Tank autoloaders

66
The traditional way of loading tank guns is the supply of shells manually by the forces of an individual crew member. This method of working with a tool has various kinds of shortcomings, which quite a long time ago led to the idea of ​​an automatic loader. Unlike humans, automation can be inscribed in a minimum volume, does not get tired during operation, and thereby simplifies the solution of the combat mission as a whole. The search for the most effective solutions in the past led to the emergence of several basic types of automatic loaders, differing from each other in layout, as well as in the ways of placing and delivering ammunition.

Drum machine



The first carrier of the automatic loader is the French light tank AMX 13, developed shortly after the end of the Second World War. This machine was equipped with a so-called. swinging tower, which was originally installed 75-mm rifled gun. In order to increase the rate of fire and reduce the load on the crew, the tower of the original design was equipped with an automatic loader. In the future, the tank was being upgraded, which included the installation of new guns, but the design of the automatic loader did not change.

Tank autoloaders
Drum automatic loader light tank AMX 13. Figure Wikimedia Commons


In the AMX 13 project, a drum automaton was used. Two horizontal drums with six cells under a unitary projectile each were placed in the turret feed unit. The operation of the automatic loading was provided by the energy of the recoil of the gun. When the barrel was moved, special mechanisms forced the drums to rotate, feeding a new projectile to the discharging line, and also sent ammunition to the chamber. After the shot was carried out automatic ejection sleeve.

The drum automatic loader of the type used on the AMX 13 was subsequently used in several other armored vehicle projects. Some of these tanks were built serially, while others could not get off the drawings or go beyond the landfills. With the advent of more advanced designs, the drum system was abandoned.


Upgrade option MBT M1 Abrams using two drums. Picture "Abrams: A History of American Main Battle Tank"


A drum-type machine has a specific ratio of pros and cons limiting its use. In fact, the drum has only one advantage: it can replace the loader. At the same time such packing irrational uses the internal volumes of the tank. The drum occupies a space that could be given to a significant number of additional shots by their different placement.

Belt conveyor

Much more effective in terms of the use of space is the automatic loader with ammunition based on a belt conveyor. Such devices were worked out since the fifties, and later found use in a number of projects, both experimental and serial. The most well-known carriers of tape-laying machines are the US-German tank MBT-70, the French Leclerc and the Japanese Type 90.

This concept provides for the placement of stacking ammunition in the developed aft niche of the tower. Instead of traditional shelving, there is a movable conveyor belt with cartridges for shells. At the command of the crew, the conveyor should bring the projectile of the desired type to the feed window, after which the disillation mechanism pushes it into the fighting compartment and sends it to the chamber. After the shot, other elements of automation should remove and throw away the sleeve or fireproof tray.


Belt conveyor tank Leclerc in position to feed the shot. Photo by Aw.my.com


Belt conveyor has several major advantages. First of all, such a construction of mechanisms is optimal for unitary shots of large calibers. It also allows for maximum isolation of ammunition from the crew, dividing them with an armored partition. In this case, the projectile is supplied to the gun through the hatch of the minimum required dimensions. In the past, draft towers were offered with a replaceable aft niche, facilitating the replenishment of ammunition and dramatically reducing the time required for this. For example, in one of the versions of the Swedish project UDES 14 at the stern of the hull it was proposed to transport a replaceable niche of the tower with additional ammunition.

However, the belt conveyor in the feed niche has significant drawbacks. The main one is the direct connection between the size of the ammunition and the dimensions of the niche: the customer and the designer have to look for a reasonable compromise between a compact and lightweight design and a large ammunition load. Stern stowage under relatively thin armor, typical of tanks of the past, adversely affects the combat stability and survivability of the tank. The only successful hit of a missile or projectile can leave a tank, at least, without ammunition.


The same unit, rear view. Photo by Aw.my.com


The automatic loader with a belt conveyor in the aft niche of the tower is considered by foreign experts to be perhaps the most successful. In this regard, such devices are used on a number of samples of modern armored vehicles, and they are not yet planned to be removed from service. Also developed and developed new designs of tanks with aft laying tower. According to some information, just such an automatic loader could be used on the promising Russian tank “Object 195”.

Carousel conveyor

Since the sixties of the last century, Soviet and Russian projects of the main tanks use automatic loaders from the so-called. carousel conveyor. The first such equipment received T-64. Subsequently, similar devices with these or other differences appeared on the T-72 and T-80 tanks (in his case, they were called the “loading mechanism”). According to some reports, the carousel is also used on the newest T-14 tank. Similar systems were also developed for some foreign samples.


