Military Review

Leopard 2 gets active protection complex

77

KAZ for all time



The tank builders did not have many options for increasing the survivability of MBTs. Usually, when talking about the crisis of the school of tank building, they mention domestic combat vehicles, such as the T-72 or T-64. In fact, this problem is common.

Tanks "Classic" layouts have largely reached their limit: at least when it comes to today's technology. Both the West and the East want to find at least some kind of protection from modern anti-tank weapons, but this is very difficult to do.

The problem is that combat vehicles such as the Abrams or Leopard 2 have reached the "allowable" weight limit. Their most recent modifications have a mass that is approaching 70 tons. This roughly corresponds to the weight of the Nazi "King Tiger", the combat use of which clearly showed all the "charms" of this feature. In particular, they talked about the difficulty of transportation, especially across bridges.

Active protection complex by itself does not make the tank lighter, but at the same time, other methods of increasing protection are clearly inferior to him in this regard. The basic version of the Israeli KAZ Trophy, developed for the Merkava tanks, weighs 771 kilograms. The mass of the Russian "Arena" reaches 1300 kilograms.


Substantial, but this is a relatively modest price to pay for

"Increasing the survivability of the machine on the battlefield several times."

It is difficult to say whether this is true or not. However, the same Trophy has already proven its effectiveness in combat conditions. One example dates from 2011, when Palestinians fired at a tank of the 9th battalion of the 401st brigade of the Israeli army from close range with a hand-held anti-tank grenade launcher. Trophy recorded a shot, fired submunitions and eliminated the threat: the rocket exploded without reaching the target.

In the case of armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectiles, everything is much more complicated. However, according to the available data, modern KAZ, such as the Russian "Afghanit", will cope with these challenges.

German spirit, Israeli defense


The most remarkable thing about this stories the fact that the pioneers of KAZ implementation are not Israelis, Americans or Germans. For the first time in history, a Soviet T-55AD tank received such a serial complex. We are talking about the Drozd system, which was installed on the tank back in the 80s.

Now, however, the actual leaders (at least when it comes to the possibility of real use in battle) are the aforementioned Israel and the collective West. Earlier, some of the American Abrams tanks received the Trophy: it is pertinent to recall that last year the US Army received the first serial M1A2 SEP V3 Abrams tanks equipped, among other things, with the Trophy protection.


In the case of Europe, the idea of ​​installing active defense systems on MBT until recently looked like

“Declaration of intent”.

However, the realization of the reality of the existence of the T-14 on the basis of "Armata", apparently, made its own adjustments to the agenda.

As previously reported by the blog of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, the Israeli Ministry of Defense recently announced the conclusion of an intergovernmental agreement with the Ministry of Defense of Germany regarding the supply of Trophy active protection systems to equip Leopard 2 tanks of the German army.

According to the Europäische Sicherheit & Technik website, we are talking about 23 KAZ kits, ammunition and related services worth 40 million euros.

The German authorities will transfer the towers of seventeen Leopard 2A6A3 combat vehicles and one tower of the Leopard 2 VT-ETB test vehicle to Krauss-Maffei Wegmann. After appropriate modernization, they will be installed on new chassis in the latest version of the Leopard 2A7, which, among other things, will receive a new auxiliary power unit.


The preliminary designation of tanks equipped with KAZ Trophy - Leopard 2A7A1.

They will be delivered in 2024–2025.

Considering that a separate contract from Krauss-Maffei Wegmann for the installation of KAZ on tanks costs 80 million dollars, it becomes obvious that this is far from a "bold experiment", but only the beginning of a full-fledged strengthening of the German armored vehicle fleet, which can be expected in the future. Today it is a "lurking beast".

Time will tell whether Trophy or a less proven but capable of intercepting BOPSs will be chosen for this. As of 2016, the German army had at its disposal more than 280 Leopard 2A6 tanks, as well as 20 Leopard 2A7 tanks.

Earlier it became known that in total the German Ministry of Defense will receive more than 100 modernized tanks in the 2A7V version. Of course, equipping all these combat vehicles with KAZs is a difficult task, but far from impossible.


