Military Review

Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd

64

Threats to the tank


Throughout stories development tanks as the main striking force of the ground forces (SV) there was an active development of means for their destruction. From a certain moment, the greatest threat to the tank was not the enemy tanks, but the battle aviation, primarily helicopters with anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) and infantry with ATGMs and hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers (RPGs).



Anti-tank helicopter and infantry with an anti-tank missile system - the most dangerous enemies of modern tanks


Since alternatives to tanks in the ground forces have not yet been invented, the question of their protection against threats from aviation and disguised infantry has become acute. The task of protecting tanks from an air attack can be effectively carried out by mobile anti-aircraft missile systems (ZRK) or anti-aircraft cannon-rocket complexes (ZPRK), such as the Tor system, the Tunguska air defense system or the Sosna air defense system (the successor of the air defense system). "Arrow-10").


Protection of tanks from air attacks: Tor-MXNUMU air defense missile system, Tunguska-M2 air defense missile system, Sosna air defense missile system


With ground-based tank-dangerous targets, such as infantry with an ATGM and grenade launchers, everything is more complicated. To increase the survival rate of a tank, it must act in conjunction with infantry, which has an incomparably better view, and is able to quickly identify and hit tank-dangerous targets. However, if the infantry is dismounted, then the speed of movement of the tank is limited by the speed of movement of the person, which nullifies all the advantages of high mobility of armored forces. In order to provide the infantry with the ability to move at the speed of tanks, infantry fighting vehicles (infantry fighting vehicles) were developed.

Infantry fighting vehicles


The first BMP (BMP-1) was created as a new class of armored combat vehicles in the USSR and adopted by the ground forces in the 1966 year. According to the doctrine of a full-scale war with NATO, which the USSR was preparing for, the BMP-1 with the motorized infantrymen hiding in them, were to follow the tanks. Since it was believed that war would only go with the use of nuclear weapons, protection against the means of defeating the enemy in the first BMP-1 was minimal, as well as the ability to defeat the enemy. Under these conditions, the main task of the BMP-1 is to protect soldiers from the damaging factors of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

Local conflicts, in particular the war in Afghanistan, have made their adjustments. Weak armored BMP-1 turned it into a mass grave with almost any fire impact of the enemy. Side projections made their way from large-caliber machine guns, RPGs penetrate the BMP-1 armor from any angle. The limitation of the angle of elevation of the gun in 15 degrees did not allow shelling high-placed targets. The appearance of the BMP-2 with its 30-mm rapid-fire 2-42 automatic cannon of the 30 caliber mm, with an elevation angle to 75 degrees, increased the possibility of hitting tank-dangerous targets. But the problem of weak reservation, vulnerable to the effects of anti-tank weapons, was preserved on both the BMP-2 and the BMP-3.


BMP-1, BMP-2, BMP-3


Weak booking did not allow the use of BMP on the front line along with the main battle tanks (MBT). If the tank could withstand several RPG shots, then for the BMP the very first hit meant almost guaranteed destruction. In Afghanistan, and in other subsequent conflicts, soldiers often chose to be placed on top of their armor, rather than inside the car, because it gave them a chance to survive if they exploded a mine or hit an RPG shot.

The assault force placed on the armor becomes vulnerable to any enemy weapon, and the weak armor of the BMP does not allow them to move safely in the same ranks with the tanks, which again brings us back to the need to ensure the defense of tanks from tank-dangerous targets.

Heavy Infantry Fighting Vehicles


Another solution was the creation of heavy infantry fighting vehicles (TBMP), usually created on the basis of the main tanks. One of the first to develop and adopt a TBMP was Israel, which, due to the specifics of its geographical location, is in a state of almost continuous war of varying degrees of intensity. The need to conduct combat operations in areas with dense buildings, where the threat from enemy infantry with RPGs is maximum, forced the Israeli armed forces (SC) to take measures to protect military personnel. One of the solutions was a small amphibious bay in the main Israeli tank Merkava, but this was a partial decision, since the tank does not provide any comfortable accommodation for infantrymen.

Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd

Dismounting of soldiers from the tank "Merkava" through the stern ramp


Another solution was the creation of TBBM on the basis of the Soviet T-54 / 55 tank. A significant number of T-54 \ 55 tanks were captured by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967. As the main battle tank, these machines were already of little effectiveness; nevertheless, their armor protection exceeded the armored defense of the BMP, which are in service with all the armies of the world.

On the basis of T-54 / 55 was established TBMP "Ahzarit." The turret was removed from the tank, the engine and transmission compartment was replaced, reducing its size, which made it possible to ensure the exit of the landing force through the stern ramp. The mass of T-55 is 36 tons, without the tower 27 tons. After equipping the case with overlaid elements of steel with carbon fibers and the Blazer dynamic protection kit, the weight of the TBMP Akhzarit was 44 tons.

The subsequent use of Akhzarit TBMP in limited conflicts confirmed the high survivability of this type of armored vehicles. The positive experience of creating the Akhzarit TBMP led to the development of the Namer TBMP (sometimes classified as a heavy armored personnel carrier) based on the Israeli main tank Merkava, with improved tactical and technical characteristics.


TBMP "Ahzarit" and TBMP "Timer"


Subsequently, the idea of ​​TBMP was repeatedly returned to other countries of the world, including Ukraine, where they developed several models of TBMP based on Soviet tanks, and in Russia where the BTR-T heavy armored personnel carrier was developed based on the T-55 tank.


Ukrainian BMPV-64 and Russian BTR-T


The most modern representative of heavy infantry fighting vehicles can be considered as the Russian TBMP T-15 on the basis of the Armata platform, which implements the latest layout achievements and design solutions that ensure the safety of the crew and landing force. For installation on the T-15 TBMP, weapons modules are considered with both the 30-mm cannon and the 57-mm cannon. The presence in the ammunition ammunition shells with a remote undermining of the trajectory will provide high opportunities for the defeat of tank-dangerous manpower. In addition, the 57-mm projectile, developed for this gun, will allow you to effectively deal with airborne targets.

The only known disadvantage of TB-15 TBMP at the moment can be considered its high cost, like all machines based on the Armata platform, which will certainly affect the volumes of equipment supplied to the troops. However, given the high coefficient of technical novelty embedded in the Armata platform machines, the experience of actual operation can reveal other design flaws.