Tape automatic loader tank MBT-70. Picture "Abrams: A History of American Main Battle Tank"


The carousel is a rotary device with ammunition cartridges placed under the polycom of the fighting compartment. With its own drives, it can rotate, bringing the projectile of the desired type to the elevator. The shot, along with the cassette, rises to the filing line, after which the rammer is activated. In domestic projects, cassettes of two parts are used, containing shots of a separate-cartridge loading. On T-64 cassettes and components of the shot were placed L-shaped: the projectile was placed horizontally, the sleeve - vertically. On the T-72 and T-90 tanks, more advanced conveyors with horizontal liner storage were used. In foreign projects, carousel conveyors for tanks were developed for unitary projectiles. In this regard, the ammunition was placed strictly vertically, around the habitable part of the fighting compartment.

The automatic machine with carousel styling takes up minimal space and also has an optimal weight. Its ammunition is located above the bottom of the hull, in the maximum safe area. The carousel provides quick selection and delivery of the shot of the desired type and gives the desired rate of fire.


Scheme of the automatic loading tanks T-72 and T-90. Figure Mil.ru


At the same time, there are certain disadvantages. Almost in all projects the carousel conveyor is not separated from the habitable compartment by armor, which leads to risks for the crew. The dimensions of the ready-to-use ammunition are directly related to the dimensions of the carousel, as well as the available volume of the body. The design of cassettes and related equipment may impose restrictions on the allowable length of the projectiles, excluding the use of promising samples.

Automatic loaders with carousel conveyors are used on all Soviet and Russian tanks of the last decades. This equipment is well proven, but not without complaints. Nevertheless, tanks with such equipment remain in service and will form the basis of armored divisions of Russia and other countries for a long time.

Alternative options

At one time, Swedish engineers made a significant contribution to the development of automatic loaders. In a number of their projects, they proposed and worked on alternative versions of automatic loaders of one kind or another. However, far from all such constructions have come to verification in practice, and only one was in mass production.


T-90 tank in section. The location of the carousel conveyor is clearly visible. Figure Btvt.info


The medium tank Strv 103 received not only a rigidly fixed gun, but also a specific automatic loader. In the aft part of the hull, there were three compartments for placing 50 ammunition sets of unitary shots of the 105 caliber. The automatic loader is structurally divided into two devices: the feed mechanism and the discharging mechanism. The first is responsible for raising ammunition to the line of unloading, the second sends them to the chamber. The proposed design of the machine provided a favorable combination of small size, large ammunition and speed of work.

Of great interest are the experimental Swedish projects, which provided for the division of the automatic loader into different elements with their installation in various units of the combat vehicle. First of all, such a separate arrangement was associated with the use of a launcher gun installation - a compact device, taken outside the hull. In such an installation it was impossible to place the ammunition, because of which it was necessary to work out the issue of transferring shells from the hull to the delivered gun.

As part of the UDES 19 project, two technology demonstrators equipped with interesting reloading tools were built and tested. It was suggested to transfer the projectile from under the armor to the gun using a cassette on a rocking base. However, for some time he remained outside the protected volumes. This dramatically reduced the safety of work, and also led to unjustified risks.


An experimental model based on the Strv 103 tank, equipped with a gun mount and a special automatic loader. Photo Ointres.se


In the course of the next project, UDES XX 20, which envisaged the creation of a tank of an articulated scheme, several layouts of weapons and automatic loading were considered. In particular, it was proposed to install a gun mount on the front link of the tank, and place the drum or conveyor belt in the back. This allowed us to allocate the maximum possible amount of shells, but it required special means of transportation to transfer shots to the gun. A movable conveyor enclosed between two hulls, as well as some other structures, was proposed. Fully assigned tasks could not be solved.

Charging or automatics

As is known, automatic loaders and a manual method of reloading an instrument have both advantages and disadvantages. Automatics of all types can increase the rate of fire, reduce the required volumes inside the armored hull and turret, without any problems prepare to shoot while moving, etc. The tanker-loader, in turn, makes it possible not to complicate the design of the combat vehicle, is able to extract shots from any layouts throughout the available volume, can participate in the maintenance of equipment, etc.

