Military Review

Heavy armored vehicles. Reality and expectations. Part of 1

42
Heavy armored vehicles. Reality and expectations. Part of 1

Armored vehicles come in different shapes and sizes, they perform many different tasks. In the series of articles, two categories will be considered: armored combat vehicles leading only direct fire, and vehicles serving also for the delivery of infantry to the battlefield.


The term "armored vehicles" is quite broad. It can cover vehicles that simply have armor to protect the people sitting inside, as well as integrated combat systems that can be as complex as a fighter or a warship. Currently, there are more and more parallels between the combat systems used on the ground, on the water and in the air.

This large number of various "armored" cars makes any discussion a difficult matter. The very attempt to classify them is, in its essence, quite complex. The use of the terms "light", "medium" and "heavy" was once logical. This indicated the mass of the system, which in turn was closely related to the level of protection, since protection was mainly a direct consequence of the quantity and thickness of armor. The more armor, the better protection and the greater the mass of the car.

A similar correlation also arose between the mass and the armament, since the mass of the heavier machine, as a rule, determined the installation of a larger caliber gun. Thus, lighter cars were most often armed with smaller caliber cannons, while heavy machines — with larger long-range cannons. However, advances in technology blurred these differences and made the categories “light”, “medium”, and “heavy” mostly meaningless.

Even the terminology used to describe the qualities of armored vehicles requires a change, since it must accurately reflect the specific characteristics and how they are obtained. For example, “protection” would be more appropriate to consider within the concept of “survivability”. It provides an opportunity to better describe a set of factors that together contribute to the safety of the crew and allow you to continue the task. Similarly, our understanding of “mobility” has changed. It was once believed that a caterpillar undercarriage is a prerequisite for installing heavy weapons and provides the highest off-road patency, but with speed limits. However today the main fighting Tanks (MBT) weighing 70 tons can easily accelerate to 70 km / h, while some wheeled combat systems have the same armament as the main battle tanks.


Separating armored vehicles according to their tasks has more meaning and significance. However, even here, differentiation can be complex - partly as a result of technological change. Larger caliber guns can now be installed on smaller machines, for example. In many cases, this new weaponry can be installed even on existing machines as part of modernization programs. Similarly, progress in the field of propulsion systems, including lighter, more compact power units and highly efficient hydropneumatic suspension, allows us to increase the payload of the machine without impairing mobility, that is, mobility. As a result, it contributes to increasing the level of protection and power of weapons. Significant advances in sensory technology, data processing, communications (including data transfer) and automation (including remote operation) also opens up new opportunities for developers of combat vehicles.

Programs of improvement and modernization allow to increase the capabilities of existing machines at relatively modest costs, often increasing the flexibility of their combat use. This trend is aimed at reducing the differences between machines that could perform different tasks. There is a growing understanding that the deployment of universal platforms (where appropriate) offers advantages in terms of service, logistics and the cost of their life cycle. New solutions, design approaches, production methods and logistics technology are combined in order to achieve “the fitness of one platform for several tasks”.

The article discusses those armored vehicles that are directly used in hostilities. These are front-line cars that are Schwerpunkt (German. Main accent, essence, center of gravity) of a tank war. The combat effectiveness of these systems is still based on the triad of key characteristics of traditional armored combat vehicles (BBM) - firepower, mobility and protection. Progress in means of situational awareness and operational management increasingly complements these traditional components of armored vehicles and contributes to the expansion and development of many programs to enhance the capabilities of armored vehicles.


In this article, combat vehicles in accordance with the main purpose are divided into two categories. The first category includes armored fighting vehicles, whose main task is firing; Thus, they can be considered as systems for direct fire. This category includes main battle tanks, self-propelled anti-tank installations, light tanks. self-propelled artillery installations and other systems. All of these mobile platforms are optimized for high-precision direct fire, have trained crews, and their levels of protection correspond to a specific set of threats.

The second category includes combat platforms, which are designed to deliver infantry to the battlefield, after which she dismounts and leads the battle (often under the cover of her car). Often, these machines may have common features with platforms from the first group, but at the same time they can accommodate an infantry unit inside.

The share of each component of the triad of key characteristics may vary, some machines have the same advanced fire control systems as MBT, but a smaller caliber gun, while other platforms have weaker reservations.

The inclusion of fire systems and infantry vehicles in one article has its own meaning. Both categories of machines often work in the same combat formations. They are able to support and complement each other, contributing to the achievement of success on the battlefield.


