Military Review

Project Mobile Ground Combat System. New tanks for France and Germany

47
The emergence of the latest Russian tank The T-14 Armata, which has a number of characteristic features and serious advantages over existing equipment, could not but disturb the foreign military. The armies of European countries do not intend to allow a backlog in the field of armored forces, and therefore initiated the creation of a new combat vehicle. The European response to the Russian T-14 tank should be a promising model, while bearing the working designation MGCS.


9 May 2015 Russia for the first time officially showed its newest T-14 tanks. At that time this equipment was at the testing stage and was not yet ready for operation in the army. However, the new Russian project was cause for concern. Further development of a promising tank and the launch of its mass production could give the Russian army decisive advantages over the ground forces of third countries. While other states were again talking about a certain Russian threat, France and Germany decided to respond to “Armat” with their own ambitious program.


Leopard 2A7 + - the latest at the moment modernization of the German tank. Photos of Below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.fr


Already in the summer of 2015, it was announced that the leading defense companies in Germany and France intend to join forces and upgrade the armored forces of the two countries. It was proposed to first upgrade the existing equipment, and then develop a promising main battle tank, fully complying with the requirements of the present time and the foreseeable future. To obtain the desired advantages of an organizational and technological nature, the project participants decided not only to work together, but also to unite at the organization level. The German company Kraus-Maffei Wegmann and the French Nexter Defense Systems merged into a holding. The united organization was named KNDS - KMW and Nexter Defense Systems.

The merger of the two companies was held for simple and understandable reasons. Firstly, the joint work of leading defense enterprises will ensure the use of all available experience in the field of armored combat vehicles. The second reason is cost sharing. For a number of reasons, at the moment France and Germany cannot independently create the desired model of military equipment. Finally, the KNDS holding will be able to circumvent some of the existing restrictions. German industry, for political reasons, can not always sign a contract for the supply of equipment to a specific country, and the participation of France will allow to get rid of such problems.

The new program of updating the tank fleet carries the working title MGCS - Mobile Ground Combat System ("Mobile Ground Combat System"). In the future, the promising main tank created during the program is likely to receive another designation. According to the announced plans, a part of the project should have been implemented during the second half of the current decade. In addition, much of the development work will move to the twenties. The start of mass production of MGCS tanks will begin only by 2030 year. Because of this, the project is sometimes referred to as MGCS 2030.

It is curious that in the framework of the MGCS project it is planned not only to create a completely new tank, but also to update the existing ones. Thus, the two phases of the Mobile Ground Combat System program of the three provide exactly the refinement of existing tanks. According to various sources, in the foreseeable future, KNDS intends to upgrade the electronics and weapons of existing Leopard 2 tanks. Only after that the main works on designing a full-fledged tank of a new model will start.

Despite the existence of such plans, starting from 2016, the developers of the MGCS project indicated that in the first few years the aim would be to shape the appearance of the new tank and define technical requirements. Not earlier than 2017-18, the year was supposed to begin the preparation of design documentation, as well as the elaboration of those or other units. The end of the project stage belongs to the beginning of the next decade.

If the MGCS project at the current early stages has not encountered any problems that could affect the timing of the work, then by now KNDS specialists may at least have a general idea of ​​the future appearance of the tank. It should be noted that to date, the developer has not announced the technical details of the project. However, certain participants in the work several times published certain information that can form the basis of a relatively complete picture.


French MBT AMX-56 Leclerc. Photo of Wikimedia Commons


According to available data, the MGCS project proposes the development of a main tank with a combat mass of no more than 60 t. Enhanced booking and other means of protection should be used that can increase the survivability of equipment on different battlefields. Also, a new type of tank should differ from existing machines with increased firepower. Such a task can be solved both with the help of a reinforced gun of a larger caliber and through more advanced fire control systems. An important part of the project will be the automation of some operations. First of all, it is proposed to automate the supply of ammunition in the gun.

In the recent past, it was indicated that in 2017 or in 2018, the KNDS holding will complete the development of the concept of a promising tank MGCS and only after that will it be able to start developing the project. There is reason to believe that this stage has already been completed, so that the program can move to another stage, but there are no official reports on this subject. One way or another, if the formation of the tank’s appearance has not yet been completed, then it will have to end as soon as possible. Perhaps the company-developer will not hide information about it and announce the imminent start of the design.