By the way, not so long ago Germany and France entered into an agreement on the joint development of a new generation MGCS (Main Ground Combat System) tank, which in the future will have to replace both Leopard 2 and Leclerc. The vehicle (at least now) is seen as a development of the ideas embodied in the tanks of the previous generation, although it will not be one of the modernizations of the same "Leopard".

Russian response


At first glance, it is strange that Russia should look for an answer to the successes of other countries in equipping its tanks with an active protection complex. Considering that the USSR was once in this regard

"Ahead of the rest of the planet."

And, besides, the country has been working in this direction for decades, without serious interruptions.

At the same time, you need to understand that Russia does not have such financial capabilities as, for example, the United States or the leading EU countries. The solution could be the delivery of T-14 based on the "Armata". But, firstly, the tank is not yet ready, and secondly, the car is quite expensive. And, therefore, in the current realities, one should not expect that it will become the main Russian tank.

As a possible "intermediate" solution, they consider equipping KAZ combat vehicles. Recall that in 2019, a photo appeared in which one could see an experienced T-72B3 main tank, equipped with a T09-06 or Arena-M active protection complex. This is a modernized version of the "Arena", developed in the USSR. KAZ protective ammunition can intercept missiles and shells.


Photo: "Military Informant" / vk.com/milinfolive

In addition, the Russian novelty, the T-90M tank, can be equipped with active protection systems.

“As part of further work to improve the security of the T-90M, it is proposed to equip the tank with the Arena-M active protection complex.

In the frontal part of the hull, instead of the currently installed reactive armor "Relikt", the tank should receive reactive armor similar to the T-14 "Armata",

- stated in the materials of the Research and Testing Institute of Armored Weapons and Equipment (NII BTVT) of the Russian Ministry of Defense, presented to TASS in 2020.

There is no question of parity with the conditional M1A2 SEP V3 Abrams or Leopard 2A7A1.

However, as a temporary measure, the decision seems to be quite justified.
Photos used:
KMW
77 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Professor
    Professor 7 March 2021 07: 36
    +9
    The most remarkable thing about this story is that the pioneers of KAZ implementation are not Israelis, Americans or Germans. For the first time in history, a Soviet T-55AD tank received such a serial complex. We are talking about the Drozd system, which was installed on the tank back in the 80s.

    Precisely the Americans. They were the first to place KAZ on their M-60s. They were followed by the Zionists who developed the KAZ to the Merkava.

    PS
    Who is the author of the article?
    1. Dodikson
      Dodikson 7 March 2021 07: 40
      -3
      can you find out the model?
      1. Professor
        Professor 7 March 2021 08: 52
        +9
        Quote: Dodikson
        can you find out the model?

        https://topwar.ru/55284-kompleks-aktivnoy-zaschity-trophy-oprobovan-v-usloviyah-realnyh-boev.html
        Pictures do not rise, but you have to look in your home archive.


        PS
        1.http: //www.army-guide.com/eng/product3820.html
        2. I'll find amerikantsev, I'll post it.
    2. lucul
      lucul 7 March 2021 08: 18
      .
      developed KAZ to Merkava.

      How is KAZ doing in urban battles? All also flies and cutlets separately (infantry and tanks)?
    3. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 08: 43
      -1
      Quote: Professor
      Precisely the Americans. They were the first to place KAZ on their M-60s.

      What KAZ? What year ? Combat use? And without this, only lyrics: Flowers bloomed in the garden ...
      1. Professor
        Professor 7 March 2021 08: 53
        +8
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Quote: Professor
        Precisely the Americans. They were the first to place KAZ on their M-60s.

        What KAZ? What year ? Combat use? And without this, only lyrics: Flowers bloomed in the garden ...

        Thrush? What year ? Combat use? And without this, only the lyrics: Flowers bloomed in the garden ...
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 09: 07
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          Thrush?

          You see! You know the designation of KAZ ... Soviet! And what are the names of the American and Israeli KAZs of that time? As for the KAZ "Drozd", it was installed on T-55 tanks since 1983 and was used in Afghanistan! What do you think about the Israeli KAZ in the 80s in the last century?
          1. Professor
            Professor 7 March 2021 10: 51
            +7
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            You see! You know the designation of KAZ ... Soviet! And what are the names of the American and Israeli KAZs of that time? As

            I gave the Zionist one above, and the bourgeois one on my home computer.