M1A2 Abrams
Developer: General Dynamics Land Systems
Country of Origin: United States of America
Armament: 120-mm smoothbore gun M256

The original M1 tank with a 105-mm M68 rifled gun with a barrel 52 caliber was adopted in the 1980 year. The variant under the designation М1А2 was released in 1990 year. Like the previous version of the М1А1, it is armed with the 120-mm smooth-bore gun М256, developed by the German company Rheinmetall AG for the tank Leopard 2; in addition, an improved fire control system (LMS) was integrated and other improvements were implemented. The A2 variant has gone through a number of improvements, which have received the SEP (System Enhancement Package) designation. The newest Abrams SEP kit is the M1A2 SEPV3, the first production machines in the V3 variant were delivered in October 2017 of the year. Funding problems have limited the deployment of new versions of the tank in the US armed forces, as a result, a large number of machines in the version M1А2 remain in the army. This means that although there are Abrams options that can meet the most advanced potential threats, these machines may not be in units that have a chance to face these threats. On the first screening of the new version, the ground combat program manager said that “Abrams M1A2 SEPV3 is a big step forward in reliability, combat stability, protection and on-board power supply, which makes Abrams and our armored brigades relevant for the years ahead. Even in the face of financial constraints that impede the creation of completely new machines, Abrams M1A2 SEPV3 demonstrates that we can still carry out significant and operational improvements. ” The US Army has already initiated the development of the V4 configuration.



Leopard 2
Developer: Kraus-Maffei-Wegmann (KMW) Rheinmetall
Country of origin: Germany
Armament: 120-mm smooth-bore Rheinmetall L / 55

Leopard 2 is one of the most common MBTs in the world. Adopted in the 80's, it was continuously upgraded and improved in response to the challenges of the battlefield through the introduction of new technologies and innovative solutions. Widespread recognition of the tank in the world was facilitated not only by these key improvements, but also by the active promotion of modifications and upgrades, which made it possible to “tune” its capabilities for different operators and geographic regions. In recent years, some customers have not missed a profitable opportunity to acquire Leopard tanks from the presence of armies of NATO countries. It was developed and proposed many options for upgrading the tank Leopard 2, including not only the company Rheinmetall, but also the industry of the countries-customers of these machines. The German Bundeswehr is fully equipped with Leopard 2A7V standard tanks. Recently, he also decided to start the implementation of the program “Improving Combat Opportunities IV” (Kampfwertsleigerung IV, KWS IV). This will allow the German army to upgrade part of its MBT fleet to the new Leopard 2A8 standard as an interim solution until the development of the new tank (Main Ground Combat System or Leopard 3) is completed. Options Leopard 2 are in service with 18 countries, another about six countries have shown interest in buying new or redundant tanks from different sources.


Leclerc
Developer: Nexter (formerly GIAT)
Country of origin: France
Armament: 120-mm smooth-bore CN 120-26

Deployed in 1991, the Leclerc tank brought with it a lot of innovative elements, for example, the on-board information management system, which are currently found in almost every combat vehicle. The main gun with a length of 52 caliber (while barrels with a length of 44 caliber were considered standard) provides a higher initial speed and a more flat trajectory. It also has an automatic loader and an integrated fire control system that can hit six targets in 60 seconds with an accuracy of 95%. The twin machine gun has a caliber 12,7 mm. This tank was the first among the MBT was equipped with a hydrodynamic suspension. Leslerc is currently undergoing modernization, which includes the installation of a remotely controlled weapon module, additional booking of the hull and turret, new radio stations and the IAS SCORPION. The gun of this tank allows you to fire programmable ammunition air blasting. Leslerc is also in service with the army of the UAE, which involved him in the fighting in the Yemeni conflict.


Challenger 2
Developer: Vickers Defense Systems (currently BAE Systems)
Country of Origin: United Kingdom
Armament: 120-mm rifled L30A1

The British MBT FV 4034 Challenger 2 is the receiver of the Challenger 1, it was put into service in the 1994 year. The tank is in service with Britain and Oman. In addition to the main 120-mm rifled gun, an 7,62-mm machine gun with a chain drive L94A1 (EX-34) paired with it is installed; Both of these systems are unique to NATO countries. The use of a rifled barrel for the main gun has no analogues among modern MBT. He was chosen due to the fact that the British army focuses on the use of armor-piercing high-explosive shells with a crushable HESH headpiece (High-Explosive Squash Head), along with armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber shells. Another unique feature is that the main gun fires with projectiles and missile charges, which are fed into the chamber separately. Protection is provided by the second generation Chobham armor (known as Dorchester) with dynamic protection and grid screens, installed if necessary. The steel bottom is reinforced with armor as part of the Streetfighter modernization project.