In our country many years ago, it was decided that the advantages of automatic loading are more useful than the strengths of the loaders, and this had a certain influence on the further development of domestic armored vehicles. There is no consensus abroad on this score. Some foreign tanks retain the crew with loader, while others are equipped with automatic. With all this, from time to time attempts have been made to abandon the existing approaches in favor of the opposite.

Obviously, automatic loaders have long and firmly taken their place in the field of armored vehicles. Such equipment is used not only on tanks, but also on combat vehicles of other classes, where it can also realize its advantages. It is possible that in the future the number of new projects with automatic loaders will increase, but manual loading is not worth writing off. Both principles of preparation for a shot have their advantages, and among the military there is still no consensus about the unequivocal superiority of a particular method. Will the loaders in the future be able to win the final victory - time will tell.

Based on:
http://mil.ru/
http://otvaga2004.ru/
http://btvt.narod.ru/
http://tanks-encyclopedia.com/
http://ftr.wot-news.com/
http://ointres.se/
Hunnicutt, RP Abrams: A History of the American Main Battle Tank (Vol. 2). Navato, CA: Presidio Press, 1990.
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    15 February 2019 05: 25
    In terms of crew survival, the carousel is far from the best option!
    1. 0
      15 February 2019 15: 16
      Quote: reveny
      In terms of crew survival, the carousel is far from the best option!

      It depends on where and how to place it ... you can also use different volumes, as on our "object 195"
      1. +1
        15 February 2019 16: 33
        Will the tower serve as the expelling plate? Will the partitions stand?
        1. 0
          15 February 2019 16: 55
          Quote: reveny
          Will the tower serve as the expelling plate? Will the partitions stand?

          It is necessary to understand the design. And for that matter, the tower breaks down at ANY deployment of ammunition. Do you want to argue?
          1. 0
            15 February 2019 17: 19
            I'm talking about the survival of the crew and with a crazy location it is much higher
            1. +1
              15 February 2019 17: 20
              Quote: reveny
              I'm talking about the survival of the crew and with a crazy location it is much higher

              Is not a fact. The crew in the tank may die, even if the tank has a tower and remains in place
              1. -5
                15 February 2019 17: 53
                It doesn’t matter, statistics are important. There are two approaches. Asian women still give birth and Western people have the highest value.
                1. +1
                  15 February 2019 17: 54
                  Quote: reveny
                  there are two approaches Asian women still give birth and Westerners have the highest value.

                  Well, if you think so, then you are deeply mistaken
                  1. +1
                    15 February 2019 17: 58
                    I judge the chances of survival
                    1. 0
                      15 February 2019 18: 00
                      Quote: reveny
                      I judge the chances of survival

                      Well, let's judge and compare the geometrical dimensions of "Asian" tanks and "Western" ones, then compare the armor protection
                      1. +1
                        15 February 2019 18: 50
                        Do you want to compare the t series and Abrams and Challengers, who's stopping you?
                      2. 0
                        15 February 2019 18: 56
                        Quote: reveny
                        Do you want to compare the t series and Abrams and Challengers, who's stopping you?

                        So for myself, I have long compared them.
          2. -1
            15 February 2019 17: 21
            But what is not disassembled in the design?
            1. 0
              15 February 2019 17: 27
              Quote: reveny
              But what is not disassembled in the design?

              Well, for example, who told you that the "object 195" did not include knockout panels? That the crew's armored capsule could not withstand the explosion of the bc?
              1. 0
                15 February 2019 17: 50
                No one told me that, I asked a question!
                1. 0
                  15 February 2019 17: 51
                  Quote: reveny
                  No one told me that, I asked a question!

                  Well, why do you immediately reject everything?
                  1. +1
                    15 February 2019 18: 01
                    I reject that, what did someone say to me about the construction of object 195, which includes kick panels? Or the fact that I asked a question?
                    1. +1
                      15 February 2019 18: 03
                      Quote: reveny
                      I reject that

                      what
                      In terms of crew survival, the carousel is far from the best option!
                      Here on "object 195" they were able to prove the opposite
                      1. 0
                        15 February 2019 18: 53
                        They proved to me no, that’s the whole difference, are there results of tests for survival in a fire, detonation? No, then goodbye!
        2. 0
          9 July 2021 08: 01
          A 38 mm kickout plate will not save the crew from an explosion of even half of the ammunition, the explosion will be of such force that it will blow apart the turret, the plate, and the part of the tank that will be under the turret. The tank will either be destroyed, or at least put out of action with very serious damage.
          In the event of an explosion of the ammunition in the T-72, the crew will be destroyed, but the probability of detonating the ammunition in the T-72 is lower than the likelihood of detonating the ammunition in the Abrams, because in the Abrams it is vulnerablely located in the tower, and in the T-72 it is hidden behind the armor.
  2. +5
    15 February 2019 05: 34
    According to some reports, just such an automatic loader could be used on the promising Russian tank “Object 195”.

