German main battle tank Leopard 2: stages of development. Part of 9

45
Leopard 2 PSO


German main battle tank Leopard 2: stages of development. Part of 9

First appearance: 2006 year



Taking on the experience of the recent operation of the main combat tanks in various local conflicts, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann developed the Leopard 2 PSO (Peace Support Operation). It is based on the Leopard 2 tank, which has been refined in terms of survivability and sensor systems. The project was more likely to demonstrate the various available technologies than to prepare the machine for production. The modernization of the machine is based on modular kits, which, if necessary, can be added to an existing machine.

While the initial task of the main battle tanks (MBT) was to lead battles at medium and large distances, today's conflicts require a certain level of infantry fire support, even in urban areas. Usually, the incorrect use of MBT is mainly due to the inaccessibility of special support vehicles (such as, for example, the Russian BMPT), rather than the capabilities of modern tanks. However, MBT is currently the most powerful weapon available for direct ground support. This led KMWeg to bring its Leopard 2 PSO model “into people”.

The only prototype shown to the public is based on the usual Leopard 2A5 version, which has been greatly improved. The A5 variant was chosen due to the fact that it has a shorter gun L44. This increases maneuverability, especially in populated areas. The angles of vertical guidance guns have not changed.

The most notable difference from other Leopard 2 options are the additional booking modules on the hull and the tower. As planned by the developers, they should provide circular protection against simple cumulative weapons (up to RPG-7). Unlike other tanks, the PSO option does not rely on simple lattice screens, but on heavy modular protection. The roof of the vehicle is not reinforced, but the vehicle is equipped with the same additional mine protection as that of the Leopard 2A6M tank.

Hydraulically operated dozer blade mounted in front of the hull. It is used to clear obstacles and open trenches. It also enhances the protection of the hull against attacking shells and mines of all types.

All means to improve the passive protection of the tank led to a significant increase in the mass of the machine. It can also be assumed that the center of gravity once again shifted forward.

In order to improve mobility and overcome the effects of weight gain on the Leopard 2 PSO variant, some modifications were made to the chassis and power plant. Since the machine in the MLC70 category is characterized by intense wear of the tracks and drive wheels, the tank was equipped with modern tracks of the 570 PO model and a hydraulic track tension mechanism. The drive wheels engage with tracks of the 570 PO tracks, and not as usual with straps, so these tracks withstand increased loads with less mechanical wear.

In the stern of the hull, the usual power unit of the Leopard 2 tank is installed. At the request of the customer, it can be replaced by a new power unit of the Euro standard. Since it takes up less space, additional tanks with a capacity of up to 400 liters can be added. Looking at the mass of the machine, as well as the expected time of the task, it may be more than appropriate. In addition, the tank can also be equipped with an auxiliary power unit.

Another major change in the Leopard 2 PSO is an improved touch package. The tank is equipped with several cameras that allow the crew to monitor the situation around the car without leaving it. The driver has a high resolution rear view camera and a night vision device in front of the car. The sights of the commander and gunner were not improved, but at the same time they received enhanced protection. The tank is also equipped with the same as the Leopard 2A5DK version, a searchlight mounted on the turret. As for the modifications inside the tank, a fully digital fire control system and operational control system were installed. The latter system also includes a navigation system with maps and the ability to exchange data between departments. The PSO version also has a recorder installed that records the actions and movements of the tank. The fighting compartment and electronics are now cooled by air conditioning.

Finally, a new element of this configuration is the combat module on the roof of the tower behind the hatch of the loader, replacing the standard anti-aircraft machine gun. It consists of automatic weapons, as well as day and night devices, allowing to work around the clock. The battle module loader controls the inside of the machine, there is no need to get up for this and lean out of the hatch. But the installation of the module introduced several drawbacks, including an increase in the height of the vehicle (its projection) and a negative impact on the commander’s field of vision.

The Leopard 2 PSO in its example demonstrates certain configuration options for the Leopard 2 tank for use in urban areas. The tank received advanced sensors and additional booking. At the same time, the projection of the machine became larger, that is, it became easier to detect and, as a result, easier to get into. Potential customers should think twice about what might be worth getting these same improvements, but at a lower cost. Or it may be better to develop a machine that is “sharpened” for future tasks.