Currently, the British Ministry of Defense is implementing the Life Extension Project. At the end of 2016, it issued contracts to a group led by Rheinmetall Landsystems and a group led by BAE Systems to provide a solution for the evaluation phase. After making a positive decision, the winner can be given a contract for mass production. The proposals include new thermal imaging and commanding sights, a modernized fire control system, new displays, systems with an open architecture, threat warning systems and situational awareness. The Ministry of Defense signed a contract with QinetiQ to evaluate active protection systems for the Challenger tank as part of its MEDUSA project.


T-90S
Developer: Uralvagonzavod
Country of origin: Russia
Armament: 125-mm smooth-bore 2А46М

Tank T-90 is in service with the Russian army; its export modification T-90C is also widely present in the armies of other countries, including Syria and India. For example, Indian tanks T-90 "Bhishma" are manufactured under license at a factory in the state of Tamil Nadu. T-90 (original designation T-72BU) is a further development of the models T-72B and T-80U, which received significant upgrades and improvements. 125-mm gun, stabilized in two axes, firing traditional shells and guided missiles. The shots are served from the carousel loader. The rocket with a range of 4000-5000 meters has a laser beam guidance system and a cumulative warhead. The fire control system and day / night sights allow you to effectively capture targets and identify them at a distance of up to 1500 meters, even in conditions of limited visibility. Protection is provided by a combination of traditional armor and dynamic protection units, as well as the Blind-1 / 1М opto-electronic suppression system. The complex includes an infrared silencer, sensors warning of laser irradiation and grenade launchers of the smoke screen.


T-14 Armata
Developer: Uralvagonzavod
Country of origin: Russia
Armament: 125-mm smooth-bore 2А82-1М

Tank T-14 project "Armata" after the first show in 2015, caused a stir in the West. It includes a number of innovative elements, including a universal tracked platform, an uninhabited tower, an armored crew capsule, it is equipped with an improved main gun and additional protective subsystems. The gun can fire ammunition and guided missiles of new development. For example, the Vakuum-1 armor-piercing piercing projectile has a core of depleted uranium 900 mm in length, which can penetrate from the 2000 meters 1000 mm mm of rolled uniform armor. The main 2А82-1М can also fire a shrapnel fragmentation projectile with a remote detonation on the Telnik trajectory, in addition, it is compatible with the 9X119X1 “Invar-M” rocket of the Reflex-M rocket having a X-YUM Protection of the crew is enhanced by placing it in the center of the hull, as well as the Afganit active protection complex (KAZ), one of the components of which is a millimeter-wave radar for detecting and tracking targets. The T-5000 tank includes a radar with an active phased antenna array, multispectral sights of the commander and operator-gunner, networked sensors, and an automatic target detection system. The developer of the tank claims that its thermal sights can detect the target at a distance of 14 meters, although it is worth noting that the previous thermal imagers were of French origin.

The subsequent fate of the T-14, judging by reports from officials and other sources, is rather uncertain and it is highly likely that the number of production vehicles will be reduced. However, in this project, a number of concepts were used that were implemented on other armored combat vehicles.


T-84 Hold
Developer: Kharkov Design Bureau of Mechanical Engineering. A.A. Morozova
Country of origin: Ukraine
Armament: 125-mm smooth-bore KBA-3

Tank "Oplot" is the fruit of a great job done by specialists of the Kharkov enterprise to improve the MBT T-80. The first version appeared T-84U, which added side screens, dynamic protection "Contact-C" on the turret, auxiliary power unit, thermal sights, laser rangefinder commander, the system combining the axis of the gun with the optical axis of the sight, as well as the navigation system. Later followed the T-84 "Stronghold", and most recently the T-84M or BM. This option is equipped with a completely new welded turret (retaining the 125 mm cannon) with an automatic loader in the turret's aft niche (instead of a carousel type), isolated ammunition was organized, and an updated fire control system was installed, including search and percussion mode. Also installed passive and active armor and electronic countermeasures subsystem. The main focus was on concluding export contracts, for which a number of presentations were made that were not very successful. As part of the contract concluded with Thailand, there were constant delays in the supply of tanks, although recently it was nevertheless executed.



Merkava
Developer: MANTAK
Country of Origin: Israel
Armament: 120-mm smooth-bore MC253 (M68)

Tank Merkava (Hebrew, chariot), designed to meet the needs of the Israeli armed forces, was put into service in the 1978 year. Mounted in front of the engine allows you to use the rear compartment for the transport of ammunition, assault or wounded. The newest version of the Merkava IV includes many new technologies, including an upgraded Knight Mark 4 optoelectronic fire control system with automatic target tracking and improved thermal imaging capabilities, as well as enhanced anti-helicopter capabilities. The tank was implemented a number of measures to reduce the thermal signature. The Merkava IV tank also features locally developed composite armor with additional modular protection. In addition to the 7,62-mm machine guns paired and mounted on the roof, the tank is also armed with an 12,7-mm machine gun mounted on the main cannon mask, and a light 60-mm mortar for setting the smoke screen is also included in the tank's weapon system. The Merkava Mk4M is equipped with an Israeli-designed KAZ Trophy with a laser and radar warning system that can intercept any approaching projectile / missile and indicate the position from which the shot was allegedly fired. The Tusayad BIS may transfer this information to other machines in order to accomplish an evasive maneuver or to fire a target.


