Military Review

Thirty Six Unified Missile Tank Ammunition

72
Thirty Six Unified Missile Tank Ammunition

In the previous articles, we considered advantages of missile tanks in relation to tanks equipped with a cannonand expediency of unification of ammunition for self-propelled anti-tank missile systems (SPTRK), military anti-aircraft missile systems (SAM), combat helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).



In this material, we will consider what unified ammunition can be created for a missile tank in order to ensure its multifunctionality and which should be used as part of promising SPTRKs, military air defense systems, combat helicopters, UAVs and other carriers. Consider what warheads (warheads) and guidance / control systems can be used in them.

For each proposed standardized munition, the tables contain a conditional rating that characterizes the importance of developing the specified munition.

Anti-tank ammunition



Nomenclature of anti-tank ammunition

The most advanced anti-tank ammunition for a missile tank should be a hypersonic ATGM, the possibility of creating which is discussed in the article "Prospects for the development of ATGM: hypersound or homing?", and which can potentially be created on the basis of the MERA hypersonic meteorological missile.


Meteorological missile MERA

Subsonic / supersonic ATGMs with remote control in a laser beam, a cumulative or high-explosive warhead and means of overcoming active defense systems (KAZ) can presumably be developed on the basis of the existing ATGM Kornet, Chrysanthemum, Ataka-D.


ATGM "Chrysanthemum" in TPK and without it

The dimensions of the unified anti-tank missile systems will make it possible to place a powerful warhead in them. For example, a shaped charge warhead can include a main charge with a shaped charge funnel diameter of the order of 160 mm and two leading shaped charges to overcome tandem dynamic protection.

The high-explosive warhead of the anti-tank ammunition can presumably contain 20-50 kg of explosive, the explosion of which will ensure the destruction of the tank without breaking through the armor: the tracks will be torn off, the gun barrel will be damaged, the reconnaissance and guidance equipment, all external modules will be destroyed, explosive reactive armor will detonate.

The table shows two options for means of overcoming active protection complexes (KAZ): a fired lead charge and a shrapnel lead charge. In the first case, it is assumed the use of a small-sized ammunition placed on a rocket and fired off before the main charge approaches the target. Small-sized ammunition can be intended both for the physical destruction of the KAZ elements and for jamming the KAZ guidance systems. The leading shrapnel charge can work in a similar way, destroying the elements of the KAZ guidance system or overloading it with false targets. The optimal means of overcoming the KAZ should be determined at the development stage.


Small-sized ammunition for overcoming the KAZ as part of the RPG-30 "Hook" hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher

Subsonic / supersonic ATGMs with an infrared homing head and aiming at a reflected laser beam or an active radar homing head (ARLGSN) can be created on the basis of promising Hermes ATGMs, if the development of such seeker is underway.


Layout and image of the first stage ATGM "Hermes"

Also, as a "donor" of the GOS, a promising "product 305" can be considered, presumably equipped with a multispectral optical-electronic GOS using semi-active laser and optical guidance with daytime and infrared channels of medium (3-5 μm) and long-wave (8-13) μm ranges of wavelengths.

The creation of an ARLGSN for an ATGM is in question, since it is still unknown about work in this direction in the Russian Federation. There is a high probability that the importance of optical and thermal homing heads will significantly decrease due to the proliferation of defensive laser systems... By the way, in the American ATGM JAGM, a multi-mode seeker is installed, which combines the capabilities of radar, infrared and laser homing.


The Russian Armed Forces need an analogue of the multi-mode seeker mounted on the JAGM ATGM

The subsonic guided ballistic anti-tank ammunition can be developed on the basis of the technology of the 120 mm "Gran" guided mine equipped with a laser homing head. An attack core can be used as a warhead of a guided ballistic anti-tank ammunition. In principle, a high-explosive warhead can also hit a tank in the upper projection, but there is a risk of an increase in the effectiveness of KAZ, potentially capable of shooting down low-speed projectiles, including those moving along a ballistic trajectory.


Guided mine "Gran" with laser homing


Warhead type "shock core"

Unguided anti-tank ammunition is intended primarily for a missile tank. Their cost should be comparable to or lower than that of tank shells with remote detonation on the trajectory or armor-piercing feathered subcaliber shells (BOPS).

As a basis for development, unmanaged aviation missiles (NAR). Currently, the NAR can hit targets at a distance of up to 5000 meters, but these are, rather, areal targets. In our case, the firing range will be limited to a distance of about 500-1000 meters. Warheads in unguided anti-tank ammunition should be unified with those of ATGMs.


Unguided aircraft missile S-13-T

An important addition to the unified ammunition system can be corrected anti-tank ammunition, which can be developed on the basis of the NAR, equipped with correction units, including a laser homing head and pulse correction engines. In Russia, a project of corrected NAR "Threat" is being developed, within the framework of which NAR S-5Kor, S-8Kor and S-13Kor unified according to the GOS are to be created.


Adjustable NAR S-8Kor


The performance characteristics of the NAR S-5Kor, S-8Kor and S-13Kor

The unified corrected anti-tank ammunition can hit targets at a range of about 5000 meters and in many cases can replace more expensive ATGMs. Their use is justified from all types of carriers under consideration.

Anti-aircraft ammunition



Nomenclature of anti-aircraft ammunition

As you might guess, the Pantsir anti-aircraft missile and cannon systems (SAM) and the Sosna anti-aircraft missile system (SAM) should be used as the basis for anti-aircraft guided missiles (SAMs) with a radio command guidance system or with remote control in a laser beam. As the basic guidance system for promising missiles of this type, a "laser path" guidance system should be used, which can be supplemented by radio command guidance.


SAM ZRPK "Pantsir", SAM and transport and launch container (TPK) SAM "Sosna"

A short-range air-to-air missile RVV-MD / R-73 can be used as a basis for a unified missile defense system with IR seeker, the dimensions of which are only slightly larger than those assumed for unified ammunition.