Leopard 2A7


First appearance: 2014 year

The Leopard 2A7 is the newest line in the inventory of the tanks of the German army and will remain the standard version of the Leopard 2 for the next few years. The tank is not new, it is a modernized version of the Leopard 2. For the first batch were taken Leopard 2A6 tanks from the presence of the Dutch army. This is a rather strange scheme, because in 2007, Germany leased 20 tanks to Canada from Leopard 2A6M. Instead of returning the tanks and replacing them with new ones, Canada bought 20 used Leopard 2A6NL tanks from the Netherlands and transferred them to Germany. These tanks were modified to A6M standard, and later for A7 standard. The tanks were transferred to the army at the end of the year 2014 and at the beginning of the year 2015. 19 machines Leopard 2A7 will be used in the army, and one will undergo further upgrades and evaluations.

In addition to 20 machines, the German Ministry of Defense decided to upgrade all existing Leopard 2 tanks to the A7 standard and add another 103 tank. Of these, 44 will be transferred to active battalions, 56 will remain at the test sites and in tank schools, and 8 will be used for further evaluation. Ultimately, the total number of A7 standard tanks will be 328 vehicles.

In the tank Leopard 2A7 introduced several new systems, some of them are quite unique. First of all, the standardization process of "А7" consists in bringing it to the standard Leopard 2A6M. It includes the replacement of old smoke grenade installations, the upgrade of radio systems, the new driver's seat, armor plates on the bottom and the translation of all the plates.

The most important change being carried out on the Leopard 2A7 tank is the integration of the IFIS information management system (Integrated Command and Information System). The system allows the exchange of digital data between the tanks of one unit, as well as to increase the level of situational awareness inside the tank. The system includes a display of the output of tactical data and information about the route of movement. IFIS comes in two versions. The full version is intended for platoon and company commanders, as well as their deputies.

Since these tanks have a higher command responsibility, the commander, loader and driver seats are equipped with digital displays. The commander and driver displays replace the usual control panel. Large color displays show tank status, map data or messages. None of the workplaces is equipped with its own keyboard. The IFIS option for the remaining servicemen of the company provides displays only for the driver and commander. Looking at the commercial value of information systems of comparable functionality, this configuration is not entirely justified.

Since IFIS allows the transmission of digital data, the Leopard 2A7 will be equipped with three radio stations, one of which is intended only for data transmission. Old antennas will be replaced by modern Comrod antennas.

The tank A7 installed a new intercom system SOTAS-IP. It is used for communication between crew members inside the tank. But it also includes a communications interface (telephone) in the stern of the tank for communication with supporting infantry. The external interface allows you to exchange data and voice messages. A similar system is also installed on the Puma and Boxer machines.

If the sight of the commander PERI R17 A2 was installed relatively recently on the tank Leopard 2A5, then the A7 variant has already received its new version. The new PERI R17 A3 scope includes a completely new ATTICA thermal imager with a higher resolution and detection range.

Unfortunately, the thermal imager of the gunner was not modernized, while the commander’s sight is fully digital and modular. The gunner’s monitor, which displays images from the sight, is still a cathode-ray tube. Replacing a thermal imager would require a complete redesign of the sight. There would be a chance to get rid of some obsolete structures and get new features. But, apparently, the high cost of replacement did not allow to update the sight.

A small, but very important improvement, implemented in the tank, was the introduction into ammunition of a new additional ammunition. The old universal shell in the future will be decommissioned. In its place will come a new programmable high-explosive fragmentation projectile DM11. The loader now has an additional control unit that allows you to program the fuse. There are three modes of detonation: point detonation, delayed and air explosions. Programming of the fuse takes place automatically in the charging box. The maximum range of the projectile is 5000 meters. But without an improved LMS, the Leopard 2 tank will be able to bombard targets with this projectile only at distances up to 4000 meters.

Leopard 2A7 will be the first tank, the ammunition which will include new high-explosive fragmentation shells. After the stock of the DM12 projectile expires, it is expected that the Leopard 2A6 and А6М tanks will also receive a new projectile sooner or later.