TBMP T-15 with the uninhabited “Boomerang-BM” combat module with an automatic 30 caliber mm gun and with an uninhabited “AU200M Baikal” module with an automatic 57 caliber mm gun


Tank support fighting vehicles


In addition to the creation of a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, in Russia, the Uralvagonzavod corporation (UVZ) developed another machine to fight the enemy’s tank-dangerous manpower - the tank support combat vehicle (BMPT) "Terminator" (sometimes referred to as BMIP, the fire support fighting vehicle).

The main difference between a heavy infantry fighting vehicle and a tank support fighting vehicle is that the crew of the latter does not dismount and defeats tank-dangerous targets with weapons of BMPT. In the first sample BMPT presented in 2002 year, it was running one 30-mm gun 2A42 with machine gun 7,62 PKTM coaxial and four anti-tank launchers "Cornet" in nadgusenichnyh shelves installed 2 30-mm grenade launcher AGS-17D.

The crew of the first generation BMPT was five people, of which two crew members were required to work with grenade launchers. Later, the weapons module was changed; two 30-mm 2А42 guns, a 7,62 mm PKT machine gun and four Ataka-T ATGMs were installed. As a basis for BMPT, the hull and chassis of the T-90A tank were initially provided with the “Relict” dynamic protection optionally installed.


BMPT "Terminator" of the first generation


The first-generation BMPT Terminator did not arouse interest in the ground forces of the Russian Federation, a small number of the Terminator BMPT (about 10 units) were ordered by the Ministry of Defense (MO) of Kazakhstan.

Based on the solutions tested on the first-generation car, the UVZ developed the second-generation BMPT “Terminator-2”. Unlike the first vehicle, presumably to reduce the cost of the product, the T-72 tank was chosen as a platform. The missiles were sheltered in armored casings, increasing their survivability under enemy fire, the installation of automatic grenade launchers was abandoned, as a result of which the crew was reduced to three people. In general, the concept and layout of the BMPT "Terminator-2" is comparable to that of the first car.


BMPT "Terminator-2"


How effectively can BMPT carry out tasks for combating tank-dangerous targets? To understand this, let's briefly digress from armored vehicles.

OODA / NORD John Boyd cycle


OODA cycle: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act (NORD: observation, orientation, decision, action) - a concept developed for the US Army by former Air Force pilot John Boyd in 1995, also known as the “Boyd loop”. Observation is the acquisition, collection, study, reflection of the situation data, orientation is the analysis and assessment of the situation data, the decision is the decision-making on the operation, its planning and task setting to the troops, the action is the direct leadership and the actual actions of the troops when they perform combat tasks.


Sequence of cycles NORD


In justifying the concept of the NORD cycle, John Boyd used three main scientific theorems:
- Godel's incompleteness theorem: any logical model of reality is incomplete (and possibly not consistent) and should be continuously improved (adapted) taking into account new observations;
- Heisenberg uncertainty principle: there is a limit to our ability to observe reality with a certain accuracy;
- the second law of thermodynamics: the entropy (chaos) of any closed system always tends to increase, therefore, the nature of any given system changes continuously, even if you take measures to preserve it in its original state.

It is on the basis of these considerations that John Boyd concluded that in order to conform to reality it is necessary to carry out actions in a continuous cycle, in interaction with the environment, taking into account its constant changes.


There are two main ways to achieve competitive advantages: the first way is to quantify your action cycles faster, this will force your opponent to respond to your actions, the second way is to improve the quality of your decisions, that is, to make decisions that are more relevant to the current situation than the decisions of your opponent.

The NORD series of John Boyd is quite versatile and can be adapted to many areas of human activity.


The most well-known cyclic models based on the cycle of NORD John Boyd


In relation to the resistance of the tank and tank-dangerous manpower, the classic NORD loop can be considered. The same subtasks are performed for interacting, within the framework of the task of mutual destruction, tank and anti-tank calculation (rocket launcher / ATGM operator) - target detection (observation), formulation of its destruction / non-destruction scenario (orientation), choice of the optimal scenario (solution) and its execution (action).

For a grenade launcher, it may look like this - detecting a tank (observation), forming scenarios - firing immediately / letting the tank closer / skip the tank and firing at the stern (orientation), choosing the best option - shooting at the stern (solution) and directly attacking (acting) . For a tank, everything is the same.

Why does tank-dangerous living force pose a significant threat to a tank, especially in rugged terrain and in urban areas, as the conflicts in Afghanistan and Chechnya have shown? With regard to the NORD cycle, anti-tank calculation will have an advantage in the “observation” phase, since a tank is a significantly more noticeable target than a soldier with a grenade launcher disguised, and in relation to the close range, the infantryman has an advantage in the “action” phase, since pointing and shooting from A grenade launcher can be carried out much faster than turning the turret and aiming a tank gun. The greater amount of information that the infantryman who has a better overview gets allows you to improve the quality of decision making in the “orientation” and “decision” phases, that is, to increase the efficiency of the cycle.

What does this mean for BMPT? Intelligence equipment - BMPT observation devices are similar to those installed on the T-90 type MBT, therefore, there are no advantages in the “observation” phase of the BMPT compared to a tank, which means there are no advantages in the “orientation” and “solution” phases.

As for the “action” phase, there is no definite answer. The turning speed of the turret of the T-90 tank is 40 degrees per second. I did not manage to find the turnaround speed of the BMPT “Terminator” tower, but it can be assumed that given the fact that the commander and gunner of the BMPT are located in the tower, its turn speed cannot be significantly increased, since the crew will negatively act on the centrifugal force rotation.

In this case, practically everything that a BMPT can do in the framework of solving the task of destroying tank-dangerous manpower can be carried out by the tank itself. The defeat of anti-tank calculations can be effectively carried out by fragmentation-beam shells of the “Telnik” type 3BOFXNNXX. Depending on the entered installation, the projectile can carry out a trajectory gap on approaching the target (at a pre-empt point) with a target hit with an axial flow of ready-made attack elements (GGE), a trajectory break over the target, with a target hit with a circular field of shell fragments, a shock ground break with installation on instant (fragmentation) action, impact ground break with installation on high-explosive fragmentation action (small deceleration), impact ground break with installation on penetrating-high explosive action (large deceleration). The only thing that a tank cannot do compared to BMPT is to hit targets on elevations due to the limitations of the angle of raising of the gun.