RVV-MD / R-73

The small-sized anti-aircraft guided missile (half the length of the standard unified ammunition) is a unified version of the Verba portable anti-aircraft missile system (MANPADS), which, in turn, is a development of the Igla MANPADS. The diameter of the rocket, which is about 70 mm, makes it possible to place such rockets by three units in one container of reduced dimensions.


In SAM MANPADS 9K333 "Verba" can be placed in three units in one TPK half length

Anti-personnel ammunition



Nomenclature of antipersonnel ammunition

Unified anti-personnel ammunition, in fact, is similar to the above anti-tank ammunition, with the replacement of the warhead by high-explosive fragmentation with increased output of fragments, possibly with the use of ready-made striking elements. Also, for an obvious reason, it makes no sense to install a seeker in anti-personnel ammunition.

For guided and unguided munitions, remote detonation on the trajectory must be implemented, ensuring the defeat of manpower behind an obstacle.

Unlike anti-tank ammunition, designed to engage well-protected targets, containing means of overcoming reactive armor and KAZ, anti-personnel ammunition can be implemented in both full-size and half-length formats. Of course, such ammunition can be used not only to destroy manpower, but also to destroy lightly armored vehicles.

Also, the composition of the unified anti-personnel ammunition can include shrapnel ammunition designed to destroy openly located manpower and light armored vehicles in the immediate vicinity.


Shrapnel shell

Bunker ammunition



Nomenclature of anti-bunker ammunition

Anti-bunker unified ammunition is similar to anti-personnel ammunition, except that their high-explosive fragmentation warhead is optimized for penetration through an obstacle, the amount of fragmentation must be reduced in favor of increasing the high-explosive action.

In addition, modifications with a thermobaric warhead are added, designed to defeat manpower in natural and artificial structures. Thermobaric warhead for unified anti-bunker ammunition can be developed on the basis of ammunition for the TOS-1A "Solntsepёk" heavy flamethrower system, the RPO-A "Bumblebee" infantry handheld flamethrower, thermobaric warheads of the ATGM "Cornet" or "Chrysanthemum".


Thermobaric ammunition of the TOS-1A Solntsepёk heavy flamethrower system

Special ammunition



Nomenclature of special ammunition

Unified ammunition with a small-sized UAV is designed for reconnaissance. When equipped with a compact warhead, the UAV can also be used to directly engage targets, in fact, turning into a patrolling cruise missile.


Small-sized UAV launched from the multiple launch rocket system (MLRS) "Smerch"

Another effective reconnaissance tool that can be developed in the format of unified ammunition can be reconnaissance and signaling devices (RSP). Existing and prospective RSPs include acoustic, seismic, magnetic and thermal sensors capable of detecting the movement of enemy armored vehicles and transmitting this information via a radio channel. The deployment of the RSP is carried out manually, by artillery or aviation. For unified ammunition, RSPs of various types can be created, capable of detecting ground equipment, low-flying aircraft, helicopters and UAVs.


Image of the artillery version of the RSP

Unified ammunition with a shock-wave emitter - electromagnetic ammunition, designed to disable enemy electronics. These can be communications equipment, enemy radars and other electronics. For example, when attacking a group of tanks, several electromagnetic ammunition can disrupt the operation of all or part of the KAZ enemy tanks, simplifying their ATGM attack. Or destroy a swarm of small-sized UAVs, damaging their control and communication systems.


Electromagnetic ammunition device

Finally, a special ammunition with a nuclear warhead. Soviet industry created artillery ammunition with a 152 mm nuclear warhead. Accordingly, special ammunition may well be created in the format of unified ammunition, the dimensions of which are much larger than that of a 152 mm caliber projectile.


152-mm Soviet artillery shell 3BV3 with a capacity of 2,5 kilotons

For the enemy, the appearance of such a unified special ammunition turns into a terrible threat, in fact, any tank, SPTRK, helicopter or even a UAV or air defense system that can use unified ammunition of standard dimensions turns into weaponcapable of delivering a nuclear strike. If earlier for the enemy VIP targets were operational-tactical missile systems (OTRK) or artillery capable of inflicting a tactical nuclear strike, then in the case of a unified special ammunition the list of threats - carriers of tactical nuclear weapons increases by several orders of magnitude.

It is believed that the possibility of using special ammunition with a nuclear warhead was considered for the promising T-95 "Object 195" tank and the T-14 "Armata" tank in the version with a 152-mm cannon.

conclusions


All of the above ammunition can and should be maximally unified in terms of combat units and guidance / control systems. Almost all of the supposed standardized ammunition has a prototype on the basis of which they can be created. No "space" technologies are required.


Summary table of unified ammunition for guidance / control systems and warheads (excluding missiles, they simply do not fit into the table)

Let's go back to the topic of the rocket tank. The range of standardized ammunition discussed in this material, which can be created and loaded into the ammunition of a missile tank, shows the highest versatility of this type of weapon.

We can say that many ammunition from the presented nomenclature is not needed by the tank, that the tank is a melee weapon. This is so, and weapons for close combat are present in the presented nomenclature. But if we are talking about the unification of missile weapons for ground forces, then why should a tank be deprived of a "long arm"? Moreover, the battlefield can be different, somewhere in the desert or in the mountains a distance of 10-15 km can be quite real (for example, when fighting from a dominant height).