Finally, in the German army’s Leopard 2A7 tanks, air conditioning and an auxiliary power unit are installed. The APU is installed in the right fender, and the air conditioning system in the aft niche of the tower. The APU allows the tank systems to operate when the main engine is shut off, including turret drives and weapons, sights, stabilization and air conditioning.

The armament of the Leopard 2A7 tank has not been upgraded. But then the tank is now equipped with a Barracuda camouflage system.


Option Leopard 2A7 with camouflage system Barracuda

Leopard 2A8

Immediately after deploying the Leopard 2A7 version, Krauss-Maffei Wegmann began work on the next evolutionary version of the Leopard 2. This time the focus is on sighting systems and mobility.

Finally, and now really timely, the gunner’s main target becomes the main theme. Although there is talk that the upgrade will affect only the imager, but most likely, the entire scope will be updated. It is expected that the gunner will be equipped with the latest thermal imaging. It will allow capturing both images and video. The day sight should have a different increase and with it being significantly larger than that of the current sight. This will increase the range of 120-mm guns firing with armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber and high-explosive fragmentation projectiles.

Previous upgrades to the Leopard 2 tank added an extra weight, which negatively affected the overall mobility of the tank. In Leopard 2A8, it seems that this will be corrected to a certain extent. The changes will affect three systems. First, the transmission, in which the sets of gears of the lower gears will be changed. The second is the new onboard gearboxes. Both changes should reduce friction and increase torque, especially in lower gears. As a result, the designers expect to achieve the driving performance of the A4 variant.

And third, since the increased mass and more torque will significantly increase the load on the tracks, they will be replaced by new tracks along with new drive wheels.

Since the Leopard 2A7 tank has been deployed quite recently, you should not expect the А8 variant before the 2018 or 2019 of the year.

Leopard 2A4 Evolution


First appearance: 2008 year

The Leopard 2A4 Evolution model was developed by IBD. The main focus here was on increasing the level of active and passive protection of the tank Leopard 2A4. The main goal was to use available technologies that would minimize the cost of development and procurement. This option is based on the usual tank Leopard 2A4, but has very noticeable improvements in the field of booking. For the front and sides of the hull and the tower used several types of modules. In addition, the tank received additional anti-mine bottom protection and protection of the tower’s roof against attacks from above. On the sides and in the stern they installed lattice screens, which force detonating attacking shells even before meeting with the main armor. Finally, the tank is also equipped with the AMAP-ADS active protection complex. He detects the attacking shells and intercepts them when approaching the tank.

Leopard 2A4 Evolution is a very interesting concept, providing good protection at minimal cost. It also means that tanks can be improved in a short time to the required level. The mass of the complete set is slightly less than 5 tons, the sets for the tower will add another 2 or 3 tons. Since most of the mass is added to the front of the car, the center of gravity has shifted. Neither the suspension nor the power unit of the tank has been modified, and this leads to more intense wear and deterioration of mobility. Since the emphasis in the development was made only on increasing the level of protection, it is worth asking why the gunner’s sight was not moved. He stayed in the same place and is a beautiful vulnerable hole in the front of the tower.

In general, improving the protection of the tank is an excellent thing. But it is worth thinking whether the Leopard 2 is the right machine. If a tank is used in a scenario where only maximum protection helps, you probably need to look for an alternative.

MW Revolution


First appearance: 2008 year

Rev Rev is a retrofit kit currently offered by Rhemmetall Defense for the Leopard 2 tank. It resembles the Leopard 2A4 Evolution variant, since it has the same ballistic protection kit. But modernization is not limited to this. MBT Revolution is equipped with a ROSY (Rapid Obscuring System) smoke curtain system. It consists of four grenade launchers installed at the corners of the tower. The system, which includes laser detectors, is able to install smoke screens of various sizes as quickly as possible. It is activated either automatically when determining the laser beam of the rangefinder or target illumination, or is controlled by the crew. The ROSY system is able to create a smoke cloud in close proximity to the vehicle and expand it as the tank moves.