            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            And sho with regards to the KAZ "Drozd", it was installed on T-55 tanks since 1983 and was used in Afghanistan! What do you think about the Israeli KAZ in the 80s in the last century?

            At what year ? Combat use? And without this, only the lyrics: Flowers bloomed in the garden ...
            Will there be evidence? Photos from Afgan, etc.
            I have posted a photo of the American KAZ here many times. I'll post it again.

            About the Zionist KAZ, I can only say what happened, as with Trophy, the military did not have the money for it.
            1. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 11: 23
              -3
              Oho-ho ... "on a cola bast, start from the beginning ..."! Your answer is again "solid lyrics" ... where is the specifics? You keep avoiding the answer, but you insist on specifics from me!
              Well, well ... I'll give you some specifics! I already said that the KAZ "Drozd" began to be installed on the T-55 since 83 ... And when the Soviet army "visited" Afghanistan, I hope you remember ... Do you want some pictures? There will be pictures for you!


              According to some foreign reports, in Afghanistan, the Drozd system with a probability of about 80% made it possible to counteract anti-tank weapons of the RPG type.
              1. Professor
                Professor 7 March 2021 11: 26
                +4
                1. I am not leaving any answer. I quoted the name of the Zionists above, there are no Americans at hand.
                2. I also posted a photo.
                3. Combat use?
                1. Nikolaevich I
                  Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 20: 46
                  +6
                  The dispute takes on a delusional character! I still declare that you are moving away from specific answers ... moreover, your answers, at times, take on the character of cheating! As I understand it, you mostly refer to KAZ POMALS? But this KAZ, for the most part, remained in prototypes (prototypes) and was created in the 70s of the last century! At the same time, in the USSR, experimental KAZs were created in the 60s (it is possible that in the late 50s ...)! I gave information about the combat use of the KAZ "Drozd"! What ... more do you want? And where is the infa about combat use ... well, the same POMALS?
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 8 March 2021 07: 16
                    0
                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    The dispute takes on a delusional character! I still declare that you are moving away from specific answers ... moreover, your answers, at times, take on the character of cheating!

                    I give specific answers to specific questions. The ancient Zionist and bourgeois KAZ have no experience of combat use, like the ancient Drozd.

                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    As I understand it, you mostly refer to KAZ POMALS? But this KAZ, for the most part, remained in prototypes (prototypes) and was created in the 70s of the last century! At the same time, in the USSR, experimental KAZs were created in the 60s (it is possible that in the late 50s ...)

                    This is the Zionist KAZ. The American one was earlier (I find it difficult to find a photo, but if it is fundamentally I will find it).
                    At the same time, it would be interesting to get evidence that in the USSR, experimental KAZs were created in the 60s (it is possible that they were created among the bourgeois in the late 40s ...) wink

                    Quote: Nikolaevich I
                    I gave information about the combat use of the KAZ "Drozd"! What ... more do you want? And where is the infa about combat use ... well, the same POMALS?

                    No, they didn't. They showed incomprehensible photos, did not give a description of a specific case, nor a date, nor a result.
                    POMALS, like Drozd, has no combat use.

                    Whether it is Trophy. There is a date of combat use, there is evidence, there is a description of the threat, and there is even a video of the firing side. hi
                    1. Nikolaevich I
                      Nikolaevich I 8 March 2021 15: 03
                      +2
                      Quote: Professor
                      POMALS, like Drozd, has no combat use.

                      Whether it is Trophy. There is a date of combat use, there is evidence, there is a description of the threat and there is even a video of the firing side

                      Fir-trees! Where is "Thrush" and where is "Trophy"? Found how to compare! fool
                      1. Professor
                        Professor 8 March 2021 17: 21
                        -1
                        Quote: Nikolaevich I
                        Quote: Professor
                        POMALS, like Drozd, has no combat use.

                        Whether it is Trophy. There is a date of combat use, there is evidence, there is a description of the threat and there is even a video of the firing side

                        Fir-trees! Where is "Thrush" and where is "Trophy"? Found how to compare! fool

                        Not a Blackbird with a trophy, but a Blackbird with POMALS.