K-2 Black Panther
Developer: Hyundai Rotem
Country of Origin: Republic of Korea
Armament: 120-mm smooth-bore Rheinmetall L / 55

Tank K-2 Black Panther was developed in South Korea, its design is optimized for operations in the mountainous terrain of this country. The tank entered service in a limited batch in 2014, with a local engine installed on these tanks. Officially, the K2 entered service in 2016, only now a power unit was installed on the tanks, consisting of the MTU 883 engine and RENK transmission produced under license. There were plans for the production of a second batch of K-2 tanks with a 1500 hp power unit. Doosan and the automatic transmission of the local company S&T Dynamics, but it turned out that the transmission did not meet the required reliability standards, which delayed further production until 2019. The tanks of the second batch will have a "hybrid" power unit, consisting of a local engine and a German RENK transmission. The K-2 tank also includes a number of unique elements, including the extended-range KSTAM overhead ammunition fired from the main cannon (a 120-caliber 55-mm cannon based on the Rheinmetall L55 cannon), a hydropneumatic suspension that allows the tank to crouch when firing, a millimeter radar connected to the fire control system, and special multi-layer composite and reactive armor. What the local businesses could not develop was manufactured under license or obtained by reverse engineering. Korea exports its defense systems with a great desire and, as a result, signed a cooperation agreement with Otokar on the use of K-2 tank technologies in the development of the Turkish Altay MBT.

Продолжение следует ...
Author:
42 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Cat
    Cat 27 August 2018 06: 42
    +6
    The use of the terms “light”, “medium” and “heavy” was once logical. This indicated the mass of the system, which in turn was closely related to the level of protection, since protection was mainly a direct consequence of the quantity and thickness of the armor.

    Not always and everywhere. For example, in the Wehrmacht, the qualification of tanks played on the caliber of the gun. In Britain, for a long time, they held on to the concepts of "cruiser" and "infantry" tanks. There were other exotic ways of grading armored vehicles. Such as "TDD" - long-range tanks or a breakthrough tank.
    So with the outer modern scallion and the mash of MBT, he is in Africa MBT. The rest: wheeled tanks, light tanks, etc. - this is the retinue of the king of the battlefield! Although God bless me, the Soviet theorists took the tank on the battlefield 15 minutes of life until it was destroyed.
    Sincerely, Kitty!
    1. konstantin68
      konstantin68 27 August 2018 07: 45
      -2
      Quote: Kotischa
      Soviet theorists took 15 minutes of their life to destruction on a tank on the battlefield.

      This "characteristic" was always amazing. The main question: Why is it needed at all? Well, followed by him: On what battlefield, what battle, which unit is leading it, the task assigned to the commander? Etc. Therefore, this is ... Nothing.
      1. DimanC
        DimanC 27 August 2018 12: 05
        +3
        As they wrote here on the website at one time - to make it easier for staff to calculate the outfit of forces for carrying out an operation
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 27 August 2018 17: 52
      +1
      Quote: Kotischa
      For example, in the Wehrmacht, the qualification of tanks played from the caliber of the guns.

      Yes, there was such a thing ... In my opinion, the T-4 "thanks to" the 75-mm gun "walked" in heavy tanks ... what
    3. Doliva63
      Doliva63 27 August 2018 19: 47
      +4
      Quote: Kotischa
      The use of the terms “light”, “medium” and “heavy” was once logical. This indicated the mass of the system, which in turn was closely related to the level of protection, since protection was mainly a direct consequence of the quantity and thickness of the armor.

      Not always and everywhere. For example, in the Wehrmacht, the qualification of tanks played on the caliber of the gun. In Britain, for a long time, they held on to the concepts of "cruiser" and "infantry" tanks. There were other exotic ways of grading armored vehicles. Such as "TDD" - long-range tanks or a breakthrough tank.
      So with the outer modern scallion and the mash of MBT, he is in Africa MBT. The rest: wheeled tanks, light tanks, etc. - this is the retinue of the king of the battlefield! Although God bless me, the Soviet theorists took the tank on the battlefield 15 minutes of life until it was destroyed.
      Sincerely, Kitty!