More changes can be found inside the tank. Rheinmetall offers a completely redesigned interior, including an electric tower and a digital SLA. Customers have the choice of leaving existing sights and controls or replacing them with new ones. And the latter is strongly recommended. The tower’s digital electronics also allows the integration of a new command and control system, including wireless data transfer.

A new feature, previously discussed only for the American tank М1А2 SEP, is the use of a tank for real training. The MVT Revolution kit allows the tank to be part of the training units when targets and information about them can be displayed directly into the scope (augmented reality function). This would allow tank crews to train on real equipment and not use simulators. Learning tasks can run on a static display or even dynamically on a training ground.

The position of the commander of the MVT Revolution tank is equipped with a new SEOSS sight (Stabilized Electro-Optical Sight System - a stabilized optical-electronic sighting system). The sight is stabilized, has a day channel and a Saphir thermal imager. The sight receives digital data from all sensors and can be connected to the digital systems of the tank. One of the interesting features of the SEOSS is the built-in fire control system. It allows you to fully control either the main armament of the tank, or a remotely controlled combat module. Theoretically, this system in the future may allow the use of weapons systems that are not directly included in the tank.

The touch kit contains a so-called situational awareness system. It consists of several day and night cameras located around the tank. They allow you to monitor the situation in the immediate vicinity of the tank.

As already mentioned, the tank is also equipped with a remote-controlled combat module mounted on the roof of the tower. It is controlled by the commander and can accept several models of machine guns. Also to the new equipment include air conditioning and auxiliary power unit.

MW Revolution is currently the most noteworthy version of the Leopard 2 tank. There are, of course, questions for additional reservations, since the shortcomings described for Leopard 2А2 Evolution are “pulled” behind it. A strong argument in favor of this option is the digital turret and the new sight of the commander. They significantly improve the fighting qualities of the tank when working during the daytime. APU and air conditioning are also appropriate.

So far, no customer is interested in such a modernization. If you close your eyes to an additional reservation, the version of the Revolution MBT of the Leopard 2 tank is something you can only dream of!

MW Evolution


First appearance: 2014 year

MBT Evolution is another emerald in the series Leopard 2A4 Evolution and MBT Revolution. While the first demonstrated a new protection kit, and the second a new fire control system for the commander, the Evolution MVT variant is aimed at a practical demonstration of the reservation kit. This tank was presented at the Eurosatory 2014 exhibition with its new defense and ROSY smoke screening system.






MW Evolution variant at Eurosatory 2014

Продолжение следует ...
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    30 December 2016 10: 49
    pleased - "Another significant change in the Leopard 2 PSO variant is an improved sensor kit. The tank is equipped with several cameras that allow the crew to observe the situation around the vehicle without leaving it." -HEHE, and if the Bumblebee arrives after sprinkling the whole video with sticky smog, what will they do ??? in the game of cards they will play out to whom to climb out and clean all the lenses soiled with smog ??? it is not even an hour tode with such a deluge (external cleaning of devices) to fly in TBG from the "seven", and there are a lot of them, read about 9 miles walking around the world
    1. +6
      30 December 2016 15: 31
      partisan

      Bumblebee, can splatter triplex.

      Leopard, a worthy thing ... Taunts are not appropriate.
      1. +4
        31 December 2016 09: 35
        if in an open area the flight distance of the Bumblebee grenade is 1700 meters, it’s not particularly necessary to heal, because everything burns in a volume of 10 m cubic meters, just EVERYTHING, so I won’t make anyone laugh if in buildings !!!! from floors and roofs of buildings !!!!! further and do not continue, practice has already proved everything
      2. +2
        1 January 2017 16: 50
        In at least one battle, he showed himself worthy of?
    2. +2
      31 December 2016 03: 49
      A bumblebee will never fly in the direction of Leo2, you have to find an idiot who will try to burn Leo2 with a Bumblebee, which is essentially a senseless suicide. And these cameras will make it very difficult to try to get closer to Leo2 at the distance of the shot, especially in the dark.
      1. +3
        2 January 2017 07: 05
        Bumblebee will never fly towards Leo2

        In the city, it will fly easily. There, even a Bumblebee is not needed, just a bunch of grenades will be thrown onto the roof from the upper floors.
      2. 0
        21 November 2017 16: 13
        Quote: karabas-barabas
        especially in the dark.