                        Quote: Nikolaevich I
                        These are all shameless excuses! You, professor, are ready to deny the obvious, so as not to admit that you are in a "pit" (!) ... I will not say which one ...!

                        I do not see OBVIOUS combat use of Drozd. All you had to do was answer my questions:
                        "They showed incomprehensible photos, did not give a description of a specific case, nor a date, nor a result." In other words, where, when and with what results did Drozd undergo combat use?
                        ... and after that I ended up in the "pit"?
                    2. Nikolaevich I
                      Nikolaevich I 8 March 2021 15: 21
                      +2
                      These are all shameless excuses! You, professor, are ready to deny the obvious, so as not to admit that you are in a "pit" (!) ... I will not say which one ...!
    4. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 08: 53
      -2
      Quote: Professor
      They were followed by the Zionists who developed the KAZ to the Merkava.

      When did the Zionists develop KAZ? For the first time, I "heard" about "experiments" with KAZs in Israel, somewhere, in the 80s of the last century ... and these were projects, some experimental "crafts" ... While in the USSR they were testing several complexes in the 60s (and it is possible that in the late 50s ... to remember more precisely, you need to dig in your "archive" ...)!
    5. Simargl
      Simargl 7 March 2021 09: 01
      -3
      Quote: Professor
      Precisely the Americans.
      But in fact - the Germans: they had anti-personnel grenades on the Tigers. True, they worked with buttons.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 09: 27
        +1
        Quote: Simargl
        But in fact - the Germans: they had anti-personnel grenades on the Tigers

        I am begging you! Just don't confuse a fork with a bottle! We are talking about protecting tanks against anti-tank ammunition! And you give the Lavrushka to the Fritz with such aplomb! By the way, I don't remember something about the "anti-personnel grenades" on the tanks ... I remember mortars firing anti-personnel (!) Ammunition ...
        1. Simargl
          Simargl 7 March 2021 09: 35
          +3
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Just don't confuse a fork with a bottle!
          What a fork, such a bottle!

          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          We are talking about protecting tanks against anti-tank ammunition!
          The hand-held anti-tank weapons from the Second World War against the Tiger are grenades and Molotov cocktails, so the protection is quite adequate.

          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          And with such aplomb you are giving the Lavrushka to the Fritz!
          If historically it so happened that the prototype was invented by the enemy, then there is no escape from this. In addition, historically, it turned out that it was necessary to adopt the experience, tactics and weapons of the enemy. Also, this means that it is not shameful to adopt these things from the enemy.
          What's wrong?
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          By the way, I don't remember something about the "anti-personnel grenades" on the tanks ... I remember mortars firing anti-personnel (!) Ammunition ...
          As BE ... the artillerymen call a land mine a "grenade". Or not?
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 09: 58
            +1
            Quote: Simargl
            The hand-held anti-tank weapons from the Second World War against the Tiger are grenades and Molotov cocktails, so the protection is quite adequate.

            Oh, my friend ... yes "cocktail" in your head! And why did you not mention tank machine guns, personal weapons of tankers (pistols, machine guns ... there was a time when "loopholes for revolvers" were made against broken infantrymen with grenades and a "Hammer cocktail"!)
            1. Simargl
              Simargl 7 March 2021 10: 30
              0
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              And why did you not mention tank machine guns, personal weapons of tankers (pistols, machine guns ... there was a time when "loopholes for revolvers" were made against broken infantrymen with grenades and a "Hammer cocktail"!)
              And you can also throw yourself at the infantry with a knife. Isn't it KAZ? Course machine gun - why not KAZ? Although the loopholes are, of course, more similar.
    6. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 7 March 2021 09: 27
      +8
      On the M60T (which at one time Israel modernized) is the Turkish KAZ AKKOR PULAT based on the Ukrainian development "Zaslon-L". They are now carrying out combat missions in Syria.


      At 2A4 / Altai, there is an Aselsan AKKOR entirely of its own design.




      Naturally, they can easily get up on other equipment.



      KAZ is already a standard solution for equipping heavy armored vehicles. For a normally fighting army.

