Military Review

Tracks vs wheels: a dilemma for all times

30
Although the controversy “which is better: the caterpillar or the wheel” is as old as the tank itself, it still does not lose its topicality, since the armies are striving to modernize their power structures in order to cope with future threats.


Most armies in the world exploit mixed fleets of wheeled and tracked combat vehicles, with each type having its own advantages. While tracks provide superior mobility to heavier platforms, the use of wheels reduces logistics and allows modern platforms to move farther and faster — effectively projecting power and capabilities — across different types of terrain, including civilian infrastructure such as roads and bridges.

Defeat distance

The debate on “what’s better: a caterpillar or a wheel” has been particularly hot lately. This is due to the formation of deployable medium or "shock" forces, which, although they do not reach the firepower of armored units, but have higher strategic and operational mobility compared to them.

The average forces should theoretically be able to maneuver at long distances and respond more quickly to international crises. A good example is the Stryker mechanized brigades, the debates about the feasibility of which have not abated since their formation at the beginning of the 2000-s. The initial concept of the middle forces was influenced by the processes that started after the Cold War, or rather regional conflicts, for example, the conflict in Kosovo, in which the deployment of armored forces was considered excessively excessive.


At the end of the driving course, soldiers of the American army note that the tracked off-road patency of the Bradley platform significantly exceeds the patency of wheeled armored vehicles, for example, Stryker armored personnel carriers

This concept is based around a common chassis, which can be adapted for various tasks, which helps to reduce the logistic load, and be light enough for transportation by C-130 Hercules military transport aircraft and other similar aircraft, for example, C-17. Before the 90, the American army traditionally preferred the tracked armored vehicles rather than wheeled, especially in the face of heavy Soviet technology, but after the Cold War, the nature of the combat missions and the enemy with whom the army could face had changed very much.

“We have entered a new era of new threats, new demands and new methods of conducting armed operations,” said Timoney director of the company Timoney Wilkes, specializing in power drive technology. - Indeed, at that time wheeled vehicles prevailed in the parks, it is clear that this was determined by operational tasks, and not by the fact that one technology is better than another. It was just that the path was more expedient at that time. ”

Wheeled vehicles were considered the best solution in this new world, especially in urban environments against asymmetric or unequal threats. As a result, the LAV III 8x8 armored vehicle developed by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS), the later Stryker designation, was chosen as the final platform for the US Army's average vehicle project. This ready-made wheeled platform was preferred to the M113A3 tracked armored personnel carrier, since then mobile shock forces would need heavy tractors for transportation, while the fuel consumption and service volume would be noticeably increased over long distances.

The Stryker armored vehicle, weighing over 20 tons, was then deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and they were also permanently deployed in Europe as part of the second reconnaissance regiment. Currently there are ten different Stryker variants, including the Infantry Carrier Vehicle (M1126), the Mobile Gun System (M1128) gun mount and the 120-mm mortar (M1129).

Due to the fact that the Stryker wheel platform, it is able to develop a maximum speed of 97 km / h. It can travel 530 km (average speed 64 km / h) without refueling and with minimal maintenance, which is impossible in the case of tracked platforms. This allows you to save a lot of time when deploying inside the operational theater.

Tracks vs wheels: a dilemma for all times

The British Army deployed the Bronco 2 Warthog armored vehicle in Afghanistan. This platform is notable for its rubber tracks.

We look for the mass

However, in order to maintain its relatively small mass and ensure maximum mobility and deployability, it is necessary to sacrifice something. Wheeled vehicles do not have such a good booking as their heavy tracked counterparts, which hold the bar somewhere between 40 and 70 tons with additional booking kits. The lack of armor — which made the machines vulnerable to more than 7,62 mm ammunition — was a common critic of the Stryker, especially when this machine was first deployed in Iraq in 2003.

Stryker armored vehicles were particularly vulnerable to rocket-propelled grenades, but these risks were curtailed by the addition of bulky lattice armor. However, this decision leads to an increase in the mass and size of the machine and adversely affects the overall mobility of the platform in difficult terrain. The installation of heavy armor has become a common practice in Iraq and in Afghanistan, where the threat of IEDs did not allow the international contingent to relax. Based on the results of these two wars, today's requirements for combat vehicles, including wheeled vehicles, were defined: protection should meet at least the fourth level of STANAG 4569 as standard.