        That is, these are not cameras, but night vision devices?
  2. +4
    30 December 2016 13: 08
    Something I remember the T-34. Until the end of the war, skated with 45mm frontal armor. They did not reinforce, the front rollers were overloaded, the mobility and resource suffered. Now the Germans are putting (or laying down?) On these indicators. With whom and how were you going to fight on this tank?
    1. +1
      30 December 2016 15: 38
      demiurge

      All right.

      The Leopard 2 defense concept was based on firepower and high mobility. Naturally, it does not allow an increase in the mass of the tank due to the increase in armor.

      Given the awareness of the author, it makes sense to assume that the Germans saved a lot, adding a survivability tank at close range.
      Most likely, such a change requires serious restrictions on the operation of the tank, imposed by various instructions.

      More simply, the driver’s mechanic must be more tender, and the tank commander is much smarter.
      1. +2
        30 December 2016 16: 35
        Quote: gladcu2


        Simply, a mechanic driver should be more gentle.

        the mechanics there are generally Lafa, steering wheels (there is a trapezoidal steering wheel there) and a gas / brake push, forward as many speeds as backward, automatic transmission, dviglo holds a certain number of revolutions (to save fuel), and the transmission accelerates and brakes.
        1. +1
          5 January 2017 22: 27
          Does a mechanic live in a tank? something I did not notice hatches - or he climbs out of a tower?
    2. +1
      30 December 2016 15: 43
      Quote: demiurg
      With whom and how were you going to fight on this tank?

      everything for sale, customers shaft.
      1. +1
        24 January 2017 12: 56
        what customers, dunce, this shushpantsyr will drown in the first puddle.
    3. +1
      30 December 2016 17: 26
      for urban battles, and near urban battles, it’s all the same from ATGM if he is beaten with active defense bullets not to avoid, and at least some chance, the Saudis rode on fast BMPs, and the Hussites shot them all for two times, and now no one makes marches like in Berlin, that is, wars are relatively local, and they are brought to countries participating in conflicts by ships / trailers.
      1. +1
        30 December 2016 22: 56
        One hell of a gun on the front of an ATVM Revolution will not be punched - the protection there is very powerful, and the Israeli experience can be used to protect the gap between the tower and the hull - hang thick-link valuables with steel balls.
        1. +3
          31 December 2016 09: 46
          One devil in the forehead of ATRA Revolution will not break

          might not penetrate, but the barrel is bent to the tank, so no adjustment will help, as a result, the ento 67 ton miracle will be in the rank of complete uselessness in military operations
          1. +2
            31 December 2016 15: 39
            "Will blow the muzzle of a tank" - How's that?
          2. +1
            31 December 2016 16: 52
            Does the T-90 have a "muzzle" in such cases, or is it, in contrast to Leo2, useful with a bent "muzzle"? The main and most expensive thing in tanks is the crew! And with the main task, the survival of the crew about the defeat of the tank, Leo2 and Abrams coped perfectly well in real combat.
            1. +1
              1 January 2017 11: 29
              In fact, the task of any weapon is achieve victory. If the only plus is that it breaks, but the crew remains alive - on purqua such weapons ?!
              Krymsky_Partizan is gradually approaching (and brings you) to the idea that tanks (like carriers и starters only 40 shells) DEPRIVING their age like dinosaurs: they are replaced by small robotic wedges and UAVs with a similar or even larger firepowerBut distributed in space, and therefore - more tenacious.
              The price of the tank and the mass of its iron can rivet about a hundred of these tankettes, arming them with guided missiles like Skolopendra.
              Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Karabakh, etc. - have already proved that a tank is a burden and useless scrap metal on the battlefield.
              Mosquito weapons will exterminate them in hundreds.
              Quote: karabas-barabas
              you need to find an idiot who will try to burn Bumblebee Leo2, essentially a meaningless suicide.

