All tank ratings lie - part I
In the domestic and foreign press, articles periodically appear with judgments about which tank is the best in the world. The newspaper "Military-Industrial Courier" publishes a presentation on this topic, sounded at the 15-th All-Russian scientific-practical conference "Actual problems of protection and security."
Crafty numbers
According to the American Military Ordnance magazine, ranking the best Tanks according to the totality of their combat properties - mobility, firepower, armor protection, places in the top ten best tanks for 1998 were distributed as indicated in the table below the rating of world tank fleets.
It does not explain how this rating was compiled, what methodologies for assessing the basic properties and tanks as a whole were used. Most likely, the assessment was carried out by a group of experts on the values of the main TTX tanks without any methods, without taking into account the integrated indicators of the main combat properties and the complex indicator for the tank as a whole and, possibly, without taking into account the "price-quality" indicator. Maybe the "study" was ordered by some developer company.
1 table. Ratings of world tank parks
In the past ten years, the world's tank fleet has been replenished with new machines: “Leopard-2А6” with an L-55 gun (Germany), М1А2 SEP (USA), “Merkava” Mk. 4 (Israel), К1А1 and К2 (South Korea), “Type 96” and “Type 99” (China), modernized by T-90А (M) (Russia).
In 2010, the same magazine published the next rating. The following is noteworthy:
- the first position in the rating is the stable position of the Leopard-2А5 and Leopard-2А6 tanks;
- decrease in the ranking from the second to the third place of the МХNUMXА1 SEP tank;
- a change in the ratings of the positions of the Leclerc and Challenger 2 tanks;
- unjustifiably low positions of Russian T-90 (C) and T-90A (C) tanks and higher positions of the Chinese 96 Type and 99 Type tanks, which are practically copies of the T-72B and T-90C tanks.
In our opinion, such an assessment is controversial, since it is unclear how, in assessing tanks in general, the three main combat properties under consideration are combined, especially taking into account the “price-quality” indicator and, as a result, taking into account the actual situation on the global tank export market. For example, let me give you the rating of the five best tanks with regard to sales on the world market, presented in one of the Russian media in June 2010: 1-th place - T-90, 2-e - "Leopard-2", 3-e - "Leclerc ", 4-e -" Challenger-2 ", 5-e - M1A2.
To analyze the presented ranking lists, it is necessary to identify the main trends in the development of tanks and the requirements for them in modern conditions (especially in local conflicts), to analyze the existing methods of comparative evaluation.
Considering the main trends in the development of tanks over the past 20 – 30 years, it is necessary to clarify the content of the frequently used concept - “modern tank”. At present, such a tank is considered an armored vehicle with powerful artillery or combined missile-artillery weapons; highly automated fire control system, providing all-day and all-weather use and duplicate fire control from the gunner’s and commander’s place; integrated protection (armor, dynamic, optical-electronic, anti-mine, electromagnetic, from atomic weapons); software and hardware complex that provides automation of tank control as part of a unit; as well as having built-in diagnostics and high maintainability.
A modern tank is the result of joint activities of many industries. Late modifications of the Abrams type (USA), Leopard (Germany), Leclerc (France), T-90A (Russia) and others are considered to be the best recent models. Consider some of them.
Main rivals
M1A2 (USA) - A modernized version of the tank M1А1. Produced in 1996 – 2001. Currently, after overhaul and modernization, the M1А1 is supplied to the US Army and for export as the new M1А2 tank. As a result, the car is produced from the enterprise in the so-called “zero hours, zero miles” state, that is, a tank after an overhaul and modernization is equal to the number of hours worked and mileage to a new car. Estimated cost, depending on the degree of modernization and customer requirements - 5,1 – 5,6 million dollars.
M1A2 SEP (USA) produced in 1998 – 2001. At present, after overhaul and modernization, the M1А2 is supplied to the troops as a new tank, the M1А2 SEP (Systems Enhancement Package). Estimated cost after the upgrade - 7,5 million dollars.