We will dwell on the design of a missile tank in more detail in the next article.
Author:
Photos used:
btvt.info.ru, tvzvezda.ru, kbptula.ru, bastion-karpenko.ru
Articles from this series:
Fire support tanks, BMPT "Terminator" and the cycle of OODA John Boyd
Armored vehicles against infantry. Who is faster: a tank or infantry?
Increased situational awareness of armored combat vehicle crews
A helicopter against the tank. Standoff more than half a century long
Russian military helicopters and their weapons. History, present and future
Great extinction. Why certain types of weapons may disappear?
Prospects for the development of ATGM: hypersound or homing?
Armament of promising tanks: cannon or missiles?
Armament of promising tanks: cannon or missiles?
Unification of ammunition for self-propelled anti-tank systems, military air defense systems, combat helicopters and UAVs
72 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. polpot
    polpot 4 September 2020 18: 08 New
    18
    Military fiction corner
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 4 September 2020 18: 45 New
      +7
      Quote: polpot
      Military fiction corner

      Why is it a ground-based missile tank? Let's look at the laser tank right away! fellow
      1. notingem
        notingem 4 September 2020 22: 00 New
        10
        One barmale costs 10 cents. Ammunition to destroy it with a mulienne. The muzzle will not crack.
        1. Shopping Mall
          9 September 2020 14: 48 New
          +1
          Quote: notingem
          One barmale costs 10 cents. Ammunition to destroy it with a mulienne. The muzzle will not crack.


          1. If you shoot at the barmaley with ammunition of type 3.4, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8, then the cost of destruction will be comparable to that of the HE of a tank shell. Are they being shot?

          2. If a barmaley aims at a tank from an ATGM, then it costs not 10 cents, but as a tank knocked out by an ATGM.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Sergey_G_M
        Sergey_G_M 5 September 2020 04: 25 New
        +5
        We will dwell on the design of a missile tank in more detail in the next article.

        I feel still ahead! The author has clearly signed ("Thirty-six unified ammunition for a rocket tank" - that's not huhry-muhry!) And now no one will bother him to put a laser gatling gun instead of a PKT on a rocket tank!
        I look forward to continuing this great series of articles - the next article is bound to be a masterpiece!
    2. Technical engineer
      Technical engineer 22 September 2020 18: 30 New
      +1
      the author expressed his opinion. Analyzed what he knows. What to immediately attack him? Let's respect our colleagues and answer reasonably.
  2. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins 4 September 2020 18: 21 New
    10
    If we remove "presumably", "perhaps", "in the future", "when they will develop" ... What will remain of the article?
    1. pv1005
      pv1005 4 September 2020 20: 33 New
      +9
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      If we remove "presumably", "perhaps", "in the future", "when they will develop" ... What will remain of the article?

      Title. But he will be off topic. laughing
    2. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft 6 September 2020 23: 06 New
      0
      Quote: Leader of the Redskins
      If we remove "presumably", "perhaps", "in the future", "when they will develop" ... What will remain of the article?

      Che got to the bottom of the orphan? Write your article about the "Death Star", so I've already found the material for you ...

      https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5c986c1b1a1ea000b4de1c77/sravnenie-vseh-kosmicheskih-korablei-iz-vselennoi-zvezdnyh-voin-5e0977c8c49f2900ae66606f
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 7 September 2020 06: 57 New
        -3
        The fact of the matter is that I write either about what I saw with my own eyes (most of my articles), or about what I heard with my own ears ... The exception is about the plane, which I read about in the magazine and it seemed to me interesting origin.
  3. Mordvin 3
    Mordvin 3 4 September 2020 18: 27 New
    +5
    And what have I read? Three cartridges were fired at the firing range, and here ... Wow, yo-mao ...
  4. Operator
    Operator 4 September 2020 18: 41 New
    +1
    Hypersonic munitions cannot use either radar or optical guidance for a simple reason - in the air they move in a plasma envelope that blocks optical and radio waves. Therefore, only an inertial guidance system.

    An exception is radio command guidance, provided that freon is released at the end of the ammunition, piercing the plasma envelope (as in anti-missiles).
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 4 September 2020 20: 48 New
      +4
      Quote: Operator
      Hypersonic munitions cannot use either radar or optical guidance for a simple reason - in the air they move in a plasma envelope that blocks optical and radio waves. Therefore, only an inertial guidance system.

      But you see what a catch ... several types of hypersonic anti-tank missiles were developed in the USA and they were all focused on laser guidance ...!
      1. Operator
        Operator 4 September 2020 22: 37 New
        0
        Name at least one with a speed> 1600 m / s.
        1. Sergey_G_M
          Sergey_G_M 5 September 2020 02: 30 New
          +4
          Vladimir is right, but they were developed and even brought to tests. Only they did not accept it - it is obvious that they did not suit it.
          Either it was not possible to control through the plasma, or the rocket flying low above the ground in the acceleration section obscured the target from the operator with the force of the flame (which is the same plasma) from the engine (and dust and sand from the ground should make a real smoke screen, the engine for such speeds is powerful and his exhaust is serious), or the dead zone necessary for the rocket to accelerate did not suit.
          In general, there are many problems, it is even difficult to say what exactly caused the rejection of such a missile into service.

          https://topwar.ru/173607-perspektivy-razvitija-ptur-giperzvuk-ili-samonavedenie.html#comment-id-10653258
          There is a bit about similar projects here.
          1. Operator
            Operator 5 September 2020 09: 02 New
            0
            Fence grass in the part of the optical / radar homing ATGM at a speed of 2200 m / s laughing

            You don't have to believe everything that is published on VO, it is advisable to be able to filter information yourself. The authors of the articles, even those who have served in the Navy for several years in a specialized officer position, do not know about the presence of a reducer in a torpedo with two counter-rotating water cannon impellers.