    On this "object"


    the loading mechanism was supposed to be a carousel type

    But on the Omsk "object 640" "Black Eagle" there were two loading mechanisms, one of them was turret ...


    Charger or automation?
    I don’t even doubt the victory of automation, the whole line of development of tank building leads to this. The caliber of tank guns is about to grow again, and in the place with it the weight of ammunition will also grow, and so the requirements for the man-loader will grow, but the possibilities of human forces are not unlimited. Yes, and automation allows you to more quickly select the right ammunition and send it to the gun
    1. 0
      15 February 2019 14: 03
      And if for the loader to develop an exoskeleton?
      1. +8
        15 February 2019 14: 57
        Quote: Simple
        And if for the loader to develop an exoskeleton?

        And if you give him a braid, attach a trolley, and attach a headlamp to his forehead, then the combine will work. Just kidding of course. It remains only to imagine how this person will leave the tank, if necessary and at what speed
        1. -2
          15 February 2019 19: 08
          Not the same, of course, as they demonstrated in the Republic of Ghana, but in a light version and anatomical, i.e. The "suit" is worn over the exoskeleton.
          1. +2
            15 February 2019 20: 13
            And three more crew members won't say, "I also want new sneakers, a red tie, a saber, a drum and a bulldog puppy?"
    2. +1
      16 February 2019 00: 16
      Quote: svp67
      But on the Omsk "object 640" "Black Eagle" there were two loading mechanisms, one of them was turret ...

      Object 640 had one ammo rack - behind the turret,

      and the commander with the gunner in battle sat at the level of the driver, only in the tower.
      And two ammunition racks were envisaged for the Burlak ROC
      1. +2
        16 February 2019 00: 19
        Quote: Bad_gr
        and the commander with the gunner in battle sat at the level of the driver, only in the tower.

    3. 0
      17 February 2019 16: 11
      Quote: svp67
      requirements for a man-loader will grow, but the possibilities of human forces are not unlimited.

      The Americans will put two blacks, sorry, or what? laughing
  3. 0
    15 February 2019 06: 03
    not a black man with a stick is better than any automatic machine. Any bright elf will tell you this. A striking example of this is Abrams.
    1. +8
      15 February 2019 06: 52
      Now everything goes to unmanned vehicles. And an unmanned tank with a single crew member will look strange.
      Although if you do not tell anyone that he is there ...
      1. -2
        15 February 2019 08: 24
        Quote: Waltasar
        an unmanned tank with a single crew member will look strange.

        Hmmm ... a tank with a member ... crew? Indeed, a tank without a penis is better!
    2. +1
      15 February 2019 10: 47
      Quote: bmv04636

      not a black man with a stick is better than any automatic machine.

      I am "translating" your opinion: I propose to develop a Negroid-type android robot! I approve of your choice! Thus, you can use the old "Abrams" "from all possible angles!" negative
  4. 0
    15 February 2019 07: 17
    Since everything goes to greater automation, and in the future to robotic tanks, the future is clearly for AZ. There’s nothing to argue about.
    And now, in most tanks, the loader is needed only because it’s hard to make a suitable machine with decent ammunition for a 120 mm unitary projectile. Including, therefore, the price of such tanks is beyond reasonable, that of the French, that of the Koreans, that of the Japanese. And with the increase in caliber, everything will only get worse.
    1. 0
      15 February 2019 18: 34
      Quote: inkass_98
      Since everything goes to greater automation, and in the future to robotic tanks, the future is clearly for AZ. There’s nothing to argue about.
      And now, in most tanks, the loader is needed only because it’s hard to make a suitable machine with decent ammunition for a 120 mm unitary projectile. Including, therefore, the price of such tanks is beyond reasonable, that of the French, that of the Koreans, that of the Japanese. And with the increase in caliber, everything will only get worse.