According to known data, the requirements for the MGCS project limit the combat weight of the tank 60-65 to tons. Further growth of this parameter can lead to a sharp drop in mobility and strategic mobility. At the same time, weight reduction may impose restrictions on survivability and combat qualities. In addition, the weight limits allow us to present the approximate characteristics of the desired power plant.

In order to obtain sufficient mobility, a French-German tank will have to have an engine of about 1200-1500 horsepower. At the same time, the specific power of the machine will reach the level of 25 hp. per ton - optimal performance for the tank with the desired characteristics. Most likely, the diesel power plant will be used. Engines of this type are used on both German Leopard-2 and French AMX-56 Leclerc.

Considered various ways to ensure proper vitality, as well as their various combinations. Most likely, the MGCS tank will receive its own combined armor with protection characteristics no worse than those of modern tanks of Germany and France. Reservations for the hull and turret can be supplemented with dynamic or active protection. At the same time, the use of such systems will require the implementation of additional projects.

In 2016, the company Rheinmetall AG, participating in the MGCS program as a developer of weapons, presented a draft of a smooth-bore tank gun with enhanced characteristics. For a significant increase in the energy of the projectile, it was decided to use the caliber 130 mm. Also, as far as we know, the possibility of increasing the caliber of the gun to 140 mm was considered, but such a tool, according to calculations, turned out to be too large and heavy for a promising tank. An increase in the caliber of just 10 mm provides an almost 50 percent increase in muzzle energy with corresponding consequences for combat effectiveness.

Project Mobile Ground Combat System. New tanks for France and Germany
The possible appearance of the future tank MGCS. Figure Rheinmetall AG


The gun of the French tank Leclerc is equipped with an automatic loader, while in the German Leopard 2 there is a separate crew member responsible for supplying ammunition to the gun. As follows from News about the MGCS project, it is proposed to introduce the features of the French AMX-56 into the look of a promising tank. Designers plan to abandon the loader and replace it with automation. Given the increased caliber, leading to an increase in the mass of shots, this solution looks logical and correct.

It should be noted that information about the automatic loader can be a transparent hint at the intention of the holding KNDS to create a full-fledged uninhabited tower. Such equipment is already used on Russian promising tanks and gives them certain positive features. It is possible that German and French engineers will show interest in a promising layout.

The main tank MGCS will need a modern fire control system, able to realize all the advantages of the new gun of increased caliber. In its composition, obviously, there will be sights of the commander (panoramic) and the gunner with day and night channels. Perhaps the on-board computer will be able to receive data on targets from third-party sources and target designation to other tanks.

Any information about the additional weapons of the future French-German tank is not yet available. Apparently, according to the experience of existing projects, the combat vehicle will be equipped with a remote-controlled module with a rifle or large caliber machine gun. Also promising tank borrows from a modern set of smoke grenade launchers.

To date, the Mobile Ground Combat System program did not have time to advance further the work on the formation of a common concept. At the same time, there is already information on approaches to the future design and production of finished units. For example, in March last year, the head of the General Directorate of Armaments of the French Ministry of Defense, Laurent Collet-Beyon, said that in the medium term, a joint French-German development tank would be adopted. Its chassis will be created by the German side, and the French participants of the program will develop a tower and a fighting compartment. How such plans correlate with the latest work of the Rheinmetall company in the field of tank guns is unknown.

Having certain information about the plans for the MGCS project, you can make some predictions and preliminary conclusions. So, judging by the data already published, the new French-German tank will be a very interesting combat vehicle with high performance. It will combine sufficient mobility, a high level of protection and enhanced combat qualities. In general, after its appearance, this car will be in the center of attention of the whole world just as the Russian tank “Armata” is currently.


Experienced 130-mm tank gun from Rheinmetall. Photo Bmpd.livejournal.com


You can also imagine what problems the new project will face. It is hardly necessary to remind that the MGCS program is not the first attempt to create a “European” tank by the forces of several countries. Previous joint projects were quite successful from a technical point of view, but did not lead to the desired results. Due to differences in a number of issues, participants in such programs broke off cooperation and created the desired armored vehicles on their own.

Whether the MGCS will be able to overcome all the problems and reach the mass production with operation in the army is unknown. The current situation with the development of the armed forces of large European countries, as well as the presence of large bureaucratic structures that do not always make the right decisions, can make it difficult for armored vehicles in the army.