Tank fragment-beam projectile 3VOF128 "telnik"


Information about the development of the Terminator-3 BMPT based on the Armata platform with an unmanned module and an automatic 57 caliber mm gun circulates in the open press. In discussions about the need to move the armed forces to the caliber 57 mm, many copies have already been broken. It cannot be denied that there are certain problems with the defeat of the enemy's lightly armored equipment “head-on” with 30 mm caliber shells, and the presence of an ATGM combat vehicle, including 125 / 100 mm fired from the barrel, does not solve the problem due to the possibility of intercepting the last complexes of active protection (KAZ) of the enemy. To intercept a high-speed armor-piercing feathered sabot projectile - BOPS caliber 125 mm, or the queue BOPS caliber 57 mm KAZ will be much more difficult. However, the potential of 30 mm shells is also far from exhausted, as evidenced by promising developments appearing in the arms market.


30-mm BOPS M929 APFSDS-T of the Belgian company Mecar


Returning to the task of defeating tank-dangerous manpower, it can be assumed that it can be approximately equally effectively solved with automatic guns of the 30 caliber mm and with automatic guns of the 57 mm caliber, provided there are shells in the ammunition with a remote undermining on the trajectory. As mentioned earlier, for the advanced TBMP, two variants of unmanned combat modules were developed / are being developed, both with 30-mm and with 57-mm automatic guns. In this context, it is not at all clear why we need a separate Terminator-3 BMPT, if there is a TBMP capable of both supporting the MBT with an 30-mm / 57-mm automatic cannon and delivering the infantry to the front line.


Combat unskilled combat modules with guns caliber 30-mm and 57-mm for TBMP T-15


Finally, we must not forget about another option, which was considered in the article 30-mm automatic guns: sunset or a new stage of development? - the creation of compact remote-controlled weapons modules with a gun caliber 30 mm for placement on the MBT instead of the 12,7-mm machine gun. This will allow the MBT to independently hit highly located tank-dangerous targets in the entire range of angles, reducing its dependence on the support of the TBMP / BMPT.

Proceeding from the John Boyd OODA cycle, it should be noted: neither the installation of a module with an 30-mm automatic gun, nor the support of a TBMP / BMPT tank will help to fully solve the problem of a significant increase in MBT protection from tank-dangerous manpower. This will require new solutions in terms of building weapons modules, raising the situational awareness of the tank crew, and automation solutions, which we will discuss in the next article.
Author:
Photos used:
btvt.info, vimpel-v, topwar.ru, vpk.name, otvaga2004.ru, militaryarms.ru, milresource.ru/Boyd.html, forum.military, parparitet.com
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. jonht
    jonht 23 May 2019 05: 47
    +1
    Here, at BMPT, only the fire density of two 30 mm guns can be barred.
    Larger than the MBT ammunition and their focus on a specific task.
    There are no other benefits.
    1. riwas
      riwas 23 May 2019 06: 12
      0
      The publications state that only fragmentation shells are wired to one cannon, and fragmentation shells to another.
      1. Shopping Mall
        23 May 2019 06: 52
        +1
        Quote: riwas
        The publications state that only fragmentation shells are wired to one cannon, and fragmentation shells to another.


        The 2А42 gun has selective ammunition. You can use two shell boxes, switching the type of shells.
        1. riwas
          riwas 23 May 2019 07: 08
          +3
          "The combat module of the BMPT" Terminator "has two 30mm automatic cannons 2A42 designed by Gryazev and Shipunov. The cannons, first used on the BMP-2, have a variable rate of fire (low - 300 rounds per minute, high - 550) In the" standard version " they have a selective power supply, allowing you to instantly change the type of shells used. The BMPT has a single-belt power supply, each of the cannons is equipped with different shells (the left one - armor-piercing, the right one - fragmentation). "
          https://warbook.club/voennaya-tehnika/boevye-mashiny/bmpt-terminator/
          1. Shopping Mall
            23 May 2019 18: 03
            +3
            Quote: riwas
            "The combat module of the BMPT" Terminator "has two 30mm automatic cannons 2A42 designed by Gryazev and Shipunov. The cannons, first used on the BMP-2, have a variable rate of fire (low - 300 rounds per minute, high - 550) In the" standard version " they have a selective power supply, allowing you to instantly change the type of shells used. The BMPT has a single-belt power supply, each of the cannons is equipped with different shells (the left one - armor-piercing, the right one - fragmentation). "
            https://warbook.club/voennaya-tehnika/boevye-mashiny/bmpt-terminator/


            If so, then it is generally enchanting stupidity. They do this in the USA when they equip a cannon for the Apache, because they do not have selective ammunition - it turns out double consumption of ammunition.
            You shoot at the infantry - armor-piercing ones fly into the milk, but they are expensive. And if on armored vehicles, then there is no sense from the PF ...
            1. riwas
              riwas 24 May 2019 05: 39
              +3
              Most likely, the left gun only shoots at armored targets, the right - only at unarmored ones. So the ammunition consumption is optimal. Another question, what is better than two single-feed cannons with one selective?
    2. Shopping Mall
      23 May 2019 06: 51
      +3
      Quote: jonht
      Here, at BMPT, only the fire density of two 30 mm guns can be barred.
      Larger than the MBT ammunition and their focus on a specific task.
      There are no other benefits.


      If only focus on a specific task. In all other BMs there is one 30-mm cannon. If it were critical, it would be easy to put two guns on both the BMP and the TBMP. The appearance of shells with a remote undermining of the trajectory in the module with one gun will give a greater probability of defeat than in the module with two guns, but without them.
      1. jonht
        jonht 23 May 2019 11: 33
        0
        So I don’t argue, I argue ....
        It is possible that BMPTs will be supplied with remote control injectors in the first place. hi
    3. rayruav
      rayruav 23 May 2019 20: 32
      +3
      I think that 1-57 is better than 2-30 and for all projected goals
  2. bald
    bald 23 May 2019 05: 49
    -1
    According to the article, the question of the advisability of using TBMP T-15 remains on the surface. And yet, she herself needs to take care of her safety, no less important than the tank.
  3. Ross xnumx
    Ross xnumx 23 May 2019 06: 01
    +1
    Thanks for the detailed analysis. Additional tank support in the form of the "Terminator" - a modernized version of infantry support for tanks since the Second World War. With the improvement of anti-tank weapons, the means of support should also be improved. But, excuse me, here is this kind of fight:
    The need to conduct combat operations in areas with dense buildings, where the threat from enemy infantry with an RPG is maximal