      Actually, under MZ / AZ they did separate loading in order to get the smallest possible dimensions.
  5. 0
    15 February 2019 08: 42
    Very interesting! Thank.
    Due to the small volume of tank towers, there are few AZ designs. Small-sized and medium-caliber AZs of various BTs make some variety.
    It seems that the AZ of the ship towers have more options due to the larger available space for the space of design thought. what
  6. 0
    15 February 2019 10: 16
    Too generalized, but still interesting. I would like more about carriage schemes (incl. Russian) - not everyone looks like the one in the picture. Also, with an unusual BO, some of the shortcomings of the carousel schemes disappear.
    Looking at the cut, the T-90 remembered the 2014 interval from the Donbass militia, in which he argued that the tank can be destroyed even with a heavy machine gun or rifle, if you know where it is aiming. Then he was surprised at first, but then, having examined the thin trough-shaped bottom in the section, he realized that it was a question of a BZT bullet falling between the road wheels in a carousel; fire and explosion ... And such a vulnerability exists in all Soviet tanks since t-64.
    1. 0
      16 February 2019 00: 45
      Quote: anzar
      we are talking about getting a BZT bullet between road wheels in a carousel; fire and explosion ... And such a vulnerability exists in all Soviet tanks since t-64.

      There is a difference.
      The T-64 has small rollers, and even flat as plates. Therefore, between them a thin bottom is visible.
      The T-80’s rinks are slightly larger, but they are wide, so it’s already difficult to see the bottom of the tank between them. Unless, if you look perpendicular to the boron.


      And at T-72-90 in general - rollers are large and wide. To get to the bottom, in my opinion, is not real.
      Incidentally, the Leopard-2 has an entire board of the same thickness as our bottom (20mm).
  7. +2
    15 February 2019 10: 21
    Different style of charging.

    1. +3
      15 February 2019 12: 56
      A man is faster than our AZ
      1. +2
        15 February 2019 16: 25
        Yeah .. only this when he stands still .. and you would try to throw like that in motion .. then you would give your koment
      2. 0
        15 February 2019 17: 10
        It’s very effective and funny for the hiding infantry. And the infantry is still the main goal.
        1. -1
          16 February 2019 15: 57
          If in a bunker, why not - with pieces of concrete, everyone will poher when punching.
      3. +1
        16 February 2019 19: 31
        Undoubtedly. However, it is believed that the loader gets tired before the shells run out in the AZ. And in AZ there is no human factor (although there is a chance of breakdown).
    2. +2
      15 February 2019 23: 34
      The second video is definitely a simulator. There is no sound of a shot, only the clicking of motors. In the sense that it’s not even in the tower, but somewhere separately in the hall, in an empty place, a man stands and trains to press a button.
    3. +1
      16 February 2019 00: 56
      In the second film, the armored partition is constantly open. Hit the tower (which accounts for most of the hits) - the khan’s crew.
  8. 0
    15 February 2019 11: 08
    An autoloader (carousel) is certainly good, until the shells run out, then the reloading process, the collection of shells and charges in all corners of the reserved space and loading into the automaton follow very much.
    1. -1
      15 February 2019 18: 40
      Quote: Konatantin 1992
      An autoloader (carousel) is certainly good, until the shells run out, then the reloading process, the collection of shells and charges in all corners of the reserved space and loading into the automaton follow very much.

      Have you had to shoot the entire BC from AZ?
      1. 0
        18 February 2019 05: 06
        I don’t, but what is the point of the question, I apologize?
  9. +4
    15 February 2019 13: 39
    The first carrier of the autoloader is the French light tank AMX 13, developed shortly after the end of World War II.

    American medium tank T22E1. 1943 year. Equipped with an autoloader for a 76 mm cannon. The tank was to replace the Sherman.
  10. +1
    15 February 2019 16: 08
    The author forgot to acquaint readers with the fun fact that happened to the Americans in Iraq. Who will guess the reason why the American tanker and not only them were obscene all those involved in the creation of the abrams with its manual loading?
    1. +3
      15 February 2019 20: 08
      Well, for starters, the question is: what kind of abrams are we talking about, what modifications? At 105mm there is an armor-piercing HEAM M393A2, at 120mm there is a cumulative-fragmentation M830A1 and a concrete-high explosive M908. And now the main thing, what does AZ and scrap nigra have to do with it?
      1. +1
        15 February 2019 21: 36
        The first serial abrams with a 105 mm gun have long been in the training units or written off, even in Iraq they were kept away from the front line. M830A1 and M908 are not high-explosive, they are much weaker in all respects and are still the same cumulative. With high-explosive fragmentation you can level the house to the ground, in fact there are no cumulative M830A1 and M908, only to nightmare those who have settled there. And now about the scrap game, a high-explosive fragmentation fragment weighs about 35 kg and throwing them into a cannon for a sleepy and tired showman is a rather non-trivial task, even if he is a Negro. AZ allows you to work with all types of ammunition, depending on the target, practically without reducing the rate of fire even in the movement of the tank. Abrams cannot effectively destroy the infantry that has settled in buildings and other fortified facilities, as the war in Iraq actually demonstrated. In general, the M830A1 and M908 were invented not from a good life, but to somehow solve the problem of the inability of the Abrams to effectively fight the enemy infantry.
        1. +6
          16 February 2019 00: 30
          Quote: LCaa
          in order to at least somehow solve the problem of the inability of Abrams to effectively deal with enemy infantry.