In this regard, the full mass of wheeled platforms tends to 30 tons, and some models, such as the Boxer from Rheinmetall, have already overcome the bar in 36 tons. According to Wilkins, these machines are currently working "at the limit of their capabilities" in terms of mobility.

“The limiting factor is very simple: the standard wheel of the largest size, which you can install on the machine and the load on this axle. The standard wheel of the largest size, if you look at almost every combat vehicle in service, excluding the Boxer, is the 16R20 wheels, he explained. “If you give the axle load, which is equipped with 16R20 wheels, more than 9 tons, then you will not get good mobility ... As soon as you exceed 8 tons per axle, then mobility starts to deteriorate.”

As the mass increases, engineers must look for ways to reduce the pressure on the ground in order to maintain permeability. One way is to further increase the size of the wheels, but this entails a corresponding increase in the size of the machine to such an extent that it can no longer be called a rapidly deployable platform. Some armies also insist that their cars be floating, and this will require a larger (but not heavier) platform in order to maintain buoyancy after the mass increase, because the Archimedes law has not been canceled.

As a result, for machines that have broken 35 tons, the tracks are the only solution.

According to Mark Signorelli, Vice President of BAE Systems, one of the main factors when it comes to choosing between tracks and wheels is the category by weight of the car, which is determined by the level of protection that the end user needs. “Wheeled vehicles can have very good mobility, but they are limited by the upper limit. If you want to go above these 35 tons ... then the difference in mobility really begins to manifest itself. "

High levels of protection and mobility are especially important for vehicles that are part of heavy armored forces, which are equipped with OBT, BMP and the corresponding support vehicles, for example, M113 armored personnel carriers. Such units, known in the American Army as the ABCT (armored brigade combat team - armored brigade groups), use general military tactics to get closer to their targets and fight in vehicles, which will often include fighting against equal opponents, who can use the most sophisticated offensive and defensive weapon systems, including their own MBT and BMP. For example, a Stryker wheeled vehicle with a mass of 20-35 tons will not be able to survive this type of war and will be quickly surpassed by enemy armored vehicles.

As part of its modernization process, the American army will replace the existing M113 in ABCT brigades with the new Armored Multipurpose Vehicle (AMPV), which have a high level of uniformity with Bradley.

“This machine, acting in conjunction with the given forces, should have the same level of protection and mobility as Bradley, may not be as high as the M1 Abrams, but by and large equivalent to the M1 in terms of all-round protection,” Signorelli said, noting that AMPV and its variants will be near the mark of about 40 tons. - If you have a military structure with tanks M1 Abrams weighing 70 tons, then, of course, you have the entire infrastructure to support such heavy machines. "

An interesting touch to stories AMPV was the short-lived tracked version of the Stryker, which was offered by GDLS at AUSA 2012. Perhaps it was the manufacturer’s hint that his wheeled vehicle could not meet the requirements of the ABCT project. The company later withdrew from the project and left BAE Systems the only applicant.

On deflated

In the past, wheeled vehicles were constantly criticized for their vulnerability to small arms fire. weapons or shrapnel from explosions that could disable the machine or put at risk those inside. Today, armies operating wheel armored fleets solve this problem by introducing the technology of fighting wheels, which allows platforms to maintain mobility even when the wheel is broken through.

This technology has now made wheeled vehicles of all types much more reliable on the modern battlefield; compared to tracked vehicles, their operation is more attractive to the ground forces. Companies such as Hutchinson and Tyron, began their activities in this area a few decades ago. Tyron once developed solutions for Land Rover Defenders armored vehicles in Northern Ireland, and is currently constantly expanding its range of products for a variety of wheeled vehicles.

Tyron has developed a lightweight Multiband system, which, in essence, is a tape that is placed in the mounting niche of the wheel and fixes the tire to the rim and does not allow it to fly off when punctured. This product remains popular, especially in military and law enforcement structures.

“When you know that the tire and the wheel do not come into contact with the road surface, it increases the car’s handling,” said Tyron’s chief executive, Richard Gleisbrooke. “This is what takes you out of a difficult situation, it’s not a wheel with reinforced inserts, in fact, it’s a way out of a difficult situation.”