In the context of bureaucracy and administrative difficulties, it is worth considering the financial features of the new project. While we are talking only about the modernization of existing tanks, the cost of the work may remain acceptable. But a full-fledged new armored vehicle, built from scratch, will be much more expensive than the modernized Leclerc or Leopard. The price of a serial MGCS may reach several tens of millions of euros. Naturally, the equipment at such a price will attract the attention of different structures and will be subject to fierce criticism.

According to current plans, the production tanks of the Mobile Ground Combat System program will have to go to the troops no earlier than the end of the next decade. In this case, such a technique is considered as the French-German response to the Russian tank T-14. It is easy to see that in such a situation, the Russian armored car has a big head start. Russian tank builders can use the existing gap in 10-12 for years to create new versions of “Armata” with higher performance. Because of this, the KNDS holding may find itself in the position of catching up without much hope of a fundamental change in the situation.

A promising French-German program for modernizing existing tanks and developing a completely new machine is of great interest. As it follows from the well-known data, the MGCC project may encounter various difficulties and not lead to the desired results. Nevertheless, despite all the possible failures and problems, this program should be monitored. It will show how foreign specialists see the future tank, and besides, it will demonstrate the real potential of European industry.


On the materials of the sites:
http://janes.com/
http://armyrecognition.com/
https://rg.ru/
http://defence.ru/
http://ng.ru/
http://militaryparitet.com/
https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/
Author:
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aws4
    aws4 15 February 2018 05: 34
    +2
    An increase in caliber of only 10 mm provides an almost 50 percent increase in muzzle energy with corresponding consequences for combat effectiveness ..... is this really true ??????? 120 mm - 130 mm, and such an increase of 50 percent .. with calibers of 80 mm - 90 mm, yes, 10 mm would give such an increase, but here I don’t understand why ???? can someone tell me stupid .. really interesting even my knowledge is limping apparently (((((((((((((
    1. lexx2038
      lexx2038 15 February 2018 06: 00
      0
      Well, without going into the details of physics, as it were. True, and the weapon carrier proportional returns will and will have to solve this rather difficult task. I read that during the Second World War our designers solved problems with the power of tank guns - it's not so simple. Very interesting topic.
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 15 February 2018 20: 41
        0
        Quote: aws4
        An increase in caliber of only 10 mm provides an almost 50 percent increase in muzzle energy with corresponding consequences for combat effectiveness ..... is this really true ???????

        Quote: lexx2038
        Well, without going into the details of physics, as it were.

        But in vain do not go into it, actually not. A 15% increase in caliber gives a 50% increase in muzzle energy, all other things being equal. For 120 mm guns - by 18 mm. That is, apparently, an increase in muzzle energy is not only due to an increase in caliber. Actually muzzle energy can be increased without a physical increase in the gun.
        1. aws4
          aws4 16 February 2018 00: 57
          0
          why then not increased? as you said without a physical increase in the gun ??? and to be honest I didn’t quite understand what you meant by - physical increase in the gun?)))))))))))))
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 16 February 2018 17: 43
            0
            Quote: aws4
            what did you mean by - physical increase in the gun?))))))))))))))

            The increase in caliber.
            Quote: aws4
            as you said without a physical increase in the gun ???

            You can make better gunpowder, you can increase the charge of gunpowder without increasing the caliber.
            Quote: aws4
            why then not increased?

            Used all the ways to increase the muzzle energy, why these nagging words, you have nothing to do?
            1. aws4
              aws4 16 February 2018 23: 54
              0
              nitpicking ??? I just didn’t understand and decided to clarify no more .. and if you noticed I thought that you understand this because I clarify but obviously your knowledge is not much more than mine ... thanks I won’t bother you anymore ...
              1. Setrac
                Setrac 17 February 2018 00: 06
                0
                Quote: aws4
                nitpicking ??? I just did not understand and decided to clarify no more ..

                Quote: aws4
                and if you noticed, I thought that you understand this because of this and clarify but obviously your knowledge is not much more than mine ...

                Quote: Setrac
                why are these nit-picking words, you have nothing to do?

                Your sarcasm is inappropriate.
                Quote: aws4
                I thought that you understand this

                Here you do not need to understand, there are few of them - ways to increase the muzzle energy: improve gunpowder, increase the combustion chamber and increase the caliber. This is understandable to any non-specialist who did not skip physics and chemistry at school. And experts are already versed in the types of vice, in the physics of its combustion, in metal science, and so on.
                Quote: aws4
                thank you no longer bother you ...

