On the training ground and on the air, but not among the troops. The future of KAZ "Arena-M"

90

One of the layouts tank with KAZ "Arena-M", demonstrated in the past. Photo Gurkhan.blogspot.com

In our country, several complexes of active protection of armored vehicles of the Arena family have been created. These products have repeatedly confirmed their high characteristics during tests, but have not yet reached the point of adoption. Right now, work is underway on a new modification of the "Arena-M", which may enter the troops in the foreseeable future. It is not known when this will happen, but some recent reports and events allow us to make optimistic forecasts.

New modification


All projects of the Arena family were developed by NPK Mechanical Engineering Design Bureau (Kolomna). In 2013, the corporation presented another KAZ of this line called "Arena-E" in export version. Then, at one of the domestic exhibitions, a modernized T-72 tank was demonstrated, on the turret of which the model units of the new KAZ were located. Subsequently, the new name "Arena-M" appeared.



In 2017, after another demonstration of Arena-M at the exhibition, the management of NPK KBM revealed the prospects for this development. It was argued that KAZ is being tested under the supervision of the command of the ground forces. In the future, "Arena-M" will be installed on the upgraded T-72 and T-90 tanks. No details were released at that time.


Experienced Arena-M carrier, 2019 Photo Bmpd.livejournal.com

In June 2018, information on the future delivery of KAZ of the T09-A6 type appeared on the public procurement resource. The customer of this product was the Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering (part of the NPK Uralvagonzavod). The complexes were supposed to be used in the modernization of T-72B3 tanks. Later it became clear that the “Arena-M” product was hidden under the “T09-A6” designation.

In November 2019, it became known that a new type of KAZ reached tests on a standard carrier. A photo of the T-72B3 tank with all the equipment and assemblies of the active protection complex on the turret has got into free access. The date, place and circumstances of the shooting remained unknown: the landscape, flora and watermelon on the tank turret did not give any specifics.

For the first time on the screen


On June 27, 2021, Channel One showed the next issue of the Sentinel TV program, dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the 38th Research Institute of Armored Weapons and Equipment. In it for the first time they showed openly the combat work of the promising Arena-M KAZ installed on the T-72B3 MBT. Previously, such shots have not been published, although the use of the previous "Arenas" has been demonstrated more than once.


Tests of "Arena-M". An RPG-7 grenade flies up to the tank, KAZ has detected a target. Smoke from the launch of protective ammunition is visible above the tower. Shot from t / p "Sentinel"

A standard grenade was fired into the side view of the tank from an RPG-7 grenade launcher. The KAZ automatics detected the threat in time and, when it approached, fired a protective ammunition. At a given moment in time, the latter triggered, created a field of fragments and successfully detonated an approaching grenade. A characteristic smoke ring remained from the flying grenade; the tank shouldn't have suffered.

Technical features


The Arena-M complex, like its predecessors, is designed to intercept incoming anti-tank ammunition at a safe distance from the tank. This KAZ was developed based on the experience and solutions of previous family projects, but includes a number of new ideas. First of all, a fundamentally new architecture of the main units was introduced, simplifying the installation of the complex on a carrier tank and increasing survivability.

The new KAZ includes radar threat detection, control automation and launchers with protective ammunition. Unlike the previous "Arenas", not a single radar unit on the tower roof is used, but several separate small-sized antennas. They are placed around the perimeter of the carrier tower and provide all-round visibility.


Detonation of protective ammunition; the grenade has not yet received its shard. Shot from t / p "Sentinel"

Previously, defensive ammunition launchers were placed in a row on the forehead or sides of the turret. The Arena-M project uses two larger launchers with a different placement. The installation is made in a protected case and includes two launchers with two protective ammunition in each. The design of the installation provides firing in different directions without turning the turret.

Control equipment is installed inside the fighting compartment. It works in a fully automatic mode and provides constant monitoring of the surrounding space, detection and determination of the degree of danger of approaching objects. Also, the automation gives the command to turn the turret and launch a protective ammunition. According to the principle of operation, "Arena-M" is almost no different from other domestic KAZ.

The new "Arena-M" compares favorably with its greater survivability, due to the absence of a large radar unit and the presence of armor on the launchers, from previous complexes. In addition, modern developments and technologies can improve performance and combat effectiveness.


When a cumulative warhead was detonated, a characteristic cloud was formed. Shot from t / p "Sentinel"

According to various sources, KAZ "Arena-M" still does not solve some typical problems. So, the complex cannot hit sub-caliber projectiles; its potential against weaponsattacking from the upper hemisphere. There are other pressing threats that need to be considered when developing tank protection.

Way to the troops


For a number of reasons, until now KAZ has not been used on the combat tanks of the Russian army. In the near future, the situation may change, and such plans are directly related to the promising Arena-M. However, the situation remains uncertain, and the ways of its further development are not specified.

Several years ago, representatives of the NPK KBM spoke about testing the complex and about its future installation on existing MBT types. Subsequent news, including the latest personnel, confirmed the installation and testing of Arena-M on T-72B3 tanks. This means that the work continues, although it has not yet reached its completion.