At DSEI 2017, Tyron presented a disc with a bedlock (a metal part (disc), which is mounted on a specially designed wheel (wheel)) and prevents wheel disassembly when driving at extremely low pressures) for a rubber tire optimized for machines with centralized regulating tire pressure. Bedlock prevents foreign objects from getting inside the tire and the tire itself remains on the wheel even with low pressure caused by a puncture or pressure control settings. “The crew’s crew clearly doesn’t need a situation where the wheel is turning and the tire stays in place, which can easily happen when trying to overcome the lift,” Gleisbrooke said.

Tyron's All Terrain Rubber Anti-puncture inserts (ATR) were also selected for the Lazar 8x8 BBM, giving you the opportunity to move at least 50 km on all the propelled wheels.

At the start of 2017, the company also showed off a new Carbon-ATR lightweight carbon insert. For the 8x8 configuration machine with 1400R20 tires, the minimum weight reduction compared to standard ATR steel inserts is 240 kg. "If we have reduced the mass and retained all the benefits, then we have succeeded," concluded Gleizbrook.


Heavy tracked vehicles cannot be deployed over long distances without the use of heavy conveyors; there is no such problem for wheeled vehicles

Combined strategy

The US Army tried to integrate the Stryker wheeled and Abrams tracked in one unit when the then 3 Brigade was deployed to the National Training Center in 2015 year to test new operational concepts.

However, the audit showed that “there are serious problems,” since it is impossible to achieve a synergistic effect from the interaction of these two machines. Both cars can perform maneuvers on the roads at the same speed, but on rough terrain Stryker was "noticeably slower."

“This made it difficult to maintain a constant pace when maneuvering in open areas, it also deprived tanks of strike power and speed with which they could usually attack. When the tanks maneuvered independently, they found themselves without the support of infantry during the stripping of the forbidden terrain and were quickly destroyed by the enemy’s anti-tank weapons, ”one of the organizers of the event shared with his impressions in an article for the American Army Military Review magazine.

It is clear that heavy armored forces still occupy an important place in modern armies, especially in high-intensity conflicts, but the problems associated with them have not disappeared for several decades. Tracked vehicles are less reliable compared to wheeled vehicles, they are more difficult to deploy without a long supply chain, which includes links such as engineering, recovery vehicles, heavy conveyors and fuel tankers. Ultimately, everything depends on their weight and steel tracks, which increases fuel consumption and requires a significant amount of maintenance.

According to Nicholas Drummond, a retired British officer and defense consultant, tracked vehicles should stop every 300 km for preventive maintenance, which may take up to 8 hours, which actually prevents further progress and contributes to a loss of pace. Crews need to rest due to fatigue associated with increased noise and vibration of steel tracks. This is another possible problem if armies want a combination of wheeled and tracked vehicles.

Currently, the UK is debating about the formation of two combined-arms shock brigades by the British army. New formations of the middle category by weight, equipped with a combination of Ajax tracked vehicles and a MIV (Mechanized Infantry Vehicle) 8x8 wheeled vehicle (a specific model has not yet been selected), should be able to be deployed on 2000 km. Ajax will be a formidable machine with its 40-mm cannon with telescopic ammunition, but at the initial stage of deployment there may be problems with acting in the same battle formations with MIV.

“If you have a mixed fleet, and all the armies with such a mixed fleet, it’s very difficult to maintain wheeled and tracked vehicles together,” explained Kevin Sloan, a retired major of the British Army.


Tracked vehicles are known for their maintenance requirements. Preventive checks are required every 300 km, which creates problems during long operations

Rubber replacement

Several countries are currently exploring the possibility of replacing traditional steel tracks with rubber tracks. One of the companies active in this field is Soucy Group, which first began to equip military vehicles with rubber tracks about 25 years ago, starting with the BAE Systems Hägglunds Bv206 and BvS10 platforms. This collaboration with Hägglunds has since expanded to include heavier tracked platforms weighing about 30 tons into its orbit, including the CV90 armored vehicle, for which Soucy developed rubber tracks that the Norwegian and Dutch armies liked.

Sloan, currently involved in business development at Soucy Defense, noted that the advantages of rubber tracks include fuel savings of a third, noise reduction at 13,5 decibels and vibration by 70% less and "significant reduction" of the life cycle cost.