            So the comments are our everything.
  5. garri-lin
    garri-lin 4 September 2020 19: 10 New
    +5
    Rocket Tank spoils a lot of ideas for everything. Tank tank. A gun. Rockets wunderwaffe will not make and multiply the price by an unknown amount. Although, in general, the unification of the battlefield missiles is a good idea. Despite the globality. Only the tank of those missiles should have a couple of pairs. Not more. And on other media it is welcome.
    1. Matthias
      Matthias 4 September 2020 20: 23 New
      -4
      From the tank, in the usual sense of this term, there is nothing left for a long time, they were retrained in the self-propelled guns of direct support.
      Therefore, the development of a universal rocket platform is taking place.
      1. garri-lin
        garri-lin 4 September 2020 20: 52 New
        +2
        Tanks 90 percent of their existence are self-propelled guns of direct infantry support. And the cannon is the perfect tool for this. The universal reet platform is a good thing. As well as the unification of the battlefield missiles described in the article. But darling. You won't shoot at each firing point. Go broke.
        1. Matthias
          Matthias 4 September 2020 21: 39 New
          0
          Tanks 90 percent of their existence are self-propelled guns of direct infantry support
          tanks were created to break through the defenses and develop the offensive, until the collapse of the Union, many dreamed of tank avalanche breakthroughs to the English Channel.
          And the cannon is the perfect tool for this.
          in the cannon, the shell is more limited by the dimensions and ballistic characteristics.
          But darling. You won't shoot at each firing point. Go broke.
          The rocket itself is not much more complicated than a toaster, the price is inflated by the relatively small serial production and a hundredfold government markups. However, the same spurs are a gross consumable even for the most backward bearded boys from the Umba-Yumba tribe. They launch an aliexpress drone for reconnaissance, in case of a target or suspicious activity, they send a guided missile and only then go to figure out what was there.
          1. notingem
            notingem 4 September 2020 22: 06 New
            0
            Very Smart YES
          2. garri-lin
            garri-lin 4 September 2020 22: 10 New
            +3
            1. Do you remember the composition of the tank wedges? How was it with the motorized rifle?
            2. A 125 mm cannon is almost ideal in terms of impact on most targets on the battlefield. Well, plus or minus 20 mm.
            3. A rocket is more expensive and more complicated than a projectile. It's not a pity for a difficult goal. You will not be enough for the usual. The rocket is more demanding for storage. The rocket is heavier and more massive. You can go over it for a long time.
            1. cat Rusich
              cat Rusich 5 September 2020 00: 53 New
              +1
              Shooter, the 2A82 smoothbore gun is needed by the tank for BOPS. That is, to fight other tanks, the rest of the targets are "secondary", but the use of tanks develops so that tanks "work" instead of SPGs - direct fire. Think differently? - then why does the tank need "combined armor" for DZ? - right ! - keep BOPS from enemy tank. About "expensive missiles" - but what about the "rate on precision weapons" - shells Centimeter-M, M1, Krasnopol-M, M1, Kitolov-2M (for Carnation and Kitolov-2 for Nona), 120mm Border mines .. .simple OFSs are needed for firing "across areas" from conventional self-propelled guns or immediately use MLRS. How many years have the military been saying: "Better accurate first time defeat with high-precision weapons than salvo fire with an unclear result."
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 5 September 2020 01: 57 New
                +1
                The tank works with direct fire. For most purposes, a HE shell is enough. A tank rarely shoots at a tank. And for this it is best to use a fancy rocket. For all other purposes, the cannon is the best option. As an example, you cite guns that work from closed positions and which do not have an accuracy comparable to a direct fire from a tank gun. They need smart shells to hit with the first shot. A tank can do this with a simple projectile. Cheap and massive.
                1. cat Rusich
                  cat Rusich 5 September 2020 02: 54 New
                  0
                  Shooter, 1) ACS Gvozdika, Akatsiya, "rifled mortar" Nona can also shoot with direct fire ... (or can't they?). 2) A tank on "direct fire" can wait for an ATGM (on the chronicles from "hot spots" we see how tanks or infantry fighting vehicles leave for one shot and hide behind cover after it). 3) ACS and mortar can hit targets behind an obstacle that interferes with line of sight and direct hit from direct fire. OFS 122mm, 152mm or 120mm mines are also "cheap". 4) "... A tank shoots at a tank extremely rarely ..." - why are they constantly developing BOPS with an increase in "power"? - for example "Vacuum-1", "Vacuum-2" with depleted uranium for the T-14, or "Lead" for the T-90? 5) "... the accuracy is comparable to a direct fire from a tank gun ..." - SMOOTH-BREEDER 2A82 gun - Gvozdika, Akatsiya, Nona have a rifled barrel, I think the SPG has sufficient accuracy to hit the "firing point".
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 5 September 2020 09: 11 New
                    +1
                    1. For the same Carnation, direct fire is not the main one. It is not intended for this.
                    2. The tank against the ATGM has at least some chance. The rest of the Carnation type has no chance.
                    3. Sau from closed positions will never replace a tank. What does not invent will not replace.
                    4. BOPSs are constantly inventing new ones. How often will it be used in combat? Honestly. Any statistics. How many tanks have been hit by BOPS over the past 20 years. In quantitative and percentage terms.
                    5. How many shells does Nona need to destroy a firing point on the battlefield? A tank with a distance of 2 km will do it with 3-4 shots. And how much does it take for Nona in the rear? Who will adjust the fire?
                    1. cat Rusich
                      cat Rusich 5 September 2020 20: 06 New
                      0