"Leopard-2А6" (Germany) It is produced from 2005 in small batches depending on the contracts concluded. The troops have already received 225 machines. The 2А6 model is similar to the 2А5 model and differs in the 120-mm L55 smooth-bore cannon with an increased barrel length compared to the L44 cannon and an upgraded fire control system (LMS). These main tanks are planned to operate at least until the 2030 year. Estimated cost - 6,5 million dollars.
Leclerc-2 (France) It was produced in 2001 – 2005 in small batches and will remain in service for another 30 years. It is planned to increase the life cycle of these machines to 40 years due to modernization, which will introduce a number of improvements, including high-level armor protection of the tower, active protection, stealth coatings. The estimated cost of the tank - 8,5 million dollars.
Domestic sample and Chinese analogue T-72
The T-90A, equipped with an Essa thermal imager, should be attributed to modern type tanks.
Tank T-XNUMHA (Russia) Available from 2007 year. A program for upgrading this tank in the course of serial production has been developed and is being implemented, providing for equipping the machine with a software and hardware complex (PTC), which provides for increasing the command controllability of the tank within the unit, as well as automatic target tracking. Constantly held activities to improve mobility and security.
The estimated cost of the tank - 2,5 million dollars. In terms of price-quality ratio, the T-90A tanks are two to three times better than the considered foreign models. Nevertheless, the latter have some advantages over our tanks due to the use of increased power in the ammunition set of armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles (BPS) compared with domestic BPS; increased protection of the crew and ammunition when the tank is broken due to large overall mass characteristics; increased power plants; more modern fuel equipment, turbochargers with high parameters of boost; equipping tanks with information and control systems; more advanced tank technical support system and, as a result, enhanced characteristics of the operational capabilities of tanks.
In the United States and NATO countries, the tank support system differs in its quantitative composition and quality of service from our similar system. In the tank battalion of the US Army, for two tanks with a crew of four people each, there are three cool specialist equipment. They are contractors. In the tank battalion of the Russian Army (RA), there are four tanks with a crew of three in each, according to the staff schedule, one technical service soldier. According to the latest data, the structures of RA tank-support equipment are manned with less than 30 percent. Thus, the existing tank technical support system in the troops of the NATO countries guarantees higher rates of operational capabilities of their tanks compared to ours. Now the Russian Defense Ministry has decided to organize the service centers of manufacturers for the maintenance and repair of weapons models. Therefore, in the near future tank support should significantly improve.
In turn, modern domestic tanks have certain advantages over foreign ones in terms of the following parameters: smaller dimensions and, consequently, a lower probability of being hit by their anti-tank weapons (PTS) of the enemy; the best indicators of specific (overall) power, specific fuel consumption, power reserve and a number of other characteristics; smaller crew size - three people; high rate of fire, regardless of the state and loading of crew members due to the automation of loading (the automatic loader was installed for the first time abroad on a Japanese tank "Type 90"); along with armor-piercing sub-caliber and cumulative and high-explosive fragmentation projectiles (OFS), the tank ammunition also includes guided projectiles (ATGM, ATGM) for firing up to five kilometers at armored and highly protected targets, self-propelled ATGM, ACS and low-flying helicopters.
In the last years of the last century, China began to lay claim to leadership in world tank design. On the 1 October military parade of 1999, on the occasion of the 50 anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, the new Chinese tanks, Type 96, Type 98 and Type 99, were demonstrated. According to the general designer of the tank "Type 99" Zhu Yushena, this machine on the three most important indicators of combat potential - mobility, firepower and security - ranks first in the world. In 2000, the first batch of 40 Type 99 tanks was launched. This is the modernization (development) of the Russian T-72 tank. The main armament - 125-millimeter smoothbore gun - the Chinese version of the Russian 2А46. The automatic loader on the 22 shot, the total ammunition - 41 shot with BPS, KS, OFS and ATGM 9М119 "Reflex" of Russian production. According to Zhu Yushen, Western technologies are worse than Russian for tank guns, tests showed that the Chinese 125-mm gun is more powerful than the 120-mm guns and by the BPS armor penetration rate exceeds the gun of the M1А2 tank on 15-20 percent gun, a performance kit, and a performance kit. -sem, and the gun of the Japanese tank "Type 2" - almost 6 times. Thus, according to the Chinese general designer, there is no doubt that the tank "Type 90" - one of the three best tanks in the world.
