection primarily against high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) type weapons.

It was added to the T-72 as a response to testing conducted by the Soviet Union against captured Israeli Magach-4 tanks which found that the glacis of the T-72 could be penetrated by the 105mm M111 APDSFS Hetz ammunition.

[58] The T-72B used a new "reflecting-plate armour" (bronya s otrazhayushchimi listami), in which the frontal cavity of the cast turret was filled with a laminate of alternating steel and non-metallic (rubber) layers.

A U.S. Army spokesperson claimed at the show, "the myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest.

The screens appeared to act as a type of slat armour attempting to protect the tanks from top attack weapons such as the FGM-148 Javelin ATGM and small air-to-ground munitions fired from unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

The vast majority of T-72s do not have advanced FLIR thermal imaging sights, which allow night vision at longer ranges and with no infrared lamps.

Like the earlier domestic-use-only T-64, the T-72 is equipped with an automatic loading system, eliminating the need for a dedicated crewmember, decreasing the size and weight of the tank.

Both the T-64 and T-72 carry their two-section 125 mm ammunition (shell and full propellant charge, or missile and reduced propellant charge) in separate loading trays positioned on top of each other; but firstly, in T-64, 28 of these were arranged vertically as a ring under the turret ring proper, and were rotated to put the correct tray into position under the hoist system in the turret rear.

The second difference is that in the T-64 the trays were hinged together and were flipped open as they were brought into position, allowing both the shell/missile and propellant charge to be rammed into the breech in one motion; in the T-72 the tray is brought to the breech as-is, with the shell in the lower slot and the charge in the upper one, and the mechanical rammer sequentially loads each of them, resulting in a longer reloading cycle.

The way that the unused rounds are stored in the autoloader system has been exposed as a flaw, as observers have noted that penetrating hits can easily set off a chain reaction that detonates all of the ammunition.

[86] On 9 June 1982, the Syrian General HQ ordered a brigade of the 1st Armoured Division, recently equipped with T-72 tanks, to move straight ahead, cross the border, and hit the right flank of the Israeli units advancing along the eastern side of Beka'a valley.

Analysis of damage to non repairable vehicles showed that no T-72 were lost to frontal penetration of the hull from man portable anti tank weapons.

[120] On 26 August 2014, the International Institute for Strategic Studies claimed that it had identified a mixed Russian column composed of at least 3 T-72Bs and a lone T-72B3 in the war in Donbas.

[121] In an interview with Dorzhi Batomunkuev in March 2015, it was revealed that he had operated a T-72B as part of a 32 tank Russian army unit when fighting for Debaltseve in Ukraine in February 2015.

[127][128][129] Military analysts have speculated that such grilles were added in an attempt to counter the usage of top-attack weapons, such as the US made FGM-148 Javelin and British-Swedish NLAW, by Ukrainian forces.

[134] Analysts have also speculated that they may be potentially used as a countermeasure against RPG-7s fired from above during urban combat, loitering munitions, or against drone attacks, as a response to lessons learned from the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war.

[135][136] The lack of uniformity between the makeshift cage variants made from different meshes and iron fences suggest that they are largely improvised by the tank crews, and are not standard issue.

[137] In May 2022, some Russian tankers said they eventually removed the cages, as they obstructed the use of machine guns and radios, and prevented evacuation if the tank caught fire.