“It does not require maintenance at all, and here the cost over the entire life cycle is a serious argument; you do not have to do anything with this rubber track after it was worn. The drive wheel, steering wheel, track rollers ... they all live about the same time as the caterpillar, ”he explained. “You need to immediately replace the entire track after running 5000-8000 km, whereas on steel tracks you drive about 2000-3000 km and during this time you change the rubber linings about six times, and this is 18 running hours.”

Soucy tracks were also installed on M113 armored personnel carriers of several armies, as well as the Bronco BMP family from ST Kinetics. At the DSEI show in London last fall, Winston To, head of marketing for ST Kinetics, said that with these tracks, the Bronco 3 could “overcome the overwhelming part of the terrain found on Earth.”

Soucy rubber tracks can withstand blast in accordance with STANAG 4569 3 level. A fourth-level explosion, and this 10 kg of TNT, can destroy it. “With the 4 STANAG 4 Level, you will have no suspension left, that is, one way or another, the evacuation of the car is necessary,” said Sloan. “The 1 STANAG Level Landmine will tear the steel caterpillar, but if the 3 Level bombs explode, the rubber caterpillar will absorb the blast wave, it will not pass through the entire machine, that is, we see another security element here.”

Sloan admitted that the initial investment required when buying rubber tracks was higher than when buying steel and replacing them (an unlikely event of rupture) is required to lift the car on jacks, but this is just a fee for the obvious advantages gained. Indeed, after the Norwegian army tested rubber tracks on CV90 machines at the beginning of this decade in Afghanistan, they decided to transfer their entire fleet to tracks. The Dutch army also follows fashion and, according to Sloan, will transfer all CV90 vehicles to tracks soon.

Looking at the prospect, Soucy bought one Leopard 1 tank from the presence of a Canadian army to test rubber tracks on platforms weighing 42-45 tons. “They are designed specifically for the new Ajax machine of the British Army in order to try to enter this market. This category by weight exactly matches our plans. We are also focused on the Australian Land 400 Phase 3 program, which is about to begin, and on the US program on the Mobile Protected Firepower machine. ”

The company is also testing rubber tracks on the Warrior IFV (510) BMP of the British Army in order to demonstrate its solution on a platform weighing 35-38 tons. In the future, this will pave the way for rubber tracks and their integration with other platforms, including M2 Bradley, especially at a time when armies are beginning to see the benefits of rubber composite materials and are beginning to change their traditional setup for the fact that tracks need only be steel.

“I believe that the army commanders have already realized that rubber tracks are reliable and durable enough for these masses, and you can begin to consider the advantages of these machines,” Signorelli explained. - When you combine these technological advantages with electric drives, you begin to reduce a certain gap with wheeled vehicles regarding fuel consumption, road traffic and even some logistical problems, since electric drives are inherently more reliable than the mechanical drives that we have had since the appearance of the tracks. machines. "

British steel

There remains a need for steel tracks from companies such as, for example, Cook Defense Systems, the “strategically important” supplier of the British Ministry of Defense. It supplies tracks for all BBMs in the British Army, and has also received a multi-million dollar contract for the supply of tracks for the Ajax program. In addition, in 2015, the company received a four-year contract worth 93 million dollars to provide all the vehicles of the British army with tracks.

“From 1996, tracks for all British BBM are manufactured by Cook Defense Systems plant in Durham County,” said Deputy Director William Cook. “The plant is specially built for the production of tracks for BBM, and constant investments allow us to keep it up-to-date.”

The company also supplies spare tracks to other armies of the world, in particular to the Middle East, while its other division designs and manufactures tracks for new BBM world giants, for example, General Dynamics, BAE Systems and ST Kinetics. The caterpillar from Cook Defense TR30 was installed on the prototype of the BMP Tulpar of the Turkish company Otokar, as well as on the Terrier engineering vehicle from BAE Systems.

“Armored vehicles are getting harder and harder as more security systems are being added,” Cook noted. - A difficult task in the design and manufacture of tracks for BBM is to ensure their durability so that they can withstand additional mass, while reducing the mass as much as possible. Caterpillar versus wheel spores never subside, but less pressure on the ground of a tracked vehicle means that it can maneuver more freely and can take on more protection than a wheeled vehicle. Steel tracks also provide much greater grip than wheels or rubber tracks. ”

Many industry experts say that these disputes are, in fact, superfluous, since they boil down to two different technologies that are suitable for different requirements and different combat missions. It is almost impossible to determine which technology is better, since both of them have positive and negative qualities depending on the scenario in which they are placed. More lively debates are currently underway on the structure of future forces and how these two technologies can be combined to create middle divisions that can project force on bоgreater distances.