      If the tank is not destroyed in the area of ​​concentration, on the march or during deployment, then it will live much more than 15 minutes. How much depends on the work of intelligence, aviation, artillery, infantry and its crew. "It's simple, Watson" (c), this is a combined arms battle drinks
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 17 October 2018 15: 39
        0
        Quote: Doliva63
        If the tank is not threatened in the area of ​​concentration, on the march or when deployed, then it will live a lot more than 15 minutes.
        If only they asked where the "legs" grow from.
        Based on the average indicators of the life time in battle, the outfit of forces and the possibility of an operation are calculated.
        A combat unit can go through the whole company without scratches. Or die from the first shot.
        But on average ...
  2. cariperpaint
    cariperpaint 27 August 2018 07: 36
    +4
    Auto RU. The German army does not have in its composition a complete fleet of A7. Of all 286 vehicles in service in 2017, there were only 20. Moreover, at the last check of their combat readiness, no more than 100 units were recognized as fully operational. About 90 in part, you understand the rest. I don’t remember the exact numbers, but these are very close. T-90 (the original designation T-72BU) is a further development of the T-72B and T-80U models, which have received significant upgrades and improvements, but translate it better)))
  3. Professor
    Professor 27 August 2018 07: 54
    -2
    The article once again testifies to the process of extinction of "mammoths" under the name "tank". There is no talk of any mass production, and very soon tanks will become so rare that they can only be seen in a museum.
    1. zyablik.olga
      zyablik.olga 27 August 2018 08: 43
      +5
      Quote: professor
      The article once again testifies to the process of extinction of "mammoths" under the name "tank". There is no talk of any mass production, and very soon tanks will become so rare that they can only be seen in a museum.

      Oleg, why don’t you like tanks and air defense systems so much?
      1. Professor
        Professor 27 August 2018 10: 25
        -1
        Quote: zyablik.olga
        Quote: professor
        The article once again testifies to the process of extinction of "mammoths" under the name "tank". There is no talk of any mass production, and very soon tanks will become so rare that they can only be seen in a museum.

        Oleg, why don’t you like tanks and air defense systems so much?

        1. Let's go to "you"? love
        2. I love tanks very much. I don’t pass by any museum where they are. However, tanks are atavisms. they are expensive, vulnerable and not so deadly.
        3. I don’t like air defense. it is a weapon of the weak. Strong attack, not defend. I already wrote and will repeat: XThe best thing that happened to the Tsakhal over the past 10 years is the adoption of the LCD. If there were no LCD, then Hamas and, accordingly, rocket attacks would not exist.

        Quote: Every
        Yes, how can I tell you. At different times, various types of weapons were considered endangered, but in the future they would certainly return.

        Battleships for example? wink Well, how will the tank return when it costs about $ 10 000 000 apiece and is destroyed by a cheap grenade launcher? What economy will it pull? Right. None.

        Quote: Every
        Heavy armored vehicles will not go anywhere, they "just" need to be adapted to the new conditions of combat

        It will become light, cheap and crewless. Only APCs will remain heavy for delivering fighters to the battlefield.

        Quote: raw174
        I do not agree

        My article from December 22, 2011. "The tank is dead, long live the tank."
        https://topwar.ru/9529-tank-umer-da-zdravstvuet-tank.html

        Almost 7 years have passed and the article written in the article is becoming more and more relevant. Therefore, I am very surprised when urapatrioty smear snot on the cheeks about the production of ceremonial tanks Armata. It is absolutely clear what fate awaits him and why.
        1. zyablik.olga
          zyablik.olga 27 August 2018 10: 37
          +6
          Quote: professor
          Shall we switch to "you"?

          With pleasure smile
          Quote: professor
          I love tanks very much. I don’t pass by any museum where they are. However, tanks are atavisms. they are expensive, vulnerable and not so deadly.

          But the command of the Israel Defense Forces does not think so No. For such a small country like yours, there is a very solid fleet of armored vehicles, which, as far as I understand, played a very important role in all the conflicts in which Israel participated.
          Quote: professor
          I don’t like air defense. it is a weapon of the weak.

          Is Israel too weak? what Seryozha (Bongo) once laid out a map of the placement of stationary air defense systems in Israel. High density of positions only in the suburbs.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 27 August 2018 11: 34
            +2
            Quote: zyablik.olga
            Is Israel too weak?

            It seems that you need to understand the specifics.
            In Israel, there is an active, and more than, a category of turbopatriots who seek to solve all problems atomic bomb as brutal as possible, and among Russian-speaking people there are more than average. Some time ago, with considerable surprise, I read an article by an Israeli author (in Russian) that desalination facilities are very bad and wrong (it seems that they didn’t like the low salinity of desalinated water, and the Israeli government was accused of genocide of the Jewish people about this), but it’s right to squeeze some river at some neighbor (it seems, Jordan, and maybe Syria).
            Likewise, Uv.Professor speaks from the position that the LCD is bad, and tearing Gaza apart is good, as if Israel and Gaza had little grief before 2011.
          2. Professor
            Professor 27 August 2018 12: 30
            0
            Quote: zyablik.olga
            But the command of the Israel Defense Forces does not think so. For such a small country like yours, there is a very solid fleet of armored vehicles, which, as far as I understand, played a very important role in all the conflicts in which Israel participated.