    And what military leader or commander declared that there is a need to conduct a battle under such conditions? Maybe this tactic is related to the lack of proper supplies in the army and equipping it with proper weapons? For a long time, an artillery attack (air, missile strike) was practiced to destroy manpower capable of resisting tanks. At present, a wide range of thermobaric ammunition is presented, allowing to clear the territory of enemy manpower ... When, after all, it will begin to reach our supreme commanders that the time to fight with "caps" is long gone. And it's time to decide what needs to be done: either to fight in full force with the development of operations and the complete destruction of the enemy, or to conduct periodic combat operations with the notification of the "sponsors" and the subsequent granting of the enemy the right to leave the battlefield ... belay
    1. Shopping Mall
      23 May 2019 06: 55
      +11
      Quote: ROSS 42
      Thanks for the detailed analysis. Additional tank support in the form of the "Terminator" - a modernized version of infantry support for tanks since the Second World War. With the improvement of anti-tank weapons, the means of support should also be improved. But, excuse me, here is this kind of fight:
      The need to conduct combat operations in areas with dense buildings, where the threat from enemy infantry with an RPG is maximal

      And what military leader or commander declared that there is a need to conduct a battle under such conditions? Maybe this tactic is related to the lack of proper supplies in the army and equipping it with proper weapons? For a long time, an artillery attack (air, missile strike) was practiced to destroy manpower capable of resisting tanks. At present, a wide range of thermobaric ammunition is presented, allowing to clear the territory of enemy manpower ... When, after all, it will begin to reach our supreme commanders that the time to fight with "caps" is long gone. And it's time to decide what needs to be done: either to fight in full force with the development of operations and the complete destruction of the enemy, or to conduct periodic combat operations with the notification of the "sponsors" and the subsequent granting of the enemy the right to leave the battlefield ... belay


      You cannot clear the whole city, the size of Grozny, as it was in Chechnya. In addition to the unimaginable consumption of ammunition, it is also the death of the entire civilian population, which is genocide and crime. Even a nuclear strike does not guarantee the complete destruction of the population in a large city.

      And if this is Afghanistan? All mountains to demolish, or to fight without the support of armored vehicles?

      No, the task of ensuring the counter tank manpower is not going anywhere.
      1. Ross xnumx
        Ross xnumx 23 May 2019 08: 45
        -5
        Quote: AVM
        You can’t clean out an entire city the size of Grozny, as it was in Chechnya.

        Let's leave the military operation to capture Grozny on the conscience of Grachev and Yeltsin with successors. Do you know what Richelieu said?
        Remember, Rochefort: there is no people that I could not put in the Bastille.

        Quote: AVM
        In addition to the unimaginable consumption of ammunition, this is also death of all civiliansthat there is genocide and crime.

        That is why I say that it is necessary to determine that this is a war or counter-terrorist operation. Genocide, say? Based on the interpretation of Wiki:
        Genocide (from the Greek. Γένος - clan, tribe and Lat. Caedo - kill) - a form of collective violence, acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in partany national, ethnic, racial, religious or otherwise historical culturalethnic group as such by:
        - killings of members of this group;
        - causing serious harm to their health;
        - measures designed to prevent childbearing in such a group;
        removal of children from the family;
        - deliberate creation of living conditions designed for the complete or partial physical destruction of this group.

        I don’t even know what the recent extermination of the terrorists preparing the bombings in Saratov can be attributed to ...
        Quote: AVM
        And if this is Afghanistan? All mountains to demolish, or to fight without the support of armored vehicles?

        The war in the mountains (namely in the mountains) is a special case where aviation and special units that have undergone mountain training are more effective. And the war there is more of a sabotage and partisan character. Among other things, every war has a purpose. You can not set the goal of victory over the people. You can destroy those who elevated the killing of civilians to the rank of some revenge for various reasons or without those and their accomplices.
        For the destruction of settlements with their structure, it is thermobaric ammunition that is irreplaceable. Perhaps, in Grozny, prepared by Dudaev for the siege, they were not used due to their absence, and the lives of young soldiers at the same time were preferable for our "strategists".

        The use of tanks in cities with wide streets and low buildings is possible (after artillery preparation), but on narrow streets and among high-rise buildings ... criminal shortsightedness. Among other things, I am inclined to believe that aviation will always be more efficient than a tank (albeit more expensive).
        1. Ross xnumx
          Ross xnumx 23 May 2019 09: 20
          -4
          Petrov and Bashirov. It stinks from you, so you would at least "meow" something in support of your own opinion. Black line sellers ... laughing
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 23 May 2019 09: 42
          +6
          Quote: ROSS 42
          but on narrow streets and among high-rise buildings ... criminal shortsightedness.

          8))))
          Well, our tankers were not aware of this ... Otherwise, the losses in Chechnya would have been much greater.
        3. Ka-52
          Ka-52 27 May 2019 06: 58
          -1
          Ross xnumx
          .... Among other things, I am inclined to believe that aviation will always be more efficient than a tank (albeit more expensive).

          strategist, have you ever fought in the mountains or in urban development? Maybe then tell us HOW aviation to identify and identify dispersed targets in low visibility conditions due to smoke, continuous destruction, the proximity of the opposing sides to each other, etc. It is dangerous to go down below the ceiling of 7-8 km because of MANPADS, higher altitudes - reduced bombing accuracy, VT-ammunition - are still more rosy dreams than reality. And the spotter gave guidance to the snail and "that house on the right along the street." Your enthusiasm for ODB speaks only of your weak competence in the principles of its operation and application
          1. Escobar
            Escobar 19 September 2020 10: 31
            0
            Perhaps, in the conditions of the rapid development of drones, it would be nice with them, in addition to the infantry, to cover tanks in the city? Lots of small quadrocopters with small arms / grenade launchers for cleaning roofs, window openings, courtyards? Moreover, they are much cheaper than aviation, they are maneuverable and they can move in conditions of dense urban development, it is not very easy to get into them (small sizes), and for MANPADS they are invisible (they emit little heat) (Opinion of the sofa analyst)
    2. Lopatov
      Lopatov 23 May 2019 09: 24
      +7
      Quote: ROSS 42
      Once upon a time practiced artillery strike (aircraft, missile strike) to destroy manpower