Materials used:
www.shephardmedia.com
www.timoneygroup.com
www.rheinmetall.com
www.tyron-usa.com
www.gdls.com
www.baesystems.com
www.soucy-track.com
www.cookdefencesystems.co.uk
www.alamy.com
www.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vard
    Vard 14 March 2018 05: 57
    +4
    The main thing in any vehicle ... This is the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat ... And you can plant any car ...
  2. Dart2027
    Dart2027 14 March 2018 06: 06
    +6
    It all depends on the terrain in which the equipment should operate and the tasks assigned - somewhere one is better, somewhere else.
  3. andrewkor
    andrewkor 14 March 2018 07: 13
    +1
    Oleg Divov "Wunderwafl" - a variant of a heavy armored vehicle, with humor!
  4. Amurets
    Amurets 14 March 2018 07: 16
    +7
    Many industry experts say that these disputes are, in fact, superfluous, as they come down to two different technologies that are suitable for different requirements and different combat missions. It is almost impossible to determine which technology is better, since both of them have positive and negative qualities depending on the scenario in which they are placed.

    Absolutely to the point. Because at the same theater the situation changes not only from the locality, but also from the weather conditions, the Winter-Summer season. I completely agree with the opinions
    Quote: Vard
    This is the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat ...
    и
    Quote: Dart2027
    It all depends on the terrain in which the equipment should operate and the tasks assigned - somewhere one is better, somewhere else.
    because you had to be in the same condition that today you drive on a regular KAMAZ, not the Saigak, but tomorrow after heavy rains, plant a tractor-bog in this very place.
    1. Monarchist
      Monarchist 14 March 2018 09: 18
      +3
      So I’m talking about this, that theory and practice are not one of the same, but if I’ve taken a tunduk, I don’t envy that crew
    2. alstr
      alstr 14 March 2018 11: 37
      +3
      Yeah. I still remember Kirovets stuck in the wheel on the road in gardening. And there is decent power and bigger wheels than the armored personnel carrier.
  5. Monarchist
    Monarchist 14 March 2018 09: 13
    +1
    What is better a wheel or a caterpillar, or maybe a hybrid? I do not exclude the possibility that at some stage we will recall the experience of Christie's wheeled-tracked tanks. At one time, Soviet intelligence carried out a brilliant operation to get a sample of this. Subsequently, the Soviet BT was created on the basis of this tank. The operational experience of BT in Spain was shown by all the weaknesses of this tank.
    The Suco caterpillar can be a compromise, but I have a question: what will be the cross-country ability of this caterpillar? Where is the guarantee that it will show itself well in different climatic zones. The theory is one thing, and combat use is another
    1. Bormanxnumx
      Bormanxnumx 14 March 2018 09: 30
      +2
      Soviet intelligence carried out a brilliant operation to get a sample of this.