                On offended carry water ???
                1. aws4
                  aws4 17 February 2018 00: 44
                  0
                  I don’t know whether or not they’re asking this question to yourself, it’s obvious that you were offended at first and now you’ve also seen sarcasm somewhere ... you are a strange person, you wanted to talk, ask, learn something new for yourself (from you) in the end it all ended up then delirium ... why see the catch everywhere?
                2. Vladislav 73
                  Vladislav 73 17 February 2018 14: 06
                  +2
                  I apologize for my 5 cents hi
                  Quote: Setrac
                  enlarge the combustion chamber

                  The combustion chamber is for engines, for example rocket engines. In firearms - even in hand guns, at least in artillery - this is a charging camera (it’s a camera and not a camera). hi
                  1. Setrac
                    Setrac 17 February 2018 14: 15
                    +1
                    Quote: Vladislav 73
                    The combustion chamber is for engines, for example rocket engines. In firearms - even in hand guns, at least in artillery - this is a charging camera (it’s a camera and not a camera).

                    I just forgot what it is called, what Camora remembered, and how it was burned or not, I didn’t remember. Engines are closer to me than guns.
        2. aws4
          aws4 16 February 2018 01: 10
          0
          and I read that, ceteris paribus, as you wrote by 12%, but even if I forgot something or mixed it up, it still doesn’t work, you yourself wrote that for 120 mm 18 mm as races of 15%, as far as I know all the trunks 120 mm NATO I didn’t want to work it out, which is why the Rh120 44 couldn’t squeeze anything out of this barrel and a gun with 55 appeared ... maybe all the same some new technologies that we don’t know or catch fluff in the eye ????
      2. yehat
        yehat 21 February 2018 17: 58
        0
        the problem of returning heavy-duty guns has already been solved at the very least in a whole bunch of ways
        rather, it is a problem of design endurance.
        here, NATO has one hardly noticeable plus - they are guided by a mass of MBT 60t (usually fattening up to 70-73), and we have an orientation of 50t, which is essential to quench the rollback
    2. vlad007
      vlad007 15 February 2018 08: 21
      0
      Quote: aws4
      An increase in caliber of just 10 mm provides an almost 50-percent increase in muzzle energy ...


      And brings the TANK closer to the SPG.
      1. avt
        avt 15 February 2018 11: 52
        +1
        Quote: vlad007
        And brings the TANK closer to the SPG.
        wassat
        How much did you drink this champagne !?
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 15 February 2018 08: 35
      +2
      Already if only because the increase in mass of the projectile from the caliber is proportional to the cube.
      1. aws4
        aws4 15 February 2018 18: 59
        0
        and that’s all right .. but not 50% from 120 to 130 ... apparently there’s something fundamentally new and the barrel for some new yet unknown technologies and some special gunpowder ... tell me more .. it's just interesting what images without the use of some new technologies will they raise 50% of muzzle energy ** ??? I'm not a surface knowledge scientist
        1. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr April 24 2018 20: 21
          +1
          It was planned to put a 130mm caliber gun on our Chelyabinsk tank. But, as usual, Chelyabinsk residents once again had no luck with the introduction of their development.
          And the tank (Object 785) was planned not bad:
          "... the frontal leaf, and indeed the bow of the hull, had an original design, which will subsequently be borrowed developed on Kharkiv and Tagil promising machines vol. 187, vol. 477 and, of course, vol. 195 .....
          ... the chassis received 7 track rollers per side. (similar to the T-80 rollers) ...
          .... "785th" and had a complex of active defense "Drozd" with 18 launchers firing protective ammunition. The main armament was a powerful 130mm rifled gun with an ammunition load of 50 rounds. This is the largest stock of shots among Soviet tanks of the second generation. And 30 shots were in the automatic loader ......
          .... engine type 2B (1200l / s) ... "
  2. Wolka
    Wolka 15 February 2018 06: 39
    +1
    in order to create something tankeuropean, for a start, the eU must unhook the usa and get out of NATO ...
  3. inkass_98
    inkass_98 15 February 2018 07: 09
    +2
    Everything can be as in the case of the MVT - they harnessed together, then beat the pots and started making Abrams and Leopard-2, respectively. And the cost of promising armored vehicles surpasses, of course. There will be a lot of people wishing to grab their piece from such a project. The only (relative) gain is the Rheinmetal, which is developing in full measure the development of the 130-mm guns. And there is a chance that this weapon will also become the main one in NATO tanks, as now.
    1. san4es
      san4es 15 February 2018 08: 59
      +1
      Quote: inkass_98
      ... The winnings (relative) are only Rheinmetal.