              - and this one idiot - robot, more precisely, a Trailer with missiles guided from afar disguised on the route of enemy columns. There may be no people at all - a truncated AI is enough ...
              1. 0
                7 January 2017 14: 14
                Quote: Aviagr
                Robot, more precisely, disguised on the route of enemy columns Trailer with missiles controlled from afar

                - so ... let's not confuse the pedals
                - if the "robot", as you write there, then it is she porridge
                - if the "trailer is in ambush" is a completely different "mess"

                Your trailers have long been invented and adopted for armament. It is called an "anti-tank mine". In PM "onboard", yeah ...

                "Robot" is a much more complex thing, and, accordingly, difficult to implement and expensive.

                Just as an example, imagine this robot wading through a forest of medium density and roughness (chur, not on the road only), while it’s known that there are also swamps in this forest ...

                Will a "robot" pull it? Nope ... "Horse from DARP" to you in the illustration.

                And to drive equipment on the ground, especially "in the machine", is much more difficult than in the air.

                That's about as Yes
                1. 0
                  7 January 2017 14: 32
                  An onboard mine has a range of up to 100m (well, there is an armored personnel carrier - 150), and the Trailer can be in a couple of kilometers in a "sleeping state" until the activation signal. But what will serve as this signal: UAV, ground sensor, Dzhamshut ... - the tenth thing. It is important to fire the missiles exactly at the target, even after clearing this route. And the term "robotic line" has long taken root on conveyors, although they do not go anywhere, do not readjust themselves, but only perform strictly programmed actions - do not engage in casuistry, Terminators will not be around for a long time - and they are not needed with existing power supplies.
                  1. 0
                    7 January 2017 14: 45
                    Quote: Aviagr
                    Airborne mine - range up to 100m (well, there is an armored personnel carrier - 150), and the Trailer can be in a couple of kilometers in a "sleeping state" until the activation signal

                    - only to hide this "trailer" is still more difficult than a mine
                    - and the probability that they will find and destroy him is much greater. Than the same for mine, yeah ...

                    Quote: Aviagr
                    the term "robotic line" has long taken root on conveyors, although they do not go anywhere, do not readjust themselves, but only perform strictly programmed actions

                    - I don’t understand what the "conveyor line" has to do with an automated combat mechanism. Tank.
                    - which tank itself chooses a movement route, goals, provides its own survivability of the setter ...

                    Quote: Aviagr
                    There will be no terminators for a long time

                    - but here I agree. And there won't be "automatic tanks" for exactly the same amount of time.

                    IMHO, essno request
                    1. 0
                      7 January 2017 16: 30
                      Quote: Cat Man Null
                      - only to hide this "trailer" is still more difficult than a mine

                      Hide Trailer in the STRIP 2 km - much easier than mines in the 100 band ..
                      In our plain reality there are very few places where the passage of enemy tank columns will be known with a probability of 99%, and therefore the Trailer with missiles is a more flexible and dangerous robotic tool.
                      Quote: Cat Man Null
                      - I don’t understand what the "conveyor line" has to do with an automated combat mechanism. Tank.

                      Term! Robot - works without / instead of a man!
                      1. 0
                        7 January 2017 16: 44
                        Quote: Aviagr
                        Quote: Cat Man Null
                        - I don’t understand what the "conveyor line" has to do with an automated combat mechanism. Tank.
                        Term! Robot - works without / instead of humans!

                        - once again, for those who ... on the robot:
                        - what do you think is a kind of "robotic line", standing in a dry and clean room, carefully groomed by the adjusters, performing fairly routine operations -

                        - resembles an abstract automated tank, on which they shmish from everything that is not laziness, which climbs through mud, windbreak and other swamps (and at the same time must not drown, yeah), which sets targets for itself, chooses means of destruction and still strikes. Otherwise, the target will do it first, and the "tank" will become sad ...

                        Well, I don’t stick a single gram request

                        IMHO, you are here inventing some kind of sphero-horse ... moreover, not too reasonably.