      Directly in the diplomatic mail exported from America?))))
    2. Wilderness
      Wilderness 14 March 2018 10: 20
      +6
      There was no operation, they just took it and bought it (officially). Moreover, judging by the photo of "this", it was not a tank, but a full-scale chassis model (a light tin bowl with wheels and a motor).
      In general, the argument “what is better - wheels or tracks” reminds me of the argument: “who is better - Masha or Dasha?” Yes damn they are both good !!!
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 14 March 2018 12: 53
      +3
      Bought a license for "Christie's tank." The Americans were then friends of the USSR.
      1. Aaleks1974
        Aaleks1974 15 March 2018 10: 31
        0
        "Friends" is already too loudly said, at the time of purchase, there were not even diplomatic relations between the countries.
      2. Amurets
        Amurets 15 March 2018 12: 40
        +2
        Here is what Maksim Kolomiets writes about the purchase of a BT tank in the book light tanks BT-2 and BT-5: England and the USA It was especially emphasized that “the purchase of samples without technical documentation is undesirable.” In June 1930, the first meeting of I. A. Khalepsky and the accompanying members of the commission N. M. Toskin and V. D. Sviridov with the American designer Walter Christie took place At the same time, our representatives had the opportunity to get acquainted with its newest development - the M.1931 tank.At the same time, Khalepsky did not show much interest in the American tank - the fact is that this machine did not fit into the aforementioned Red Army weapon system. June 1930, the American designer and representatives of the UMM of the Red Army “shook hands.” It's hard to believe, but no papers were signed, and even more so no production licensesnot purchased. An oral (!) Agreement was concluded for the supply of two tanks in full complement with technological documentation and the right to manufacture them in the USSR. In addition, Christie undertook to provide information on further modernization of M.1931. The total value of the contract was $ 160.
        On December 24, 1930, the cars left the USA for the USSR. Contrary to popular belief, both sides did not make secrets about the objects of the transaction: Christie notified the US State Department that he had sold two tanks to Amtorg (a Soviet-American trade organization) and received an export permit without any problems. It should be noted that the American designer did not fully comply with the terms of the oral agreement: the vehicles sent to the USSR did not have towers with weapons, and the set of documentation was incomplete. For this, Christie was withheld 25 thousand dollars, which was the reason for his rejection of the invitation to move to work in the Soviet Union. He successfully used the latter circumstance to put pressure on the US military department and as a result received an order for seven tanks for the American army. Under the agreement, Christie undertook to inform the Soviet side of all changes made to the design of these machines, but refused to do so. However, V.D.Sviridov, who remained in the United States, acquired the drawings from Christie's assistants without much difficulty.
        Soon, the need for money forced the American designer to bow to representatives of the USSR, to whom he proposed to buy the latest model - the “flying tank” M.1932. The car was purchased by our side for 20 thousand dollars and secretly (in this case, the US State Department imposed a ban on sales) in the summer of 1932 was transported to the USSR, where it received the designation BT-32. "Almost word for word it is also written by I. Shmelyov:" Tanks BT ".
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 15 March 2018 13: 57
          +1
          Thanks for the interesting details! drinks
    4. ZAV69
      ZAV69 20 March 2018 19: 48
      0
      Air bag
  6. san4es
    san4es 14 March 2018 10: 29
    +2
    short-lived crawler variant of Stryker, which was offered by GDLS at AUSA 2012


    Prototype tracked armored vehicle General Dynamics Stryker + Tr
  7. svp67
    svp67 14 March 2018 10: 54
    +2
    Although the controversy “which is better: a caterpillar or a wheel” is as old as the tank itself, it still does not lose its topicality,
    And this will continue until a new type of propulsion is invented, the same "simple and reliable."
  8. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 14 March 2018 12: 55
    +1
    About heavy-duty rubber tracks - very interesting.
    How many problems will be removed!
    1. Wilderness
      Wilderness 14 March 2018 13: 22
      +7
      And how many new, fresh will be added!
      1. ydjin
        ydjin 14 March 2018 14: 40
        +1
        [q uote = Wilderness] And how many new, fresh ones will be added! [/ quote] I agree, the station wagon will always be worse than a specialist, you can’t harness a horse and a trembling doe to a team!
      2. Aaleks1974
        Aaleks1974 15 March 2018 10: 35
        +1
        There, it seems to me, the main problem is that if the damage is changed, the whole goose will have to be replaced entirely, and not a few damaged tracks, and lifting jacks to completely hang BMs weighing 30-40 tons is another challenge soft soils. So it can be used in peacetime and for wars of low intensity, when it is possible to safely repair damaged equipment.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 15 March 2018 14: 05
          +1
          Here is a nice picture of a rubber track
          a small bulldozer company Caterpillar.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 15 March 2018 14: 10
          0
          "will have the whole" goose "as a whole," ////

          It's right. But there are advantages. BTR- "techie"
          can carry several such kits (compactly twisted).
          And now there is a tendency that tankers do not change tracks, but specifically
          trained technicians in TBTR. As in aviation: the pilots do not serve their combat
          airplanes - only fly.
    2. Simargl
      Simargl 15 March 2018 04: 28
      +1
      Quote: voyaka uh
      How many problems will be removed!
      Yeah! For 3000 km, rubber linings 6 times to change, but here the whole guslя for 5000 km!
      Miracle! good
  9. ICT
    ICT 14 March 2018 19: 54
    +2
    Heavy tracked vehicles cannot be deployed over long distances without the use of heavy conveyors; there is no such problem for wheeled vehicles





  10. prodi
    prodi 15 March 2018 13: 24
    0
    it is strange, of course, to compare the carrying capacity and throughput of 4-8 wheeled vehicles and 8-14 tracked roller
  11. chingachguc
    chingachguc 15 March 2018 14: 17
    0
    For the Russian theater of operations with its mud, snow and swamps, caterpillars rule ...
  12. k_ply
    k_ply 16 March 2018 08: 36
    +2
    Wheel cars were considered the best solution in this new world, especially in urban environments...