            1. Somehow in a dispute with Lopatov, I laid out the number and name of the 30 armored brigades years ago and now. Guess how many times they have decreased? Yes, and continue to decline. tanks still exist because generals continue to think by inertia. But a young shift to the generals is on the way. Well there will be no Merkava 5.

            Quote: zyablik.olga
            Is Israel too weak? Seryozha (Bongo) once laid out a map of the placement of stationary air defense systems in Israel. High density of positions only in the suburbs.

            I wrote about this. Weakened Israel. Defends, not attacks. In the 1970's it was impossible to imagine such a thing. They fire at us, and we sit at home, and are not called up according to Tsav 8.

            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Some time ago, with considerable surprise, I read an article by an Israeli author (in Russian) that desalination facilities are very bad and wrong (it seems that they didn’t like the low salinity of desalinated water, and the Israeli government was accused of genocide of the Jewish people in this regard), but it’s right to squeeze some river at some neighbor (it seems, Jordan, and maybe Syria).

            There is nothing to squeeze from them. Jordan, we ourselves supply water.

            Quote: Cherry Nine
            Likewise, Uv.Professor speaks from the position that the LCD is bad, and tearing Gaza apart is good, as if Israel and Gaza had little grief before 2011.
            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 27 August 2018 13: 21
              +3
              Quote: professor
              In the 1970s, this could not be imagined. They fire at us, and we sit at home, and are not called according to Tsav 8.

              I don’t remember who, it seems, Moshe Dayan, said that Israel should not act in the style of "constructive dialogue", but like a mad dog, so that they would be afraid to climb up to it. This behavior has its pros and cons.
              As you can see, in the 60s and 70s you were called more than once. However, you are still being bombarded.

              Of course, any statement on the Arab-Israeli conflict seems foolish, nonetheless. BV tested 3 approaches to the Palestinians:

              1. Give them political rights. Lebanon, 1975.
              2. Do not give them political rights. Jordan, 1970.
              3. Fence off a piece for them, let them do what they want there. Israel / PA, today.

              What do you actually offer? Jordan 1970, no?
        2. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 27 August 2018 12: 23
          +2
          Quote: professor
          very soon tanks will become so rare that they can only be seen in the museum.

          It seems that in 2011 you were in a somewhat more balanced state
          The tank will not soon completely disappear, but it will never again be the main weapon for a ground war.

          I fully understand you, since 2011 there have been many different troubles. Nonetheless.
          1. American ground forces now - 32, EMNIP, brigades, about 160 thousand people. With a convoy and Markitans - 450 thousand people. Tanks - 10 ABCT, on a circle of 900 vehicles. That is 1 car for 500 people. Old Man Addie had half the tank saturation in the summer of 41. The Red Army has more, but, as you know, there were nuances.
          At ABCT, one car is needed per 50 people. In the Soviet mechanized corps of the 41st year, known for its inadequate OSh, 1 car was for 35 people, despite the fact that half of the cars of the 41st year is every little thing.
          2. In modern operations of low intensity (in development), the tank performs 2 functions a) delivers weapons of destruction b) acts as a raid boss, most of the freedom fighters take it upon themselves. And if in the first role NLOS tools are pushing him (although they cost ...), then in the second role no replacement is foreseen, as they already wrote to you.
          Quote: professor
          It is absolutely clear what fate awaits him and why.

          It is absolutely clear, but this is not connected with the problems of the tank as a species.
        3. Usher
          Usher 27 August 2018 20: 20
          +1
          So when you sit in the trench and there will be an enemy tank nearby, let's see which of you will be weak. And even you will have an RPG, it’s not a fact that you will have time to use it and hit it, but if you hit it, it will be disabled. So your mammoths who die out will be seen by your grandchildren and great-grandchildren.
          1. Professor
            Professor 27 August 2018 22: 03
            -1
            Quote: Usher
            So when you sit in the trench and there will be an enemy tank nearby, let's see which of you will be weak. And even you will have an RPG, it’s not a fact that you will have time to use it and hit it, but if you hit it, it will be disabled. So your mammoths who die out will be seen by your grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