                      Shooter, 2) - against which ATGM does the tank have a "chance" - "Kornet-D"?, Javelin?, Spike? ... "In principle" - there is a "chance", I admit it. 5a) Nona SAMU will need 3 mines to suppress the "firing point" - "mortar fork" - flight, undershoot, "bull's-eye". Moreover, from a closed position, 5b) While the tank fires 3-4 shots from direct fire, an ATGM can hit the tank, 5c) Who will "adjust" the tank's fire? - who will inform the tank about the "firing point"? - it's time to have a fire spotter in each company - and be in touch with whoever will provide support with fire for the company - even an ACS battery, even a single mortar, even a squadron of attack aircraft. 4) In the West, they have already come close to increasing the caliber of a tank gun to 130-140mm (there are articles on VO on this topic) - the caliber is increased not for the "power" of the OFS, but to increase the power of the BOPS - WHY? 3) In the course of the wars, the "tank" smoothly turned into an ACS of the Great Patriotic War (for example, the SU-100, SU-122 ...) - an ACS from a closed position can operate in a CLOSED position, and the tank needs to go into line of sight of the "firing point" - in fact, you need to understand the concept of "firing point" - what is it? - "classic" pillbox-crab, just a machine gun in a trench, a sniper in one of the windows of the house, an ATGM position ...
                      1. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 5 September 2020 20: 59 New
                        +1
                        1. Javelin has a chance. Cornet too. Spike too. Even without KAZ. Tou, bassoon, mestizo, etc., etc. The tank has a chance. Everything else that you listed has no chance.
                        2. Nona hits the bull's-eye from a closed position from three minutes. You flatter the artillery.
                        3. 3-4 shots for a tank is a minute.
                        4. Tank fire does not need to be adjusted. The tank goes in battle formations and he sees from where they shoot at him and the infantry. And to work with Nona, there must be a corrector. Trained with reliable communications and a host of instrumentation. And he needs a lot of time. And you can't put that in every platoon. And the tank interacts directly with the infantry.
                        5. The West can go its own way. Most western tanks at the beginning of 2000. were turret and tank destroyers. Without HE in ammunition. The legacy of the USSR, tank wedges were preparing to stop.
                        6. The firing point is from a submachine gunner in a competently dug trench and to a bunker. From which they shoot at the infantry, causing damage and slowing down the advance.
                        0. The work of artillery from closed positions will not replace the direct fire of the tank.
                      2. cat Rusich
                        cat Rusich 5 September 2020 23: 00 New
                        0
                        Shooter, 3) "... 3-4 shots for a minute ..." - accurate? - or towards the enemy? - "Tank biathlon" is not an indicator, but they shoot at the target "tank" very slowly, while the "target" does not threaten a response ATGM or BOPS (and this is with a standing tank, but if you have to move?). 4) I did not look into the sighting devices of the tank commander, but I doubt that they can see the entire "battlefield" (you probably mean the "panoramic sight"? - and there are many of them in the army ... on each tank?), The tank will survive in battle Given the number of ATGMs and RPGs, will there be enough time and shells to help the infantry? - "... The tank is in battle formations ..." - with the "speed" of the infantry? - "... And the tank directly interacts with the infantry ..." - how? - How does the infantry communicate with the tank, whether you like it or not, but a spotter in the company is needed - next to the company commander, at least communication with the platoon commanders who could report "firing points". 5) During the Second World War, the Germans also "went their own way" - on the "Kursk Bulge" T-34-76 could hit the T-5 Tiger only on the side ... 6) How will a tank gun hit a machine gunner in a "trench"? (by "air blast" like "Telnik" for the T-14, and how many "Telnikov" will go for the T-72B3 and T-90?) - OFSs will explode nearby - maybe the "foe" will be crushed by a blast wave ... - the tank will immediately to shoot at the machine gunner or will he stop and aim at him?
                        DOT
                        The pictures show examples of pillboxes. You can imagine how you will have to hit them from the tank ... and if their ATGM will cover ...
                      3. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 5 September 2020 23: 45 New
                        0
                        Did you serve in the army? Or only in the "Call to the attendant" were cut? Or tanks? There is no alternative to the tank. And it won't. With all its cons.
                        ... Biathlon is not an indicator
                        .tank goes exactly with the speed of the infantry that it supports.
                        ... The tank keeps in touch with the infantry that it covers.
                        ... Tigers released 1500. T 34 how many released see for yourself.
                        ... A direct hit will destroy. Or suppress with close blunders.
                        ... The pillbox pictures are beautiful.
                      4. cat Rusich
                        cat Rusich 6 September 2020 00: 55 New
                        0
                        Shooter, 2) The meaning of the attack of tanks is in a quick breakthrough into the depths of the territory occupied by opponents to its tactical objects, the infantry moves on "vehicles designed to move behind tanks and armor from bullets and shrapnel" - what else is it necessary to come up with (as the simplest example of an infantry fighting vehicle -1, Btr-152). 3) How does the tank keep in touch with the infantry? - on the radio, who has the radio? - the one with the walkie-talkie can direct the ACS to the "target" (if he doesn’t know how, let him study !!!) 4) Tiger and Panther increased the caliber of guns to 88mm - T-34 increased the caliber of the gun to 85mm, and the IS-2 to 122mm, Leopard increased the gun to 130-140mm - T-14 Armata ... 5) "... Direct hit ... "from which shot? - you have to stand in the field and shoot, while the enemy has an ATGM ... in ambush. 6) An article about "universal rockets", and what are WE arguing about? - I suggested that we first determine the dimensions of the "universal missiles", and suggested as an example the dimensions of missiles from Chrysanthemum-S - 152mm caliber, 2m long.
                      5. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 6 September 2020 11: 04 New
                        +1
                        An article about the reincarnation of a rocket tank. This does not give advantages and increases the price at times.
                    2. cat Rusich
                      cat Rusich 6 September 2020 01: 13 New
                      0
                      UOS "Gorchak" was launched in 1990 under the USSR in 1996, was adopted.
                      UOS Gorchak
                      Armament: 1 NSV 12,7mm, BK 480 rounds, 1 PKM, BK 1700 rounds, 1 AGS-17, BK 360 rounds, 4 ATGM, at the time of creation "Fagot" or "Competition", with a range of up to 4000m, crew of 2 fighters - try this "Gorchak" "... suppress by close blunders ..."
                    3. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 6 September 2020 11: 05 New
                      0
                      Open or closed?
                    4. cat Rusich
                      cat Rusich 6 September 2020 20: 25 New