    Where and from whom did they count? ... In the conditions of urban destruction, with wheeled fittings, just wheeled running gear is not even visible, but this does not take into account the turning radius, which is necessary for wheeled BMs in cramped city streets, where the tracked BM will simply turn onto location.
    Due to the fact that the Stryker is a wheeled platform, it is able to reach a maximum speed of 97 km / h. It can travel 530 km (average speed 64 km / h) without refueling and with minimal maintenance, which is not possible in the case of tracked platforms.

    This does not matter with respect to a single machine, when marches take place as part of units and in military columns, it is also worth taking into account the average rate of conducting an offensive by troops (say, offensive operations over the past half century). In short, all these are very unfounded and superficial statements.
  13. k_ply
    k_ply 16 March 2018 19: 43
    +1




    It is worth explaining. In all countries, the military makes it possible for civilian, commercial companies and contractors to earn money, nothing surprising, especially if the l / c crew is involved somewhere else (relocation, joint maneuvers, other training exercises). It is known that the equipment and weapons for the same Stryker brigades based on the continental United States (7) for acceleration and ease of deployment are stored on overseas theater of operations in the European zone, in South Korea and on the ships and warehouses of the Naval Command of the United States Navy , i.e. goes up to two BM on the crew.
  14. Xscorpion
    Xscorpion 17 March 2018 02: 45
    +1
    In short, I didn’t even read. Again, baby talk who is stronger, Rambo or Terminator. You do not need to compare 2 different types of mover. Both have advantages. Caterpillars for swamps, forests and desert, wheels for steppes and roads. Disadvantages of caterpillars: inability to transfer long distances on their own, due to wear and tear on the road surface and their own life; light vulnerability, one small-caliber shot is enough to knock down a track when hit, and if a maneuver fails, these tracks easily fly off (I know from Chechnya sometimes elk to drop such equipment in delicate situations, change the crew, and then come back with reinforcements for repairs); very high noise, which marks the use of this equipment for reconnaissance and special forces (the noise of tracks is heard for many kilometers, and the column can be heard for tens, for wheels this distance is at least ten times less). Also, insufficient mobility and handling at high speeds. Disadvantages of wheels: insufficient patency on viscous ground (again, a lot depends on the driver’s qualifications, for all cars you can change the pressure in the tires) The same can be said for the turning radius, it all depends on the driver’s qualifications. Well, a higher profile of wheeled vehicles, when compared with tracked vehicles, which makes it more noticeable and the difficulty of installing heavy weapons, but this is solved. The advantages of the tracks are, respectively, a lower profile and some greater cross-country ability in certain areas of the terrain. And that’s all. Advantages of the wheels: High speed, maneuverability and mobility when transporting over long distances with in case of failure of 1 wheel due to a mine explosion or its blocking in case of damage, an armored personnel carrier is capable of driving further at a fairly high speed and maneuverability (there was a case in Chechnya when an armored personnel carrier was walking along the highway at a speed of 70 km / h, roughly speaking without 2 wheels. It was closing in the convoy, the remote control unit worked, they wanted to cut it off and destroy it. One wheel was torn off and another was jammed, and specifically the second right wheel was torn off and the third from the starboard side was wedged. Plus, shelling from small arms started. Despite BT damage managed to break away and catch up with the convoy, its course has reached PPD.I such cases are not one-off.) Another of the advantages I can note maloshumnost.Chto ideal for the use of this technology for special operations.
    You see, any technique has its advantages. Comparing tracks and wheels is the same as comparing a submarine and a surface ship. Or comparing a fighter and a bomber.
    1. Saxahorse
      Saxahorse 17 March 2018 18: 10
      +1
      This lengthy comment did not even read. :)

      Moreover, he retells everything that is said in the article at a more primitive level.