      PS All these conversations who are the first does not make the slightest sense. It is important who now has this system in series. The life of whose soldiers KAZ protects. With this in Russia it is sad.
  2. iouris
    iouris 7 March 2021 08: 06
    +11
    Not. Expensive Better to increase the issue of "34-ok" ...
    1. Simargl
      Simargl 7 March 2021 09: 36
      +4
      Quote: iouris
      Better to increase the release of "34-ok" ...
      MS-1 can be assembled in any garage.
  3. lucul
    lucul 7 March 2021 08: 10
    0
    Tanks of the "classic" layout have largely reached their limit: at least when it comes to today's technology. Both the West and the East want to find at least some kind of protection from modern anti-tank weapons, but this is not easy to do.

    This has already passed through history - the armor of the knights, by the Late Middle Ages, became so strong that to overcome them it was necessary to use a qualitatively new type of weapon - firearms.
    Or the second example - modern body armor, their quality has grown so much that to overcome it is already required to increase the caliber of the weapon, the old one cannot cope.
    So in tank building - the level of metallurgy remained at the beginning of the 20th century, and already 100 years have passed. A qualitative leap is required in the research and development of the metallurgy of tank armor.
    1. Kaman
      Kaman 7 March 2021 08: 39
      +15
      My nephew, a tanker, was rescued by KAZ from the Kornet in 2014 during the anti-terrorist operation in Gaza. If I had met the developer of this system, I would have given him cognac to the grave.
      1. lucul
        lucul 7 March 2021 08: 45
        .
        My nephew, a tanker, was rescued by KAZ from the Kornet in 2014 during the anti-terrorist operation in Gaza. If I had met the developer of this system, I would have given him cognac to the grave.

        They just wanted to knock it out - if they had set themselves the goal, they would have used more than one.
        1. Kaman
          Kaman 7 March 2021 09: 04
          +11
          Don't worry, in that battle 1 more ATGM installation was destroyed before the rocket was launched
    2. Krasnodar
      Krasnodar 7 March 2021 08: 52
      0
      Even if 5,56 hits the ceramic body armor (from a distance, say 100-150 meters), the soldier will be incapacitated. Increasing the caliber of weapons against body armor is impractical
      1. lucul
        lucul 7 March 2021 09: 54
        .
        Even if 5,56 hits the ceramic body armor (from a distance, say, 100-150 meters), the soldier will be incapacitated.

        The same Ratnik also holds an SVD bullet, closer than 100m.
        1. Krasnodar
          Krasnodar 7 March 2021 11: 05
          +8
          What happens to a person after being hit by a 7,62 bullet from 100 meters into a bulletproof vest, you know? ))
          He remains alive. But he can hardly fight hi
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 7 March 2021 12: 28
            0
            Quote: Krasnodar
            He remains alive. But he can hardly fight

            Depends on a lot. From what bulletproof vest (in Afghanistan they used weighing from 7 to 15kg, of course with different results from a bullet hit), from where the bullet hit and at what angle, from what kind of clothes the bulletproof vest is worn over.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Krasnodar
              Krasnodar 7 March 2021 13: 01
              +3
              Distance and angle - yes. I went to one 5.45 in the armpit area. He would not have been wearing a ceramic body armor, he would have been with us today. And so ricochet from the walls and porridge.
              5.56 in the sternum (from 100-150 meters) - at best, a bruise. 7,62 - severe injury.
              There is a fracture in the ribs.
              In the abdomen, trauma to internal organs, possibly internal bleeding and, as a result, hypovolemic shock.
    3. Simargl
      Simargl 7 March 2021 10: 54
      +4
      Quote: lucul
      a qualitatively new type of weapon - firearms.
      Not. The first quality victory over the men at arms - they were stupidly showered with grenades. The firearm gave birth to cuirassiers, and the mass army took these cuirasses away (crossed them out in a cross).
  4. Dmitry Izmalkov
    Dmitry Izmalkov 7 March 2021 08: 13
    0
    Another iron fist can take BOPS. And the saddest thing is that these Kazs are already in NATO troops.
    1. lucul
      lucul 7 March 2021 08: 21
      -3
      Another iron fist can take BOPS.