                      0
                      Shooter, in the picture of the Gorchak UOS in the open - height 600mm (60cm), in the closed form - the weapon is lowered inside and closed with an armored cover - height 150mm (15cm)
                      UOS Gorchak
                      Here is UOS Gorchak in a closed and open form, in a "cut" ...
                    5. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 6 September 2020 20: 52 New
                      0
                      And what will happen to the arrows in this box after detonation in 2-3 meters from the cover of the PF tank gun. They obviously won't be able to shoot. A fixed firing point can fire a leash a couple of times. Then it becomes a heap of scrap metal.
                    6. cat Rusich
                      cat Rusich 6 September 2020 21: 31 New
                      0
                      Shooter, now you flatter the tank gunner ... The Kornet ATGM works up to 5500m, we are sure that the tank will be able to get into the Gorchak UOS from at least 2 km, even 2-3m nearby - the Gorchak UOS is 600mm high - you still need to see it. Weight meaning UOS and UFS in stealth. UOS Gorchak is motionless, but the tank will STAND the same (or will it shoot right away?). You Shooter claimed that the tank will need 2-3 shots, but UOS Gorchak will also "give back", you are sure that the tank will "survive" until the second shot. After 2 burned tanks the UOS can be thrown ... The soldiers in the UOS are below ground level, so the exposed weapon can damage. I repeat, you need to hit the UOS - at the target at ground level for 2-2 km - and not get hit by the ATGM "response".
                    7. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 6 September 2020 21: 51 New
                      0
                      The coordinates will be known exactly after the first shot. And your beloved Carnations and Nona will come into play. I think 15 shells will be covered. The tank will need to suppress the OT with close hits. Go to the Army. That's cool. Preferably not in alternative troops but in combatants.
                    8. cat Rusich
                      cat Rusich 6 September 2020 22: 11 New
                      0
                      Shooter, so you need Nona, Carnations ... and the spotter "by itself" appeared ... and the tank acts as a "live bait"? But will the tank "survive" after the first ATGM shot? You can also crush the UOS with a simple 82mm company mortar - the company ran into the UOS and the company commander gives the order to "suppress" - the spotter aims the mortar at the "target", 5 minutes will be enough ... or the tank will be attached to the company, but there will be no mortars ... somehow it turns out that the tank is "formidable and terrible", and someone else will crush "firing points ...
                    9. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 6 September 2020 23: 07 New
                      +1
                      How does it come out that the army has tanks and carnations and trays and flames and shoes and much more. These are different tools and each for its own business. And one tool cannot replace another. Understand this simple truth already.
                    10. cat Rusich
                      cat Rusich 6 September 2020 23: 39 New
                      0
                      Shooter, the conversation began with the purpose of the tank gun and what is more profitable a projectile or a rocket ... the 2A82 tank gun was primarily created for BOPS against tanks, for this, the rifling was removed. OFSs as an addition to BOPSs, the fathers-commanders (from the headquarters) decided to "hang" the duties of an assault gun on the tank, and the OFSs became the main ammunition of the tank (after all, there were no tank battles). Missiles are needed when the "target" needs to be hit at a distance of more than 3 km and preferably the first time (we are talking about tanks without SPG support) - we made the Reflex ATGM with a range of up to 5 km.
                    11. garri-lin
                      garri-lin 7 September 2020 09: 04 New
                      0
                      The tank gun is designed to engage main targets. The main targets are not tanks. This concept comes from the legendary Thirty-four. And no one is going to leave her.
  • Technical engineer
    Technical engineer 22 September 2020 18: 37 New
    0
    1) In terms of the impact on most targets on the field (except for tanks), the howitzer will still be most effective.
    2) an unguided missile is cheaper than a projectile. Fewer tolerances and theoretically it is possible to rivet from roofing iron. They are sometimes made from fire extinguishers and gas cylinders in the Middle East. So, the rocket is sometimes cheaper.
    3) often the rocket will be more effective than the projectile. For example, in a thermobaric version or in the form of a kinetic hypersonic ATGM.
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 22 September 2020 19: 45 New
      0
      Howitzer reaction time is minutes. The reaction time of the tank is seconds.
      2. An unguided missile at a distance of more than 500 meters can only be hit by a miracle. And at the same time, in addition to the thick-walled barrel, the trigger must have all the same attributes as the gun. High-precision aiming mechanism, stabilizers, etc. and etc. and so on. In fact, the same gun only modified. And at the same time, much more gunpowder is needed for the rocket. And the initial weight of the rocket will be greater than that of the searion. An analogue of a tank HE shell is the S13 missile. Look what this fool is.
      3. There are thermobaric shells for conventional guns. The hypersonic ATGM is a good thing. For them, remodel tanks?
  • cat Rusich
    cat Rusich 5 September 2020 00: 08 New
    0
    Shooter, In the case of "just support the infantry with fire" - take the self-propelled guns Carnation or Nona (Vienna), let Chrysanthemum-S cover the enemy's armored vehicles ... The meaning of Carnation (or Acacia), Nona (Vienna) is in the ability to support the infantry with fire from "closed positions ", if it is very necessary, then direct fire directly into the bunker (if there is a fairly open area in front of it). Anti-tank guided missiles of the outdated generation with a high-explosive warhead (for example Malyutka) can also be used against "firing points".
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 5 September 2020 01: 59 New
      +1
      Obsolete needs to be modernized and sold.
      1. cat Rusich
        cat Rusich 5 September 2020 03: 00 New
        0
        Shooter, "Obsolete needs to be modernized and sold" - tell those who are modernizing BMP-1, BMP-2 ...
        1. garri-lin
          garri-lin 5 September 2020 09: 02 New
          0
          Tell them. They don't listen.
  • Thomas N.
    Thomas N. 6 September 2020 09: 17 New
    0
    Quote: Matthias
    From the tank, in the usual sense of this term, there is nothing left for a long time, they were retrained in the self-propelled guns of direct support.