      According to the latest data, by the year of 2018, the German defense industry should bring more than 100 units of such equipment as the “Leopard-2” tanks to the “state” of the MBT Revolution. In reality, a new generation of tanks will be mass-produced (according to German sources) no earlier than in 15 years.
      The concept of the MBT Revolution tank was demonstrated by German manufacturers long before the same German manufacturers saw the T-14 Armata (at the Victory Parade in Moscow). MBT Revolution as a modernization concept for the "Leopard 2A4" was presented in 2011 at the arms exhibition in Paris. The concept of MBT Revolution, according to developers, is aimed at improving protection, optimizing the design, updating elements and fire control units. However, 4 years ago, the Bundeswehr did not consider it necessary to invest heavily in the idea of ​​Rheinmetall, but now it declares that it will “catch up and overtake” Armata.

      1. Ramzaj99
        Ramzaj99 18 February 2018 10: 58
        +1
        Given that LEOPARD 2, shattered to smithereens by the old Soviet bassoon ...... I would not have made a big bet on LEOPARD 3. Leopards almost never fought, unlike the constantly fighting T-72 and T-90 .....
  4. EvilLion
    EvilLion 15 February 2018 08: 36
    +3
    Given that in Europe even existing tanks are not being built, this is not even funny.
  5. Victor_B
    Victor_B 15 February 2018 09: 05
    +3
    On the one hand, there is nothing worse than waiting and catching up, but on the other, there is a guideline that must be exceeded.
    Money, brains and the most modern industry available.
    For any gash.
    1. Graz
      Graz 15 February 2018 15: 24
      0
      cost lyamov under 20 eureka?))
  6. Kars
    Kars 15 February 2018 11: 04
    +4
    The sketch is a usual modification of Leo 2-4 with a hole in the forehead.
    And so there is a story with MVT-70 I think it will be the same.
    1. avt
      avt 15 February 2018 11: 59
      +3
      Quote: Kars
      The sketch is a usual modification of Leo 2-4 with a hole in the forehead.
      And so there is a story with MVT-70 I think it will be the same.

      request It will be possible to speak about some kind of “European” MBT ONLY when France and the FRG agree. But I somehow doubt that we will see it. As practice shows, the Franks in military affairs will stand by and keep their school and industrial base to the last. that ,, eclair "separately, ,, kittens" separately. .... and between them also ,, spaghetti "will hang out. bully Well, the caliber is 130mm .... So it’s more likely that our choice of 125 back in the USSR was right, but 152, or 155 there, for the time being is not accessible to anyone by the formula, cost-effectiveness " request Or terribly expensive, or extremely short-lived in terms of wear.
      1. EvilLion
        EvilLion 15 February 2018 14: 53
        +1
        125 mm appeared as a banal removal of rifling standard 122 mm guns. At the same time, due to short shells, the muzzle energy of the 125 mm gun is slightly less than that of the NATO 120 mm.
        1. avt
          avt 15 February 2018 15: 25
          +4
          Quote: EvilLion
          125 mm appeared as a banal removal of rifling standard 122 mm guns.

          Avono how! And the boys didn’t know .... And the Germans what? Spent -
          Quote: EvilLion
          commonplace rifling standard
          American 105 mm gun? wassat Enough to squander metal only on 120mm?
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr April 24 2018 20: 32
          0
          Quote: EvilLion
          125 mm appeared as a banal removal of rifling standard 122 mm guns.