      BOPS has supersonic speed, although it drops with distance. It is unclear at what distance the KAZ was tested. If for 2-3 km it is possible and will take, but if for some 500m, then hardly.
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 7 March 2021 09: 08
        +3
        Quote: lucul
        BOPS has supersonic speed
        Hypersonic.
      2. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 7 March 2021 10: 08
        +2
        Bops for tanks, according to statistics, is not the biggest enemy. Moreover, the PT guns are leaving the stage.
      3. Dmitry Izmalkov
        Dmitry Izmalkov 8 March 2021 22: 23
        0
        Perhaps, as far as I know at Arena-M, the target speed is up to 1000ms, which means that it can catch BOPS from 2,5-3 km, or at least change the trajectory
  5. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 7 March 2021 08: 29
    +6
    And according to Drozd, there is silence and no data
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 7 March 2021 09: 34
      +2
      Quote: Zaurbek
      And according to Drozd, there is silence and no data

      The KAZ "Drozd" is full of publications. For instance:
      https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Дрозд_(активная_защита)
      http://www.btvt.narod.ru/3/kaz_drozd.htm
      and many more other links in any search.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 7 March 2021 10: 06
        +2
        Where is the video?
        1. Thomas N.
          Thomas N. 7 March 2021 10: 42
          +4
          Quote: Zaurbek
          Where is the video?

          This video at 2:27 shows the work of the KAZ "Drozd"
          https://youtu.be/_kldmE7Shm8
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 7 March 2021 11: 35
          +4
          Quote: Zaurbek
          Where is the video?


  6. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 7 March 2021 08: 41
    +1
    Well, correctly transferred to the level against which there are already a bunch of overcoming means.
  7. Simargl
    Simargl 7 March 2021 08: 59
    +3
    The inclusion of KAZ leads to the "disconnection" of infantry support. However, DZ is also not safe for infantry.
    The battlefield looks more and more like a ship, which has all the means of destruction and protection. And, accordingly, if everything is taken from the Navy, then the "order" cannot be small. And without BMPT, instead of infantry, in pilot and unmanned versions, there is no way either. Those. the tank in the singular is not a tenant.
    My opinion: the tank will have to be increased in size and weight, hung on it from electronic warfare to air defense, which means, by analogy with the Navy, it will have to be spread across different physical carriers and draw up an order: aircraft carrier = tank, satellites can be unmanned ...
    ... Is Armata ahead of herself?
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 7 March 2021 09: 37
      +2
      Quote: Simargl
      The battlefield looks more and more like a ship, which has all the means of destruction and protection ...

      Probably you should read "The tank looks more and more like a ship ..."?
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 7 March 2021 09: 38
        0
        Quote: Thomas N.
        Probably should read
        Tank on the battlefield.
    2. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik 7 March 2021 09: 39
      +3
      Quote: Simargl
      hang on him from electronic warfare

      Already. On the latest modernization of the Abrams electronic warfare, a standard option.
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 7 March 2021 09: 57
        +1
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Already.
        Can aerosol protection with metallization be considered electronic warfare? Then we have had it for a long time too already.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik 7 March 2021 10: 05
          +5
          Not. The M1A2 SEP V3 has a full-fledged electronic warfare system CREW Duke V3 counter remote-controlled IED (RCIED) that protects the crew from road bombs and IED attacks.
          Option for MRAP.
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 7 March 2021 11: 06
            -1
            Quote: OgnennyiKotik
            No.
            Why not? The equipment is protected from scanning by electronic and optical means.
            But in any case, electronic warfare is a necessary thing. Already.
            As well as air defense.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik 7 March 2021 14: 08
              +2
              No, in the sense that not only aerosol. In general, I agree with you. KAZ and electronic warfare must be standard on all medium and heavy equipment.
              Air defense should go alongside tanks. All together on one technique cannot be combined. Therefore, I think that it is necessary to bring the BMPT project to a universal platform that also works by air. This requires projectiles with controlled detonation + radar + OLS + BIUS. Two 30mm autocannons and ATGMs are already more than sufficient. You can, of course, add MANPADS, or mix, depending on the task.
              The radar allows not only detecting targets in the air, but also on the ground. For example, an ATGM calculation hidden in the bush or determine the location of the mortar by the flight of a mine.
              In the USA, this project is called SHORAD. On the Stryker platform, the Army buys it, on the L-ATV it tests the ILC. There is an option on Bradley. We need BMPT + SHORAD. Naturally, you also need to put on other chassis.