                        That's all Yes
            2. +3
              2 January 2017 14: 16
              Does the T-90 have a "muzzle" in such cases, or is it, in contrast to Leo2, useful with a bent "muzzle"?
              the T-90 gun is also an Invar-type KUV launcher, the ZUBK of which does not need many of the parameters that are necessary for a classic shot, the KUV only needs to "spit out" the ZUBK (UR) from the barrel and everything else will be done by the lidar controlled by the gunner or the commander in the "double" mode, neither Leo nor Abra have anything like that, they bent the muzzle, read everything, fought back, and here's more about the tank KUV - battles for the Donetsk airport, "wrung out" from the Ukrainians by the DNR T-80 was damaged by a mortar mine into the front projection without penetration, the mechanic drive was concussed, the turret was jammed and the gun was bent, the commander's control system was also out of order, however, the auxiliary installation worked properly, which allowed the gunner to fire from the KUV Reflex extremely accurately, despite the channel deviation barrel from targets to 90 degrees, like this,
              1. 0
                2 January 2017 14: 30
                As you already got with your KWV Invar. Are you praying for him or what? What are you going to punch them with his miserable penetration of 900 mm?
                1. 0
                  4 January 2017 11: 12
                  haha, well, you give, Cornet has a much smaller breakthrough, but it gives a good shot, right ???? Cornet and tank KUV starting from Reflex is one field of berries,

                  "Are you praying for him or what?"
                  the crew will pray for Invar (and others like him) in case of damage, it is not customary for the Soviet tank school to leave the affected vehicle (like all foreign tank crews), firstly, "the hollow is cut in" what and how it works, if something is working properly, then the tank continues his "black" work,
                  and yet, where does the tank have meter armor? or is the matyuk equivalent misleading some TARS? this equivalent for different projectiles is different, just like the effectiveness at different distances, for example, an experienced gunner can put the Reflex on top, and what is the equivalent, everyone knows -50 mm "puff" with an equivalent of no more than 400 mm, and the second, very important circumstance, the tank is a means of supporting the infantry and breaking through the defense ... that's what is important
                  1. 0
                    4 January 2017 23: 31
                    So Abrams has the equivalent of a tower of 1500 mm from the COP, and a case of 1000 mm. And what are you going to punch with Invar with a penetration of 900 mm? And homework for you, tell me how you get to the top of the tower. As far as you know, only Jewelin knows how to make a slide. Burn more.
                    1. 0
                      5 January 2017 22: 30
                      Abrams supposedly 1200 from the COP and 850 from the scrap - somewhere like that, the exact data is secret but definitely not 1500/1000
                      1. 0
                        6 January 2017 10: 26
                        As far as you know, only Jewelin knows how to make a slide. Burn more.
                        I’ll light it up !!! all lidar-based semi-automatic anti-tank systems (in the cone of rotation of the laser beam) fail above the target in order to prevent detection by enemy detectors, and only when approaching the target 3-4 seconds are aimed at the target, thus the SD flies to the target from above, Well, so
                        "Ak U Abrams is equivalent from the tower compressor station 1500mm., hull 1000mm."
                        I remind you once again that it’s not worth playing with equivalents, at Abra On subsequent modifications, starting with IPM1 (1984) and ending with M1A2SEPv2 (2008), the thickness of the frontal armor of the tower is (62 - 700 - 101) 863 mm, where 62 mm is a steel plate, 700 mm is a filler, and 100 mm rear mild steel covered with Kevlar, so that the scrapings would not fly, for tandem cumulative materials (Invar and others like him) this is not a barrier, but otherwise, here is the projection, judge it yourself
                      2. 0
                        7 January 2017 13: 42
                        http://army-news.ru/2014/08/analiz-bronirovaniya-
                        tanka-m1a2-sep-abrams /
                        What are you saying ...
                    2. 0
                      21 November 2017 16: 18
                      Quote: TARS
                      So Abrams has the equivalent of a tower of 1500 mm from the COP, and a case of 1000 mm.

                      They have exactly the "equivalent." But you can’t hold back the equivalent of a shell. And who checked what equivalents are equivalent to? Moreover, such liars as Germans and Americans.! All this is a lie for public relations and the subsequent sale of the product.
            3. 0
              24 January 2017 12: 59
              here you are a storyteller, and who in Syria and Iraq burns so well from our outdated anti-tank systems.
  3. +1
    30 December 2016 13: 17
    And how will the fur of the waters leave the car?
    There is no place at all!
  4. +1
    30 December 2016 15: 42
    Auto RU.