      Remember Stalingrad, remember Monte Cassino. Massive air and artillery strikes do not save the situation, on the contrary, greatly help the defenders
      1. Ross xnumx
        Ross xnumx 23 May 2019 09: 51
        -4
        Quote: Spade
        Massive air and artillery strikes do not save the situation, on the contrary, greatly help the defenders

        What help was there?
        By the number of total irretrievable losses (killed, died from wounds in hospitals, missing) of the warring parties, The battle of Stalingrad became one of the bloodiest in the history of mankind: RKKA - 478 741 people. (323 856 people in the defensive phase of the battle and 154 885 people in the offensive)

        And in the city there was not a single residential building?
        Thus, by the beginning of the Battle of Stalingrad, the enemy had superiority over the Soviet troops in tanks and artillery - by 1,3 and in aircraft - by more than 2 times, and in people 2 times inferior

        The lack of the right amount of equipment and weapons in the Red Army was more than compensated for by human losses? Most of the WWII was won due to the mass heroism of the Soviet people: at the front, then in the rear. I do not want to compare that time with modern military doctrine and the quality of modern weapons.
        I know for sure that before the advance of the troops (using tanks), fire preparation is carried out with the aim of destroying manpower and artillery, including anti-tank ...
        You have your own knowledge, I have my own beliefs and the basics of tactical training.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 23 May 2019 10: 00
          +6
          Quote: ROSS 42
          Lack of proper equipment and weapons in the Red Army

          And where does the Red Army, if the Wehrmacht could not take the city?
          Precisely because it was destroyed, and thereby greatly limited its own capabilities for the use of heavy weapons.
          Quote: ROSS 42
          I have my own beliefs and the basics of tactical training.

          I apologize, but you overestimate yourself. Even the "basics" should provide for knowledge of the basics of interaction between infantry and group weapons, including armored vehicles.
          Read at least the Battle Charter, the third part, this should give the necessary minimum.
          1. Ross xnumx
            Ross xnumx 23 May 2019 10: 06
            -3
            Quote: Spade
            Even the "basics" should provide for knowledge of the basics of interaction between the infantry and group weapons, including armored vehicles.

            The basics are the initial, simplest information, the beginnings, the basics of something. You do not involve me in an argument that does not make sense. The war of 1939-1945 was conducted according to completely different canons ...
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 23 May 2019 10: 37
              +3
              Quote: ROSS 42
              The basics - the initial, simplest information

              Exactly.
              Quote: ROSS 42
              The war of 1939-1945 was conducted according to completely different canons ...

              Not at all a fact. The principles of the combat use of tanks in settlements were worked out precisely then.
          2. Kuroneko
            Kuroneko 23 May 2019 10: 33
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            Precisely because it was destroyed, and thereby greatly limited its own capabilities for the use of heavy weapons.

            You might think he destroyed it (the city) not with heavy weapons, but with light weapons? So what? With army machine guns and Mausers, did Kar98k destroy? ^ _ ^
            The effectiveness of heavy weapons always falls after its continued use against the same target.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 23 May 2019 11: 06
              +1
              Quote: Kuroneko
              You might think he destroyed it (the city) not with heavy weapons, but with light weapons?

              It’s one thing if you point out targets in a high-rise building with tank fire. It’s completely different if you work there with an artillery battery, bombarding several buildings with shells.
              1. Kuroneko
                Kuroneko 23 May 2019 11: 15
                0
                World War II - a war of motors and attacks on squares. Why be surprised?
                .
                Quote: Spade
                It’s one thing if you point out targets in a high-rise building with tank fire.

                And the tanks of that period were not intended for such surgical work at all, with an insignificant number of exceptions like the T-80, for example (with its +65 degrees of UVN).
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 23 May 2019 12: 01
                  +1
                  Quote: Kuroneko
                  And the tanks of that period were not intended for such surgical work at all, with an insignificant number of exceptions like the T-80, for example (with its +65 degrees of UVN).

                  8))))
                  No, dear, if the tank doesn’t have enough elevation angle, it means that it just came too close. Badly selected fire, no more.

                  This is a completely different problem, the issue of communication. Even, rather, interaction. I had a lousy experience in this area. Targeting the tank. And it seems that the connection is normal, and who is the artilleryman, so I understand that he sees differently from me, and that the commander of the tank is a platooner. but still everything went very "tight".

                  ---
                  I compensate you minus ... It is imperative to abandon dislikes in technical articles, some kind of stupidity comes out.
                  1. Kuroneko
                    Kuroneko 23 May 2019 12: 32
                    +1
                    Quote: Spade
                    No, dear, if the tank doesn’t have enough elevation angle, it means that it just came too close. Badly selected fire, no more.

                    Find a better position on the streets of dense urban development. To be safe, besides. Especially if the attacked house is not the beginning / end of the avenue, located with a stick like the letter T. During the Second World War, Katyusha was also rolled into improvised caponiers for a reason, because of the good life, so that it could be hit with direct fire.
                    Quote: Spade
                    I compensate you minus ... It is imperative to abandon dislikes in technical articles, some kind of stupidity comes out.

                    Too difficult, no one will bother with that. And about the minus - I just have some stubborn "fan" showed up somewhere about a month and a half ago. He carefully minuses absolutely all my posts in all the topics that he finds. Personally, it's funny to me. But let it work. Apparently, this is better for him. A kind of small, but found the meaning of life. ^ _ ^
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 23 May 2019 12: 37
                      0
                      Quote: Kuroneko
                      Find a more convenient position on the streets of dense urban development for a start.

                      you can always find. and secure
                    2. Same lech
                      Same lech 23 May 2019 12: 45
                      0
                      Why then could not take Komsomolskoe for so long?
                      They destroyed all the houses to bricks, but they didn’t succeed in smoking militants from the ruins with tanks.
                      1. Kuroneko
                        Kuroneko 23 May 2019 12: 50
                        0
                        And why else in a record time took Königsberg, a fortified city? This is me to all the participants in the dialogue.
                        Think about it. ^ _ ^
                      2. Same lech
                        Same lech 23 May 2019 12: 55
                        0
                        There sapper-assault groups worked out the capture of the city in a specially prepared layout in advance ... the assault worked out to the smallest detail and there was no misfire.
                        But the loss of personnel was still decent ... 3700 people.
                        https://www.kaliningrad.kp.ru/daily/25880.4/2843410/
                      3. Kuroneko
                        Kuroneko 23 May 2019 13: 38
                        +1
                        Quote: The same LYOKHA
                        There sapper-assault groups worked out the capture of the city in a specially prepared layout in advance ... the assault worked out to the smallest detail and there was no misfire.