            1. Cherry Nine
              Cherry Nine 28 August 2018 00: 03
              +2
              And why did you post it? To the fact that anti-tank weapons are so called not by chance?
              I understand you correctly that Cast Lead and Indestructible Rock needed to be carried out only by aviation, or what?
              1. abrakadabre
                abrakadabre 28 August 2018 12: 11
                0
                I understand you correctly that Cast Lead and Indestructible Rock needed to be carried out only by aviation, or what?
                Probably with the help of MLRS, the remains are abundantly pollinated with napalm and BOV. With them it will become.
        4. Whisper
          Whisper 28 August 2018 22: 39
          0
          However, tanks are atavisms. they are expensive, vulnerable and not so deadly.
          Yeah ... until they come to your yard or village. Such vulnerable and cute .... Yes, and the infantry more fun to go undercover .....
          Chariots certainly progress, but there will be no failure. If only towards BMPT TERMINATOR ...
        5. Simargl
          Simargl 17 October 2018 15: 43
          0
          Quote: professor
          Therefore, I am very surprised when urapatrioty smear snot on the cheeks about the production of ceremonial tanks Armata.
          Armata is not a tank. For the T-15, you keep a niche tongue
          Well, the platform for 152 mm can not be small.
    2. Every
      Every 27 August 2018 08: 46
      +5
      Quote: professor
      The article once again testifies to the process of extinction of "mammoths" under the name "tank". There is no talk of any mass production, and very soon tanks will become so rare that they can only be seen in a museum.

      Yes, how can I tell you. At different times, various types of weapons were considered endangered, but in the future they would certainly return.
      Khrushchev, at one time, relied on missiles and began to reduce other types of weapons. As it turned out to be wrong.
      The first jet fighters removed the cannon weapons, believing that now everything is decided by rockets, and guns are the past. The war in Korea proved the opposite.
      Heavy armored vehicles are not going anywhere, they "just" need to be adapted to the new conditions of combat.
      1. Zvonarev
        Zvonarev 27 August 2018 09: 43
        +2
        Quite right. Now it is difficult to imagine the collision of large masses of tanks as a counter engagement of two tank divisions. In any case in Europe, up to 3 MB. The tasks of counterterrorism and the provision of other "police" operations are more urgent. And for this, the power of the tank is excessive. Much more useful is something like an infantry fighting vehicle, perhaps with a short-barreled 75-120 mm cannon for mines, and an infantry squad for stripping.
        1. Bad thing
          Bad thing 27 August 2018 10: 53
          +2
          Quote: Zvonarev
          The tasks of counterterrorism and the provision of other "police" operations are more urgent

          For whom are relevant? For the ground forces?
          For real counter-terrorism actions and police missions, there are other structures and units, and from the renaming of the civil war, where there are active actions of the warring parties, with heavy weapons, the essence of combined arms combat does not change in the CTO (ATO).
          1. Zvonarev
            Zvonarev 27 August 2018 11: 04
            -1
            Quote: Bad
            For real counter-terrorism actions and police missions, there are other structures and units

            Well, there are different counter-terrorism operations, for example in Syria. This is just closer to combined arms combat, but the enemy does not have or has little heavy equipment.
            1. Bad thing
              Bad thing 27 August 2018 11: 10
              +2
              Do you propose to initially imprison an army under a knowingly weak enemy?
              Quote: Zvonarev
              but the enemy has no or little heavy equipment

              And thanks to whom and to whom has it become so small?
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 27 August 2018 10: 53
          +6
          "Now it is difficult to imagine a collision of large masses of tanks" ////
          ----
          Everything can happen. Therefore, tanks are trying to make universal use. And when he alone supports an infantry platoon. And when he, as part of a regiment, gets involved in an oncoming battle with enemy tanks. And when you have to enter the city - one infantry without support will not go there. A classic tank will die only when robot wedges are massively introduced into the army. With all the difficult logistics of their management, supply, repair.
          1. brn521
            brn521 27 August 2018 12: 50
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            A classic tank will die only when robot wedges are massively introduced into the army.

            Where there are tankettes, there are tanks - the armor is thicker, the gun is more powerful.
          2. Simargl
            Simargl 17 October 2018 15: 56
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            A classic tank will die only when robot wedges are massively introduced into the army.
            A classic tank will die only when the living will no longer collide with the living on the battlefield. Not soon.
        3. Cherry Nine
          Cherry Nine 27 August 2018 11: 17
          +2
          Quote: Zvonarev
          Now it’s hard to imagine a clash of large masses of tanks as a head-on battle between two tank divisions

          Islamic Republic of Egypt, 1000 Abrams in the Sinai.
          Quote: Zvonarev
          Much more useful is something like an IFV, perhaps with a 75-120 mm short-barreled gun