Main criteria
Consider the possible methods of comparative evaluation of tanks. The simplest may be the method of direct comparison of the main performance characteristics - overall mass characteristics, power, speed on different routes, reservation level or level of resistance from different PTS. All pure tank characteristics are given. This is a very simple and seemingly clear way of comparing tanks for the main performance characteristics. It would be possible to accept it as the main one if everyone agreed with the nomenclature of the characteristics under consideration, which would ensure the objectivity and adequacy of the assessment of a particular tank.
With this method, the priority of a certain group of performance characteristics will also affect the selection of the best sample. Therefore, a simple comparison of machines according to the tables of the main TTX cannot give a definite answer to the question: which sample is better? Especially in the case when in one of two compared samples one selected TTH is higher and the others are lower.
In the theory of operations research and other scientific disciplines, the criteria for comparative evaluation of weapons and military equipment are indicators of combat effectiveness, tactical-technical-economic (TTE) effectiveness, military-technical level (VTU) and a number of other complex indicators. In addition, to assess the combat potential of a tank fleet as a whole, such comprehensive indicators of the combat vehicle are needed that would give an opportunity to assess the military technical potential of the tank fleet as a whole.
Under the combat effectiveness of the tank is understood the ability of the machine as part of units, units and formations to perform the corresponding combat missions. Evaluation of tanks with the help of combat simulation (MDB) is an approximate assessment of the properties of the machine in the case when we cannot physically do a real battle. The methods of the MDB were the basis for the creation of another group of methods for evaluating the effectiveness - methods for directly evaluating the indicators of the main combat properties and VTU tanks. Indicators of the main combat properties are given in the second table.
2 table. Complex and private indicators of the main combat properties of the tank, taken into account in the sectoral methodology for assessing the WTU
Numerous calculations using the integrated methodic of the TTE to assess the effectiveness showed that the complex indicator of the tank's effectiveness can be expressed in terms of its basic combat properties. VTU of the tank reflects the complex indicator of the military-technical effectiveness of the tank when it is used in combination of combat conditions (offensive, head-on, reflection of attack, defense). The VTU indicator represents a comparative assessment of the effectiveness of a tank relative to a certain reference tank. The calculation of the integrated indicator VTU is carried out on indicators of firepower, security, mobility and operational capabilities.
Under firepower refers to the ability of a tank to detect and hit targets of certain types.
Under security refers to the ability of the tank to maintain combat capability when solving combat missions when exposed to damaging factors on the crew and equipment.
Under mobility refers to the ability of the tank to overcome a given distance for a certain time without additional means of maintaining movement.
Under operational capabilities refers to the ability of the tank to perform specified functions while maintaining in time the values of the established operational performance within the specified limits, corresponding to the specified modes and conditions of use, as well as its adaptability to the elimination of combat damage and bringing into combat readiness.
The volume of input and output information for the calculation of complex indicators of the main combat properties and the tankers of the tank as a whole is more than 5000 indicators. This gives the assessment of objectivity. Considering the large amount of input information, especially in terms of the variable of its part related to private performance indicators, and its insufficient reliability with respect to foreign samples, it must be admitted that the error in the estimate may be about ten percent. When the indices of the main combat properties and VTU differ within the limits of this value, it should be considered that the compared tanks are approximately equivalent. However, the results of an assessment of the WTU indicator of individual tanks are often criticized by some opponents in connection with the publication in foreign media of ratings similar to those presented in the first table.
The ending follows.
Information