                        That is yes. BUT! After all, even before this, Koenig was plowed with heavy weapons from and to, so Mama did not worry. One of the most heavily damaged cities in the war. But the Germans did not succeed with Stalingrad under approximately similar initial conditions (and the matter is far from the presence / absence of combat-assault groups, the Germans also had decent numbers of their pioneers).
                  2. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 23 May 2019 19: 36
                    +3
                    Quote: The same LYOKHA
                    Why then could not take Komsomolskoe for so long?

                    Minimization of losses. After the first "swoop" they fought terribly for them.

                    Besides, I would not say that the tanks were deciding something there. Precisely because the artillery was not sickly "having fun"
                    Well, all sorts of things ... "assaults" were shooting, mortars were half-straight, "Buratino" was trying to get somewhere, "tulips" were working. Even the MT-12 of the Vladikavkaz OPtADN was installed on a hill in the southeast of Komsomolskoye. Where the sniper "Alfovtsev" worked. Next to "Vasilko"
                    At the end, even 2C3 was rolled out for direct fire.

                    Well, plus they blew up. And during the assault, and after ...
                    Mchsniki arrived to collect corpses, grabbed his head ...
  4. Blue fox
    Blue fox 23 May 2019 10: 59
    +3
    I will add also that quite often the task arises of not just knocking an enemy out of the building, but at the same time preserving it as much as possible in order to use it for my needs. In such cases, artillery and aviation can be selected selectively.
    As an example from the experience of my instructor, who fought in the first campaign in Chechnya, his group was given the task of ensuring the actions of a platoon of motorized rifles to capture a high-rise building at the intersection of streets in which the militants were seated. In principle, dumping it with fire from tanks or artillery was not difficult, however, capturing it in a suitable condition made it possible to get an overview and shelling of the three nearest quarters and thereby control the terrain. To the heap to plant aircraft guides and spotters on the roof.
    Demolitionists made their way through the basement from a neighboring house, breaking a gap with a concentrated charge, while simulating an assault from the street using smoke, hand grenades and flares launched from neighboring houses in addition to the fire of supporting units. Motorized riflemen completed the task and did not suffer losses.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 23 May 2019 12: 06
      +3
      Quote: Blue Fox
      Demolitionists made their way through the basement from a neighboring house, breaking a gap with a concentrated charge, while simulating an assault from the street using smoke, hand grenades and flares launched from neighboring houses in addition to the fire of supporting units. Motorized riflemen completed the task and did not suffer losses.

      The British worked like that. Fighting not along the street, but through the houses. Until the Germans learned how to create traps. Continuous mining of one of the houses in a row, the British break into it, accumulate to go to the next, and undermine. Which blocks the same street.
  • riwas
    riwas 23 May 2019 06: 35
    +3
    Strange, I thought that the BMPT module is remotely controlled.
    To reduce the reaction time and increase the accuracy of the destruction of the infantry, there must be instruments for automatic detection and recognition of targets: a scanning digital camera and a thermal imaging device, a compact and lightweight millimeter-wave radar, and a computer that automatically processes data from the instruments, identifies targets, identifies, and also determines the order of hitting targets, calculates commands for pointing weapons, leads. The fire is carried out at the command of the operator or automatically in the specified sectors of destruction.
    Expensive of course, but we already have similar systems in air defense.
    Read more in my article:
    http://www.sinor.ru/~bukren/tank_21.htm
    The article was published in the journal "Tekhnika-Molodezhi", N5, 2000 under the title "Tactics dictate technique".
    1. Shopping Mall
      23 May 2019 06: 57
      +2
      Quote: riwas
      To reduce the reaction time and increase the accuracy of the destruction of the infantry, there must be instruments for automatic detection and recognition of targets: a scanning digital camera and a thermal imaging device, a compact and lightweight millimeter-wave radar, and a computer that automatically processes data from the instruments, identifies targets, identifies, and also determines the order of hitting targets, calculates commands for pointing weapons, leads. The fire is carried out at the command of the operator or automatically in the specified sectors of destruction.
      Expensive of course, but we already have similar systems in air defense.
      Read more in my article:
      http://www.sinor.ru/~bukren/tank_21.htm
      The article was published in the journal "Tekhnika-Molodezhi", N5, 2000 under the title "Tactics dictate technique".


      The following material is planned for something like this.
      1. riwas
        riwas 24 May 2019 05: 55
        +1
        The watch tank, which is discussed in the article, can not only be used to accompany armored vehicles, but also to protect convoys, rocket launchers and artillery batteries, etc.
    2. g1washntwn
      g1washntwn 23 May 2019 07: 38
      +4
      since the crew will act negatively centrifugal force arising during the rotation

      The author somehow missed that the towers there are unmanned. So the crew carousel is canceled.
      The speed of reaction and guidance is expected to be clearly higher than the tank. And as you have correctly noted, the automation of the process of detection, selection and decision-making will be able to get ahead of the reaction of anti-tank infantry. It seems that the Terminator was called for a reason ...
      1. Shopping Mall
        23 May 2019 18: 13
        +2
        Quote: g1washntwn
        since the crew will act negatively centrifugal force arising during the rotation

        The author somehow missed that the towers there are unmanned. So the crew carousel is canceled.



        No, this is only in perspective, if any. Until then, the carousel wink :


        Quote: g1washntwn
        The speed of reaction and guidance is expected to be clearly higher than the tank. And as you have correctly noted, the automation of the process of detection, selection and decision-making will be able to get ahead of the reaction of anti-tank infantry. It seems that the Terminator was called for a reason ...