              1. Thomas N.
                Thomas N. 7 March 2021 14: 25
                0
                Quote: OgnennyiKotik
                We need BMPT + SHORAD.

                BMPT + SHORAD = ZAK "Derivation-Air Defense" + tank chassis
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik 7 March 2021 14: 30
                  0
                  No radar, excessive gun caliber. The derivation is just a good BMP, the air defense abbreviation is clearly superfluous there.
    3. Lara Croft
      Lara Croft 7 March 2021 09: 56
      0
      Quote: Simargl
      the tank in the singular is not a tenant.

      It has always been that way. Why lyrics?
      1. Simargl
        Simargl 7 March 2021 10: 04
        +1
        Quote: Lara Croft
        Why lyrics?
        Well ... before the infantry covered, but now it is useless next to the tank: it is dangerous for the infantry if the KAZ and DZ are working.
        1. Lara Croft
          Lara Croft 7 March 2021 10: 35
          +2
          Quote: Simargl
          Well ... before the infantry covered, but now it is useless next to the tank: it is dangerous for the infantry if the KAZ and DZ are working.

          Well, now she covers him on an infantry fighting vehicle equipped with KAZ and DZ ...
          Israeli Jews, back in the 60s, heavy infantry fighting vehicles began to be made from captured T-54/55 ...
          1. Simargl
            Simargl 7 March 2021 11: 08
            +2
            Quote: Lara Croft
            Well, now she covers him on the BMP
            How can the infantry cover a tank without leaving the box? Through the loopholes? Not. The infantry must fulfill its function - to clear the territory.

            Quote: Lara Croft
            Israeli Jews, back in the 60s, heavy infantry fighting vehicles began to be made from captured T-54/55 ...
            Well done!
            However - higher.
            1. Lara Croft
              Lara Croft 7 March 2021 13: 31
              +1
              Quote: Simargl
              [How can the infantry cover a tank without leaving the box? Through the loopholes? Not. The infantry must fulfill its function - to clear the territory.

              Without the suppression of tanks, armored combat vehicles, PA and PTS, the infantry has nothing to do on the battlefield, it follows in the battle formations of tanks on BMPs and dismounts only in front of the front edge of the enemy's defense ...
              1. Simargl
                Simargl 7 March 2021 13: 35
                0
                Quote: Lara Croft
                the infantry has nothing to do on the battlefield
                It depends on what to call a "field" If these are locations that are insurmountable by technology, there is something to do ... or erase (locations) from the face of the Earth ...

                Quote: Lara Croft
                dismounts only in front of the front edge of the enemy's defense ...
                That's it!
                The line is not running now.
    4. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 7 March 2021 12: 40
      +1
      Quote: Simargl
      the tank will have to be increased in size and weight, hung on it from electronic warfare to air defense

      Well, electronic warfare - of course, against mines (on the T-14 its antenna is in the front of the wing flaps, which is why they are so long), but where should the air defense be installed there? It will not work to shove the filling with the means of destruction at least from the "Tunguska" or "Pantsir" into the tank, and for the sake of less it is not worth fiddling about. It is quite enough if the tank column will be accompanied by the same "Tunguska", which will do this job much better than what can be additionally put on the tank.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 7 March 2021 13: 01
        0
        In my opinion, the "anti-sniper" equipment would be quite appropriate on the tank - it is quite compact, and the weapons from which they aim at the tank, as a rule, have optics and the "anti-sniper" will find it. Means that automatically start firing at targets detected by the "anti-sniper" have already been developed and tested. For the crew of the tank only permission to destroy the target.
      2. Simargl
        Simargl 7 March 2021 13: 28
        +1
        Quote: Bad_gr
        Well, electronic warfare - of course, against mines (on the T-14 its antenna is in the front of the wing flaps, which is why they are so long), but where should the air defense be installed there?
        If you cram in everything you need, you get a wunderwolf of 300 tons.
        Electronic warfare - understandable.
        Mine radar - how effective is it against non-metallic enclosures?
        Air defense - at least - against loitering.
        KAZ ...
        So it turns out that you need to carry around the carcasses.