          Where does this information come from?
          Read the story of the creation of the T-62 smoothbore gun. This is the first smoothbore gun that appeared on the tank. And then, everything goes already on the thumb.
      2. Kars
        Kars 15 February 2018 19: 55
        +2
        Pasta merged.
        And so it’s better 130 mm with IS-7 and that stood on the lunar rover.
  7. prodi
    prodi 15 February 2018 12: 41
    +1
    after all, it seems that the future lies with a pair of full-size “drones” at the disposal of each traditional tank: one is a tank, the other is like a terminator
  8. cheap trick
    cheap trick 15 February 2018 13: 17
    +1
    Correctly spelled, advantages over Third Countries, but not equal! Or in Russia, France and Germany are third countries?
  9. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 15 February 2018 13: 49
    0
    For some reason, there is a certainty that Armata will not be better, but it will be more expensive.
    1. MadCat
      MadCat 19 February 2018 05: 28
      0
      Quote: bratchanin3
      For some reason, there is a certainty that Armata will not be better, but it will be more expensive.

      nobody really tested this armature and didn’t see it in addition to the parades, and you’re already talking about better / worse persuading yourself.
      1. bratchanin3
        bratchanin3 21 February 2018 11: 12
        0
        No gag and stupid conclusions. Asm expressed his personal point of view and no fantasy.
  10. mvg
    mvg 15 February 2018 15: 55
    +1
    So why is Armata so good? How do they sing about her? Why are Germans or Americans with Jews worse? They have ammunition with an armor penetration of 900-1000 homogen, we have better I do not know Mango with 800. Why is this all? If one Apache with 10 ok Armat will endure? And in the city it is useless.
    1. prodi
      prodi 15 February 2018 16: 22
      0
      in general, of course, I would like to see a real breakdown of a real homogen meter
      1. mvg
        mvg 15 February 2018 16: 28
        0
        М829А4
        DM53
        https://topwar.ru/117742-tankovye-boepripasy-v-ot
        vet-na-sovremennye-potrebnosti.html
        http://arhivach.org/thread/105950/
  11. Lexus
    Lexus 15 February 2018 17: 14
    0
    Leopard 2A7 + is the latest modernization of the German tank.

    Isn't MVT Evolution? Something MGCS hurt just like him, or even to his earlier version - MBT Revolution.
    1. k_ply
      k_ply 15 February 2018 20: 50
      +2
      Sketches of the Revolution MVT with a 130-mm Rheinmetall gun are not a possible MGCS look, but rather a proposal by corporations (always looking to the future) for the remaining Leo-2 MBTs after MGCS or when a joint project fails.
  12. Victor_B
    Victor_B 15 February 2018 19: 24
    0
    Quote: Graz
    cost lyamov under 20 eureka?))

    But this is their problem!
    And given the difference in incomes, our Armats will come to our pocket too.
  13. k_ply
    k_ply 15 February 2018 20: 31
    +2
    AMX-56 with an extension of up to seven pairs of track rollers (additional drum-launcher to the right of the driver’s drive, the Leo-2 has a left), German 130-mm cannon in a modified and of course enlarged Leclerka tower with a modified automatic loader , dumb. exploded booking MEXAS - Express MGCS (I).
  14. Catfish
    Catfish 16 February 2018 01: 16
    +2
    And what is it to talk about now, to squat with brains. They’ll do it, then we'll see, and we can talk. They have a new gun, and around it they will build a new machine. It is only doubtful that they would shove it into the modernized tower, and roll this trunk on the old chassis. But all this will not be soon. We still have time to make Armata 3 and 4.
    If the country once again does not go bankrupt. hi
  15. k_ply
    k_ply 16 February 2018 08: 32
    +2
    Really, from the elementary mental sketch of the express version, the brain is already crouching. It is enough to compare with what they now have. Even after the presentation of new samples, you objectively never know the real possibilities and toppings.
    Anyway, people go to forums and read only articles without comments.
  16. Catfish
    Catfish 18 February 2018 00: 14
    +1
    Or maybe it’s not the "brain crouches", but someone from idleness crouches with the brains? But nakoy is actually written separately. good
    1. k_ply
      k_ply 20 February 2018 09: 07
      0
      Yeah, yes another one glanced at us self-confident Arrogance with a terribly business-like working tongue, and, as usual, past Temko ...
  17. acetophenon
    acetophenon 18 February 2018 12: 13
    0
    It's funny to look at that. Tanks flatten more and more and they screw an increasingly hefty gun in order to defeat other tanks. Tell me, when was the last battle of tanks against tanks? When did one tank hit another? So I will not name right away. Tanks are blown up by mines, burn from RPGs and shot from the air. But with a zeal worthy of better application, they are equipped with METER armor in the frontal projection.