        The existing modules have standard MBT sights, with the same drives. And the automation is the same. The name "Terminator" for marketing. In Ukraine, they called the armored ATV "Terminator".
        1. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 24 May 2019 07: 07
          -1
          For T-1 and T-2:
          Remotely controlled module armament located at the back of the hull
          .
          For the T-3 project:
          based on the universal Armata platform and arm with the latest AU-220M combat module

          Will you continue to make excuses and think up about the crew sitting in the modules?
          The existing LMS contains an automatic target tracking device, therefore, we conclude about the presence of automatic recognition, "screwing" to which the "kill em all" algorithm is a feasible task for a pioneer robotics circle. I won't say anything about the angular velocity of the module's reaction. But you are mistaken that the drives on the T-90, T-14 and BMPT-72 are the same and with equal characteristics.
  • CommanderDIVA
    CommanderDIVA 23 May 2019 08: 28
    0
    Boyd’s theory is aimed at fulfilling tasks in the field of organizational and managerial activity; it is included in the military doctrines of the USA and Australia; its essence is the reduction of time from obtaining information about the enemy to making a decision in relation to it; moreover, here is the use of armored vehicles and this theory I misunderstood something from the article
    1. Shopping Mall
      23 May 2019 18: 14
      0
      It is applicable to any cyclic process, see p. 2
  • Glory1974
    Glory1974 23 May 2019 08: 32
    +2
    As I understand it, Boyd's cycle is spelled out in our combat manuals as a "combat control cycle." Why refer to an American pilot if we have our own designs?
    weak armored infantry fighting vehicles does not allow them to safely move in the same formation with tanks, which again brings us back to the need to ensure the protection of tanks from tank dangerous targets.

    When they adopted the BMP, infantry losses decreased 2-2,5 times. That is, for their time they completed their task. It is obvious that now we need a more secure machine.
    If the BMPT is not needed, and the BMP will cope with the cover of tanks, then it must be of a higher level of reservation. But the 30 mm on the tank is not viable. The tankers are doing their job and they just have no time to track the grenade launchers.
    1. Shopping Mall
      23 May 2019 18: 16
      0
      The question is, what's better, two tanks with add. module gun 30 mm or tank + BMPT? As for 30's unviability, mm is far from certain.

      But TBMP should most likely be with 57 mm.
  • Den717
    Den717 23 May 2019 08: 34
    +3
    If the BMPT is not equipped with a target reconnaissance system of a higher level than that of the MBT, then its (BMPT) presence in the battle formations of tank units is very doubtful. At the same time, the presence of such systems (thermal imaging, anti-sniper, etc.) and their manifestation in action will be able to squeeze out potentially dangerous anti-tank weapons to a greater distance of fire, of course, except for the obvious "suicide bombers." one 30mm trunk will give a serious advantage in urban conditions, since the lower floors, for example, of brick buildings can be more than 57 meter thick.
  • tchoni
    tchoni 23 May 2019 09: 00
    +2
    Proceeding from the John Boyd OODA cycle, it should be noted: neither the installation of a module with an 30-mm automatic gun, nor the support of a TBMP / BMPT tank will help to fully solve the problem of a significant increase in MBT protection from tank-dangerous manpower. This will require new solutions in terms of building weapons modules, raising the situational awareness of the tank crew, and automation solutions, which we will discuss in the next article.
    Lord, really I saw it on IN ?! Adequate article about BMPT with adequate conclusions !? I am glad that this device is beginning to perceive adequately. As a kind of tank, and not as a solution to the problem of tank dangerous manpower of the enemy. The author is quite right when he talks about the futility of the BMPT niche in the presence of either TBMP or providing the tank gun with proper elevation angles.
  • lucul
    lucul 23 May 2019 10: 08
    -1
    Since an alternative to tanks in the ground forces has not yet been invented, an acute question arose about their protection from threats posed by aircraft and disguised infantry

    The installation of a thermal imager on the tank / BMP / BTR removes all camouflage of infantry; in this case, infantry can hide only behind an obstacle or behind terrain. That is, she herself will then lose sight of the tank. But in this case too, a drone with a thermal imager solves the problem.
    For those who do not understand why the thermal imager is effective against disguising the enemy, I will give a simple photo from an inexpensive thermal imager of an ordinary hunter.
    1. Bodipancher
      Bodipancher 23 May 2019 10: 40
      -1
      Shots from Chechnya and the Donbass show that shooting at tanks / infantry fighting vehicles is usually conducted under the cover of greenbacks if there is a possibility from the mountains, no one is building any capital cover there. In order to conduct shelling, you will have to lean out of cover and here the thermal imager decides.
      1. Archon
        Archon 23 May 2019 11: 09
        0
        a thermal imager should be mandatory at all. but he is not a panacea - there are enough ways to reduce heat generation, as well as set fraudulent goals. just stupidly shoot from an anti-tank installation, while being in a herd of sheep or some other animals (there is a possibility that the animals will not even get scared).
    2. vvvjak
      vvvjak 23 May 2019 12: 49
      -3
      Quote: lucul
      The installation of a thermal imager on a tank / BMP / BTR removes all camouflage of infantry

      Tank / BMP / BTR is a battlefield technique, not "bounty hunters". Can you imagine what kind of "crap" the thermal imager will show in a real battle, when everything shoots, burns, explodes.
      1. lucul
        lucul 24 May 2019 23: 45
        0
        Tank / BMP / BTR is a battlefield technique, not "bounty hunters". Can you imagine what kind of "crap" the thermal imager will show in a real battle, when everything shoots, burns, explodes.

        Sometimes, you just need to get to the battlefield and not be ambushed. And against ambushes, the thermal imager will be very effective.
        Indeed, in a real battle, the tank will be turned towards the enemy with frontal armor and it is clear where the enemy is and what to do with it.
        And when ambushed, they always beat in unprotected places.
        Watch a video of real battles involving tanks shot by barmales. . The tank ALWAYS does not see where it flies from. He's just BLIND. The thermal imager gives him eyes, and with them life.
    3. cat Rusich
      cat Rusich 24 May 2019 00: 20
      -2
      The thermal imager will show you - the enemy, many goals in space. How to determine who has an RPG, who has an ATGM? what To cover (destroy) all goals at once will NOT work - how to solve this problem?
      1. cat Rusich
        cat Rusich 24 May 2019 20: 45
        0
        How to determine the presence of a Javelin ATGM using a thermal imager? They will let him go and that’s all ... Setting minus is easy, try to answer the question. hi
        1. lucul
          lucul 24 May 2019 23: 38
          +1
          How to determine the presence of a Javelin ATGM using a thermal imager? They will let him go and that’s all ... Setting minus is easy, try to answer the question.