        Quote: Bad_gr
        For the crew of the tank only permission to destroy the target
        And it turns out that the tank's crew is the command staff of the unmanned aerial vehicle.
  8. tralflot1832
    tralflot1832 7 March 2021 10: 03
    -1
    Knowledgeable people, with the development of reconnaissance UAVs, how will a column of tanks with KAZs, going to the place of deployment in battle formations to the front line, behave if it gets hit by a volley of Hurricanes equipped with camouflage anti-tank elements to break through the roof of a tank?
    1. Thomas N.
      Thomas N. 7 March 2021 11: 19
      +5
      Most KAZ do not work upwards, therefore they are not protected from SPBE. In addition, the SPBE impact core is formed at a height of several tens of meters from the target, and KAZ also does not work at such a range.
      1. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 7 March 2021 11: 26
        0
        So there is a chance to see the action of Hurricane ammunition on tanks with KAZ, as in yesterday's photo of Point U on oil tankers. I am not against KAZ, but he is not a panacea from everything. With KAZ it is better than without it. Definitely.
  9. evgen1221
    evgen1221 7 March 2021 10: 28
    +1
    As I understand it, modern kazov have problems with crowbars and their own infantry. When it happens. When a tank rushes in the city, its infantry must guard it around from grenade launchers, but at the very first start, the kaz can cover its own and remain naked. Bops - if they beat you from 500 m, then you are clearly mistaken somewhere, and even more so they beat at the side from such distances, the tank at 500 m still needs to be allowed. In the frontal plane, the tank is more secure and shooting forward, does not harm the infantry (it is usually slightly behind). Conclusions (IMHO mine) drones will study the route more closely, do not climb into the buildings, or preemptively expand completely into rubble with a passage through this shiben no more than 15 minutes later so that someone with RPG does not wind up there. Tanks of the armata type will be developed by everyone, like high-speed kaz stations, perhaps as an ersatz-in the form of a trailer with a computer, and mortars are already on the tank as well as an UAV float annunciator (a trailer with its own generator to save space and weight of the tank itself, and ergonomics and so tight inside.
    1. Nestor Vlakhovski
      Nestor Vlakhovski 7 March 2021 19: 00
      0
      modern kazs have problems with crowbars
      There is no this problem, both Leo2 with Abrams and Merkava head-on confidently hold any serial BOPS.
      and his infantry.
      the striking elements of the counter-ammunition in the trophy are directed downward in a narrow sector, which significantly narrows the affected area. The rest is a matter of coherence and interaction, besides, kaz can always be turned off.
  10. Free wind
    Free wind 7 March 2021 12: 09
    0
    The tank is of course a beast !!!! But ours are not kittens at all.
  11. psiho117
    psiho117 7 March 2021 17: 25
    +4
    Eh, here is Adolf Aloizovich turning over in his grave when they put a Jewish KAZ on German tanks ...
    Definitely - zrada! wassat
    1. Incvizitor
      Incvizitor 8 March 2021 14: 00
      0
      Moreover, from the fact that the Germans do not have their own.
  12. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 7 March 2021 20: 52
    0
    Honestly, I don't understand what's going on on the VO site! I give an objective information, they minus me without explaining the reasons! Oleg Sokolov "drives a blizzard", in my opinion, but it is a plus! What is this website craze?
    1. psiho117
      psiho117 7 March 2021 22: 03
      +2
      Jewish lobby? hi

      Yes, no, it cannot be, these are all stupid conspiracy theories ... soldier
    2. CastroRuiz
      CastroRuiz 7 March 2021 22: 30
      +1
      Ego plusuyut izbrannie / stammgenossen i Vam staviat minus.
  13. DMi
    DMi April 17 2021 20: 59
    0
    According to the mind, KAZ should stand on any armored vehicle, up to an armored personnel carrier. And also on vehicles that work from the "rear", the same self-propelled guns and air defense. Now the chances of getting under fire are almost higher than those of those on the front lines. Here, of course, the Russian army is a complete failure. Apparently somewhere, when it is necessary to incur heavy losses, that would "suddenly" find funding
  14. Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan 16 May 2021 19: 54
    +1
    Russia seems to put KAZ on its tanks the very last, and only after it loses a bunch of equipment and people in the next conflict.

    It is just a shame.