    On the contrary! Tanks at first (World War I and the beginning of World War II) were engaged in direct fire support for the infantry, and after World War II they finally turned into an anti-tank weapon. They are at war with each other, and everyone must protect them from everything else (helicopters, ATGMs, TOZhS).
  • Sergey_G_M
    Sergey_G_M 5 September 2020 02: 54 New
    0
    Rocket Tank spoils a lot of ideas for everything. Tank tank. A gun. Rockets wunderwaffe will not make and the price will be multiplied by an unknown quantity.

    It's not even about the price, but about the dimensions - the ammunition load will be 10 well, at least 15 missiles. Let's estimate the ammunition load - 6 anti-tank, 6 - high-explosive fragmentation, 3 - something from the author's fantasies. Now the question is - why do you need a tank with such a short amount of ammunition?
    With an increase in ammunition, the tank becomes huge, its survivability decreases (rockets are more explosive than shells)
    Rate of fire - the rocket needs at least 10-15 seconds to enter the INS and chemical batteries mode.
    Recharging - the same problem, well, the author promised to tell about it in the next article, let's wait))

    In general, no one makes rocket tanks, not only because of the price. But let's wait for the next article, it simply has to be a masterpiece!
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 5 September 2020 09: 00 New
      0
      A masterpiece will definitely be. Although, in general, the concept of unification is quite sound.
    2. Technical engineer
      Technical engineer 22 September 2020 18: 42 New
      0
      Let's compare a high-explosive shell of a tank cannon and a shot from a jet flamethrower. I think the latter in the form of missiles can be taken more. And they say that a shot from a Bumblebee "In terms of the effectiveness of the impact directly in close combat on all types of selected targets, with the exception of tanks, is not inferior to a 152-mm high-explosive fragmentation projectile"
  • Shopping Mall
    9 September 2020 14: 59 New
    0
    Quote: garri-lin
    Rocket Tank spoils a lot of ideas for everything. Tank tank. A gun. Rockets wunderwaffe will not make and the price will be multiplied by an unknown quantity.


    And why? In the previous article "Armament of promising tanks: cannon or missiles?" https://topwar.ru/174116-vooruzhenie-perspektivnyh-tankov-pushka-ili-rakety.html there was a comparison of the cost of a projectile + a gun and a rocket. Shells are also expensive + gun wear and tear. And the resource of domestic guns leaves much to be desired.

    At the same time, if you make a missile based on the NAR, then it will not be more expensive than the HE shell, which are now mainly used. In fact, it will be something like a tank RPG or Bumblebee.
    1. garri-lin
      garri-lin 9 September 2020 16: 26 New
      0
      An analogue of a tank HE shell is NUR C 13. Anything less will yield. Will there be many of them on the tank? And by the way, the resource of guides for NUR launches does not differ much from the resource of the barrel. Although they are much cheaper. And the use of TPK increases the size required to accommodate missiles. And the main disadvantage of rockets is that they are stored less shells. And they are more demanding on storage conditions. Shells can be stored for decades without problems. Missiles after 15 years of storage can fail. Especially if the temperature regime was not maintained.
      1. Shopping Mall
        9 September 2020 21: 13 New
        0
        Quote: garri-lin
        An analogue of a tank HE shell is NUR C 13. Anything less will yield. Will there be many of them on the tank? And by the way, the resource of guides for NUR launches does not differ much from the resource of the barrel. Although they are much cheaper. And the use of TPK increases the size required to accommodate missiles. And the main disadvantage of rockets is that they are stored less shells. And they are more demanding on storage conditions. Shells can be stored for decades without problems. Missiles after 15 years of storage can fail. Especially if the temperature regime was not maintained.


        Dimensions of missiles in TPK and ammunition in the next article, it has already been delivered and will be released in the near future.

        An interesting question about storage. I found the following information regarding shells:

        In addition, as studies of ammunition have shown, their long-term storage leads to a change in the properties of powder charges, and, consequently, to a change in the parameters of internal ballistics during the production of a shot.
        ....
        the use of ammunition, the storage period of which is 12 years longer than the guaranteed one, by 50 ... 60% increases barrel wear with the same number of shots.
        ...
        an increase in the burning rate of propellants as a result of long-term storage and maximum pressure in the barrel, which is 1,03 ... 1,2 times higher than normal.
        ...
        The wear of the barrel when using shots, the storage period of which exceeds 30 years requires a special experiment, and at the beginning it is necessary to conduct physicochemical studies of the charge to exclude the manifestation of blasting properties and reduce the caloric content of the powder to a level where the projectile does not leave the barrel


        On the other hand, the Armed Forces have examples of successful firing with ancient RPGs and ATGMs.

        On the third hand, shells form in the powder, because of which the ATGM can "bang" on the launcher, but when the missile is on the launcher outside the hull, and even on the rocket tank, there will be no particular harm.

        And if we still throw out missiles with an expelling charge, and the main engine turns on later, then there will be no threat to the carrier at all.

        And if the rocket does not explode, but the thrust characteristics are weakened, then in the ATGM this can be partially compensated by the control system.

        Formally, the warranty period for shells and missiles is approximately the same and is 10-15 years.
        1. garri-lin
          garri-lin 9 September 2020 21: 20 New
          0
          For shells, exactly 10 15? Like more. When stored properly. The rocket is still larger in size.
  • cat Rusich
    cat Rusich 4 September 2020 20: 25 New
    0
    The author of the article could first decide on the dimensions of the "universal ammunition" of the "rocket tank" ... For example: ammunition for the "Chrysanthemum-S" 152mm caliber, 2 meters long. And to design the rest of the "universal ammunition" for these dimensions (if anything, then use it with the ready-made "Chrysanthemum-S").
    1. Momotomba
      Momotomba 4 September 2020 21: 54 New
      +1
      Quote: cat Rusich
      the rest of the "universal ammunition" should be designed for these dimensions (if anything, use it with the ready-made "Chrysanthemum-S").