          The short-barreled gun in the KV-2 style does not make sense. There are options with a 105 mm tank gun (M1128 Mobile Gun System), 120 mm (B1 Centauro II), and Patria AMV with an AMOS turret (double 120 mm mortar loading breech). Just the last option most closely resembles your land mine. But he has very serious capabilities for mounted shooting, an automatic mortar, after all.
          In addition, there are options in calibers of 30-40 mm with remote detonation, which is also quite serious, and there are many options.
          The domestic manufacturer offers Bahch-U (100 mm) and AU220M (57 mm) modules for armored personnel carriers, but the MO didn’t acquire such a thing.
        4. Simargl
          Simargl 17 October 2018 15: 53
          0
          Quote: Zvonarev
          Much more useful is something like an IFV, perhaps with a 75-120 mm short-barreled gun
          In fact, everything is already thought out: the BMP-3 is called.
          Your version was in the BMP-1. I didn’t like it - it was not enough purely "fugasca".
      2. Bad thing
        Bad thing 28 August 2018 07: 52
        0
        Quote: Every
        considering that now everything is decided by rockets, and guns are the past. The war in Korea has proved the opposite
        Something is wrong with the chronology, in Korea the UR "V-V" has not yet been. But the first modifications of "Phantoms" and MiG-21 were in Vietnam without cannon armament.
    3. raw174
      raw174 27 August 2018 09: 36
      +2
      Quote: professor
      The article once again testifies to the process of extinction of "mammoths" under the name "tank". There is no talk of any mass production, and very soon tanks will become so rare that they can only be seen in a museum.

      I disagree. The role of the tank is changing, yes, the tank ceases to be the MOST weighty argument of the army, large tank formations lose their meaning, it is now difficult to hit a more or less technological enemy with such a "fist". The tank as a measure of support for the advancing infantry, having dug in, it will support in the defense, I think this will become its role in the coming wars. Therefore, they will be in amias, but the method of application is changing, the role is changing and armada of thousands of vehicles are not needed.
      1. Corn
        Corn 27 August 2018 11: 17
        0
        Tanks passed from the category of hunter to the prey role, they do not live outside the shelters of urban development for a long time, and there is nothing more to do in cities.
        Technologies for reducing visibility in the IR and RL range only temporarily delay the inevitable.
        How and where can infantry advance with such an abundance of modern anti-personnel weapons?
    4. Corn
      Corn 27 August 2018 11: 07
      0
      With our own eyes we observe the next round of history.
      With the advent of modern ATGMs, heavy armored vehicles are losing their relevance, as once the heavy "knightly" cavalry ceased to play a leading role with the advent of firearms.
    5. dokusib
      dokusib 28 August 2018 05: 24
      0
      What do you see the process of extinction of these monsters? The fact that new tanks do not appear, but old models are actively being modified? But this is simply the most effective way of updating in the absence of a total war. A body made of armored steel will remain a body made of armored steel. This is not a car. It is not necessary here for the sake of competitors to update the design every year. But the filling of this case is changing radically. Each modern MBT has at least 3-5 modifications
  4. Vova Kabaev
    Vova Kabaev 27 August 2018 09: 45
    +1
    "The Leclerc tank deployed in 1991 brought with it many innovative elements."
    Its from candy wrapped deployed ?!
  5. DimanC
    DimanC 27 August 2018 12: 04
    +3
    It’s strange - to record the ACS in direct fire. The last time SU-assault and anti-tank guns of the WWII times and nearby (in time) conflicts fought like this. Now, in a "normal" war, ACS, on the contrary, are hidden from direct contact with the enemy. Maybe add a couple more departments to the classification?
  6. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 27 August 2018 18: 06
    +2
    You think ... Abrams ... Leclerc .... That would put on monster such a monster ... all leklerk-iron caput!
  7. kashcheevo egg
    kashcheevo egg 30 August 2018 16: 11
    0
    not from candy wrappers, but put into the troops. everyone understands, but one needs to get to the bottom. normal article
  8. Sckepsis
    Sckepsis 31 August 2018 16: 56
    0
    "The German Bundeswehr is fully equipped with Leopard 2A7V tanks"
    What?
  9. NF68
    NF68 2 October 2018 16: 04
    0
    The German Bundeswehr is fully equipped with Leopard 2A7V standard tanks.



    Modernization of previously built Leopards into the Leopard 2A7V variant is planned to START ONLY in the 2019 year. At the same time, in the 2019 year, the 104 tanks will be modernized, and they will complete the modernization of the 320 tanks in the 2030 year.


    Ab 2019 werden der Bundeswehr 104 Kampfpanzer (KPz) Leopard 2 in der neuen Version A7V zulaufen.

    Mit Abschluss des Projektes 2023 stehen dem Heer dann 320 KPz Leopard 2 zur Verfügung. Der Vertrag mit einem Finanzvolumen von ca. 760 Millionen Euro wurde am 5. Mai 2017 unterzeichnet.