          Quote: LCaa
          American tankers, and not only them, were obscene all those involved in the creation of the abrams with its manual loading

          I don’t know which Iraq you are talking about, but the symbol of the first Iraq for people interested in land affairs was not some highway of death, but Abrams with a bulldozer dump.
          Which burying foot soldiers in a trench alive.
        2. +2
          16 February 2019 07: 21
          Is it worth it to destroy houses? They have cellars like this, sometimes with a network of underground utilities. And to knock a hole in the wall, with the passing of a part of the structure in the seats opposite it, is useful. Do not forget that the Americans are not stupid, as Zadornov apparently told you that if they needed a landmine, they would have made it. The Germans, as well as all Leopard operators, the presence of a unitary OF and the absence of AZ does not seem something abnormal. Speaking of all types of ammunition, how much time does the AZ T-72 take to crank a drum and take a shell from its opposite part? And how long does it take for the loader to reach out to the desired cell?
          1. +1
            16 February 2019 08: 04
            the Germans have 15 shells in the first stage of the ammunition depot, while the rest must be fun to dive
            1. +1
              16 February 2019 09: 07
              Are you not enough? wink
              1. 0
                16 February 2019 09: 30
                if you shoot a couple of times from an ambush - it’ll come off
  11. -1
    15 February 2019 17: 02
    In, the cons went, okay. The abrams does not have high-explosive shells, so they shoot cumulative and shrapnel in terms of manpower, which is complete idiocy.
    1. 0
      18 February 2019 20: 27
      So cumulative, they say, in terms of manpower it is no worse than PF, though there are still no confirmations
  12. 0
    15 February 2019 20: 50
    40 years ago, tanks with AZ and still appeared en masse, "there is still no consensus among the military" laughing - and on "Maxim" there is still a consensus on how to shoot from it, with a tape? or one cartridge at a time? laughing
    1. +2
      16 February 2019 00: 26
      Quote: Bone1
      and on "Maxim" there is still a consensus on how to shoot from it, with a tape?

      No, there is no consensus. In particular, watering in the USSR switched from tape (RPD) to stores (RPK), and Americans - from stores (BAR) to tape (Minimi).
      You are right, with tanks a similar story.
      1. 0
        16 February 2019 20: 35
        And where is the tape or the store? -On one cartridge guessed not to recharge?
  13. 0
    15 February 2019 21: 47
    I urge the distinguished Lopatov to scientifically explain the advantage of the T-72 high-explosive fragmentation projectile over the fragmentation-cumulative abrams.
  14. 0
    17 February 2019 02: 12
    I was always surprised to see shells and charges located nearby in the MOH and AZ. Rationally shells in the carousel charges in the feed beggar. Yes, and modular. Separate allows.
    1. 0
      17 February 2019 19: 48
      modular charge in BOPS, the rest is not really needed, because low angle of elevation of the trunk. But to split the halves of the shells between the polikom and the tower niche will result in a more complex AZ and, probably, a longer loading time. True, the number of shells in the carousel would increase.
      1. 0
        18 February 2019 00: 25
        Time will not increase. This can be achieved by simultaneously supplying to the line of loading and the projectile and charge by two independent mechanisms. Complexity and increase, but security would be much more. DJF shells explode from damage well, very rarely. But gunpowder burns like gunpowder. That's why he gunpowder. Bring gunpowder out of habitable volume and vitality will increase at times. Modular is not only good for BOPS. A projectile with a programmable detonation on a weak charge can be very cunningly thrown. This is more important for the tank BOPS.