      Then there will be no point in creating a rocket tank. And so the author plans to create a superweapon that can destroy everything and everyone at any distance of the battle.
      At one time, we already made aircraft and ships without artillery weapons. But after a while they abandoned such an execution and returned to rocket and cannon armament. Now let's try to make a purely rocket tank. Although we have already gone through this ...
    2. Shopping Mall
      9 September 2020 15: 04 New
      0
      Quote: cat Rusich
      The author of the article could first decide on the dimensions of the "universal ammunition" of the "rocket tank" ... For example: ammunition for the "Chrysanthemum-S" 152mm caliber, 2 meters long. And to design the rest of the "universal ammunition" for these dimensions (if anything, then use it with the ready-made "Chrysanthemum-S").


      Planned dimensions of the TPK: length 2700-3000 mm for standard ammunition, diameter 170-190 mm. The reasons in the next article.
      1. cat Rusich
        cat Rusich 9 September 2020 20: 36 New
        0
        Andrey, then your "rocket tank" will be similar to the TOS-1 "Buratino" - you won't be able to "hide" the TPK 3000X190mm inside (how many will there be?) Or like the TOR air defense system vertically? - then the height of the "tank" will be very high for a tank ... In principle, the layout of "Buratino" is also suitable for firing from a distance.
        TOS-1 Buratino
        This is how the TOS-1 "Buratino" caliber 220mm, length 5000mm looks like.
        1. Shopping Mall
          9 September 2020 21: 15 New
          0
          Quote: cat Rusich
          Andrey, then your "rocket tank" will be similar to the TOS-1 "Buratino" - ...

          An article with an approximate calculation of the weapons bay will be released in the near future, has already been handed over.
          1. cat Rusich
            cat Rusich 9 September 2020 21: 21 New
            0
            We are waiting ... "food for reasoning" smile
    3. Technical engineer
      Technical engineer 22 September 2020 18: 44 New
      0
      Why should only one gauge be used from the rail? And why can't you install two thin-walled pipes instead of a cannon (even two tubular guides for missiles will be lighter than a tank gun. 152 and 80mm, for example.
      1. cat Rusich
        cat Rusich 22 September 2020 20: 03 New
        0
        Quote: Technical Engineer
        install two thin-walled pipes instead of a cannon (even two tubular guides for missiles will be lighter than a tank gun. 152 and 80mm for example.
        BMP-1, M551 Sheridan have already been invented ... Gun 2A28 "Thunder" = SPG-9. 10mm B-82 recoilless gun - can this caliber be used? Sheridan is equipped with a 81mm M-152 cannon, with the ability to use the MGM-51 Shilleila ATGM.
        Quote: Technical Engineer
        Why should only one gauge be used with rail guides?
        It is necessary to clarify how the "rail guides" will look like ...
        A lot has already been said about "universal missiles" ... In the case of using different calibers on the same vehicle, you need to think over the ammunition rack, how the warheads of different calibers will be located. How they will be fed to the launcher. Maybe a "vertical start"? - the missile will become more complicated, but the ammunition stowage will become easier - the missiles should be placed in the launcher while standing, like "firewood of different diameters."
  • Matthias
    Matthias 4 September 2020 20: 30 New
    0
    It is not necessary to unify individual launchers, but a combat module recruited from multi-caliber vertical launchers. Something like the Russian "Torah".
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 4 September 2020 22: 13 New
    +1
    Something rockets to fig! I won't remember that much! As some person said, when they brought an ugly girlfriend to visit ...: "Oh, I won't drink so much!" ... Can I read it tomorrow? And then I already want to sleep!
  • sen
    sen 5 September 2020 06: 08 New
    +1
    About universality.
    There is such a missile system ADATS. In service with Canada.
    The complex was developed by the Swiss company "Oerlikon" together with the American "Martin Marietta" in the period 1979-1984.
    Designed to combat low-flying air and ground armored targets. It is capable of striking air targets at ranges of 1-10 km and altitudes up to 7 km.
    The performance characteristics of ADATS missiles: launch weight 51,3 kg, length 2,05 m, body diameter 15,2 cm, wingspan 36 cm, maximum flight speed 3 M, warhead weight 12,5 kg. Warhead of cumulative fragmentation action, penetrating armor up to 900 mm thick. Fuses of two types are used: laser non-contact when firing at air targets and contact - at ground armored vehicles.
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADATS
  • Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 5 September 2020 11: 43 New
    +1
    Everything is wonderful and incomparable. But what kind of missiles were recently fired at the exhibition so shamefully that half of them did not reach the target? Does anyone know?
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 6 September 2020 08: 58 New
      0
      look here
      https://topwar.ru/174472-polovina-raket-ne-popala-v-cel-v-seti-razocharovany-strelbami-na-armii-2020.html
  • Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 5 September 2020 17: 34 New
    +1
    A shell with a special warhead is a great thing.
    It is necessary that in the ammunition load of each gun of the corresponding caliber there are always 1-2 of these.
    So that the personnel are not afraid to handle such things.
  • Thomas N.
    Thomas N. 6 September 2020 09: 06 New
    +1
    It is a pity that the article cannot be added to, the author is worthy. Or is it possible? I'm here recently, if anyone knows, tell me.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 6 September 2020 14: 34 New
    0
    The topic of kinetic ammunition is interesting ... but it seems to me that it is better to deliver an ammunition with a shock core to the target at subsonic speed and detonate it at a distance.