    Many thanks. The series of articles is very interesting.

    Unfortunately, given the number of comments, the VO public is not ready for discussion on such technical reviews. But in this regard, the articles can increase the literacy level of readers, which is very useful in the era of liberal capitalism, seeking to lower the educational standard.
    1. 0
      30 December 2016 17: 19
      authoritarian communism is no better in this respect than lol) some of the sciences were pulled up, some were thrown out.
    2. +1
      31 December 2016 09: 55
      the author is certainly a plus, but the dictum - "the VO public is not ready for a discussion on this kind of technical reviews." - you are fundamentally wrong,
    3. 0
      2 January 2017 07: 12
      The public of VO is not ready for discussion on such technical reviews.

      Although the number of people in the "topic" on the resource has decreased, there are still a lot of them.
  5. 0
    2 January 2017 07: 14
    Thanks for the review! Despite the small number of pluses and comments, be sure that your cycle finds a grateful reader. I wish you success!
  6. 0
    7 January 2017 13: 44
    Crimean partisan 1974,
    Similarly, study ...

    http://army-news.ru/2014/08/analiz-bronirovaniya-
    tanka-m1a2-sep-abrams /
  7. 0
    7 January 2017 17: 37
    Cat Man Null,
    Well, I don’t stick a single request

    IMHO, you are here inventing some kind of sphero-horse ... moreover, not too reasonably.

    Well, add grams - holidays still wassat
    It’s you who drove yourself some kind of miracle into Bosko, and I have a specific unit: Hog as a miniature robotic self-propelled gunner and Borov-controlled trailers with missiles disguised in the folds of the terrain - i.e. Boron does not carry anything with itself, except for 30-40pcs 40-mm grenade grenade launcher in a cumulative version.
    And there can be hundreds of these Hogs, and if one of them fails, the other takes control of the missiles from the Trailers. Or it transfers this control to UAVs - which, again, do NOT carry ANYTHING except optics (although there are UAV-missile boxes - which carry missiles for UAV-gunners). Read my tactics of Mosquito weapons in the Profile - it will be clearer.
    But tanks are not needed!
    1. 0
      7 January 2017 18: 06
      Quote: Aviagr
      Read my tactics of Mosquito weapons in the Profile - it will be clearer.

      - I read ... Honestly - Pts is fresh, only my hair is on end for some reason laughing
      - there are trailers on which "self-launching" (where, by the way ??) rockets "stings" are transported,
      - there are "Hogs" that carry these trailers and operate them (also, however, it is not clear - according to the algorithm (s) and in general - with what fright)
      - the proposal to equip each soldier with a separate "trunk", which he must carry on himself, caused a stormy and prolonged laughter.
      - I haven’t mastered it yet, I’ll go and drink tea ...

      The first impression is that you still exaggerate a lot ... or something. And downplay wink

      But tanks are still needed, and will be needed for a long time. Like many other other ... um ... special equipment Yes
      1. 0
        7 January 2017 18: 55
        Fighters do not PUSH - but TOW. Scolopendras are induced WHERE HARDS or UAVS SAY. Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Karabakh, etc. - have already shown that the tanks have no space left on the battlefield. Attack UAVs and fire support for guided missiles from the Trailers - this is the future of all winners on land.
        At sea - it is also written there.
        1. 0
          7 January 2017 19: 03
          Quote: Aviagr
          Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Karabakh, etc. - have already shown that the tanks have no space left on the battlefield.

          - mdya ... your energy, but for peaceful purposes (s)
          - I’ll go on drinking tea. Do not understand me request
          1. 0
            7 January 2017 19: 09
            In the comments to the articles there are many explanations even to such lost. War, like any science, is systematized and formalized - which our slow-thinking people are not able to do. Therefore, there are no victories either in Syria, or in past Afghanistan, or in future wars ...
            Quote: Cat Man Null
            Your energy, but for peaceful purposes (c)

            There are also peaceful developments - in the era of universal drank they are also not in demand.