          I didn’t set a minus for you personally, but I will answer.
          The tank does not always fight in the classical sense only on the battlefield, a la Prokhorovka. There are other types of maneuvers. In Afghanistan and Chechnya, a bunch of armored vehicles were laid with a simple movement of armored vehicles in a convoy. And all because the tank is BLIND. Optical detection means pass before visual masking of the enemy. A thermal imager solves this problem.
          How to determine the presence of ATGM Javelin using a thermal imager

          Secondly - have you seen what neural networks are doing now? To train a neural network to identify an object from a picture is no longer an impossible task.
  • kontrobas
    kontrobas 23 May 2019 10: 27
    -2
    After that: "Since it was believed that the war would go on only with the use of nuclear weapons, the protection from the means of destruction of the enemy in the first BMP-1 was minimal, as well as the ability to defeat the enemy." the author immediately into the furnace ...
  • Bodipancher
    Bodipancher 23 May 2019 10: 31
    -1
    The author raised a very interesting topic. With the development of remotely controlled modules associated with the commander’s sight, it seems expedient to replace a 12.7 mm tank anti-aircraft machine gun with a small-caliber gun (30 or even 23 mm). To solve the tank’s self-defense tasks (shooting at air targets, infantry hiding on mountain slopes / upper floors of buildings, green and lightly armored targets), such a gun outperforms a machine gun in all respects. The limited ammunition is not critical here, after all, it is an auxiliary type of armament for performing emergency tasks.
    1. cat Rusich
      cat Rusich 24 May 2019 00: 24
      -2
      In my opinion, to defeat the infantry is better than the AGS, but lightly armored vehicles from 30mm soldier
  • Xenofont
    Xenofont 23 May 2019 14: 48
    +1
    It is strange why the respected Author did not mention the Viper and a couple of other cars from the Soviet era?
  • Romka47
    Romka47 23 May 2019 16: 23
    0
    "As a main battle tank, these vehicles were already ineffective," - T54 / 55 medium about never MBT fiction!
    "anti-aircraft gun-missile systems (ZPRK)" breaks both eyes and ears, ZRPK is more correct.
    "including in Ukraine," - IN Ukraine.
    well and further Т15, dear, and go to the highlight there will be flaws, the US Army ...
    I'm sorry I did not finish reading
    1. Shopping Mall
      23 May 2019 18: 34
      +1
      Quote: Romka47
      "As a main battle tank, these vehicles were already ineffective," - T54 / 55 medium about never MBT fiction!


      From the fact that at that time there was no such abbreviation, the essence does not change:
      Posted by: П.Н. Sergeev
      Name: T-54 / 55 Soviet main tank. part of 1. Military Technical Series No. 103
      Publisher: Kirov: Kirov Society of Military Equipment and Model Fans, Tornado
      Year: 2002

      Quote: Romka47
      "anti-aircraft gun-missile systems (ZPRK)" breaks both eyes and ears, ZRPK is more correct.


      Both types of abbreviations are used.

      Quote: Romka47
      "including in Ukraine," - IN Ukraine.


      I hope the moderators will not accuse me of incitement, but I can not resist ...
      - By and large, that Poroshenko, that Saakashvili, they both go to Ukraine.
      - To Ukraine! They chase "V" Ukraine, stupid cotton wool !!!


      Quote: Romka47
      well and further Т15, dear, and go to the highlight there will be flaws, the US Army ...


      And so it will be. A fundamentally new platform. It is a crime to buy 2000-3000-4000 such vehicles at once, it can turn out like in the fleet with the Lira submarines. But to buy 200-300 pieces and how to run in for 3-5 years is normal.

      Quote: Romka47
      I'm sorry I did not finish reading


      It is your right...
      1. Romka47
        Romka47 24 May 2019 09: 00
        0
        You’re right, excuse me for criticizing me, but the truth was that the article didn’t go to me in terms of style, but it’s not easy to read it. Today I’ll read it to the end, and evaluate the component itself.
  • Saxahorse
    Saxahorse 24 May 2019 00: 00
    0
    The assault force placed on the armor becomes vulnerable to any enemy weapon, and the weak armor of the BMP does not allow them to move safely in the same ranks with the tanks, which again brings us back to the need to ensure the defense of tanks from tank-dangerous targets.

    Now you can find many videos from Syria where BMP is actively used by both parties. Honestly speaking, those wishing to ride armor directly in the war zone are hard to find on video. Unless on the march. But you can see how to use these light cars. They are needed to quickly move through shooting areas and capture key points with an infantry landing. It is noticeable that the main advantage of the BMP is precisely its high mobility, even through the rubble and the lunar landscape of the battlefield. Not the fact that a heavier car (not to mention the Terminator) can replace the BMP in this role. How many guns do not screw on the tank to replace the infantry in capturing key positions no Terminator can.

    For some reason, it seems that increasing the survivability of an infantry fighting vehicle is not due to a primitive thickening of the armor and reducing mobility, but rather working with the layout of the machine. BMP-1 with its vertical tank in the airborne compartment and, again, vertical ammunition is really the dream of a grenade launcher. Remove everything explosive down to separate compartments with fire walls and even a BMP-1 vehicle will survive several hits of something like RPG-7. Well, a heavy ATGM and MBT will kill.
  • Lieutenant Colonel of the USSR Air Force in stock
    +2
    Quote: riwas
    Most likely, the left gun only shoots at armored targets, the right - only at unarmored ones. So the ammunition consumption is optimal. Another question, what is better than two single-feed cannons with one selective?

    ***
    I saw this BMPT thing in N-Tagil during an exhibition several years ago. Then, firstly, the crew of 1 * (!) People surprised, secondly, yes, one gun - with armor-piercing, the other with high-explosive fragmentation *, thirdly, the lack of protection of the weapon "squeezed" from above, Fourthly, the lack of special means for detecting AT weapons in comparison with tanks, i.e., there are no special advantages over tanks in detecting AT weapons.
    * which reduces the internal space and ammunition.
    At first it was an anti-terrorism machine, then tank support, and then, it seems, infantry support. I agree with the authors of the article https://topwar.ru/150481-komu-nuzhna-boevaja-mashina-podderzhki-tankov.html