On the training ground and on the air, but not among the troops. The future of KAZ "Arena-M"

One of the new T-80BVM tanks for the Eastern Military District. Despite the press release, the vehicle does not have a KAZ. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

It was reported that "Arena-M" can be used on T-72 and T-90 tanks as part of modernization. According to some reports, the latest modification of the T-80 may also be its carrier. Not so long ago, interesting news came in on this score.

So, in April 2021, the press service of the Eastern Military District announced the delivery of the first batch of modernized MBT T-80BVM. It was reported that the tank is equipped with lattice screens, reactive armor "Relik" and KAZ "Arena-M". At the same time, active protection units were absent in the published photographs. Most likely, there was some mistake, but other interpretations are also possible, incl. the most optimistic.

Positive prospects


Thus, a specific situation remains in the sphere of domestic means of active protection of armored vehicles. The promising Arena-M KAZ has been developed and tested, which has already confirmed its full compatibility with the modern T-72B3. On the other hand, so far we are talking only about tests of such a system, which have been going on for several years, and the timing of their completion and the launch time of the series are unknown. Meanwhile, the massive modernization of existing tanks continues without the use of KAZ.

However, our army will not be left without active protection. There is real interest in this topic, and KAZ has even been included in the technical specifications for the new generation of armored vehicles. Promising T-14 tanks or Kurganets-25 infantry fighting vehicles will receive not only armor, but also active protection complexes for promising models. And along with them, the existing fleet of T-72, T-80 and T-90 under construction and renovation can receive similar funds. However, this will only happen after the completion of the current work.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

90 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    7 July 2021 04: 51
    Thus, a specific situation remains in the sphere of domestic means of active protection of armored vehicles. The promising Arena-M KAZ has been developed and tested, which has already confirmed its full compatibility with the modern T-72B3. On the other hand, so far we are talking only about tests of such a system, which have been going on for several years, and the timing of their completion and the launch time of the series are unknown. Meanwhile, the massive modernization of existing tanks continues without the use of KAZ.

    Yes, like bum, the situation is just standard.
    T72 go to our troops in the configuration worse than in any Serbia.
    Serbs love their tankers more, or do our commanders think that there will be no war?
    Are they preparing to surrender heroically again like in 1991?
    1. +7
      7 July 2021 05: 06
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      T72 go to our troops in the configuration worse than in any Serbia.
      Serbs are supplied with T-72 with "Arena"? There, even the DZ remained in the same configuration.

      According to various sources, KAZ "Arena-M" still does not solve some typical problems. So, the complex cannot hit sub-caliber projectiles.
      In principle, you cannot hit a crowbar with a fragmentation field, not from such a distance for sure.
      1. +6
        7 July 2021 05: 51
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        In principle, you cannot hit a crowbar with a shrapnel field,

        They do something like DZ against scrap. Powerful energy is needed there, KAZ cannot do it.
        1. +3
          7 July 2021 06: 07
          Quote: Jacket in stock
          They do something like DZ against scrap. Powerful energy is needed there,

          About "Afganite" they write that he should blow up solid BOPS with a close explosion and shrapnel, so that BOPS would approach the armor obliquely or better sideways. It is believed that the combat element is similar to that of the "Drozd", only more powerful and more accurate in terms of the time of detonation.
          1. +4
            7 July 2021 08: 53
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            It is believed that the combat element is similar to that of the "Drozd", only more powerful and more accurate in terms of the time of detonation.
            At the Afghanit, the flying ammunition is knocked down not by a bundle of fragments, but by a "shock core"
            1. 0
              7 July 2021 08: 55
              Quote: Bad_gr
              At the Afghanit, the flying ammunition is knocked down not by a bundle of fragments, but by a "shock core"
              Maybe, but the crowbar cannot be knocked down in this way, but they will somersault quite, as it seems to me.
              1. +3
                7 July 2021 08: 58
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                ... a crowbar and thus not knock down, but they will somersault quite, as it seems to me.

                I think so. If the crowbar hits the armor at an angle, it will break itself.
            2. -1
              7 July 2021 19: 44
              Quote: Bad_gr
              At the Afghanit, the flying ammunition is knocked down not by a bundle of fragments, but by a "shock core"

              On the Internet, they write a lot of nonsense, for example, that there is a radar station on the Armata. with a range of 100 km. IMHO, this is from the same series. Technically, it is very difficult to implement, it requires really advanced electronics, which means it will cost like a missile defense system. They don't install a simple Arena here, because it's like unacceptably expensive, what kind of hit-to-kill is, it's just a tank, and not a fighter for 100 lamas.
        2. +1
          7 July 2021 16: 50
          KAZ Arena-M has 3 main options for detonating protective ammunition
          1st heavy shards,
          2nd medium and light shards,
          The third "saucer" is not broken, but the impact core is pulled out just against the BOPS
          is there some more,
          4th is reverse detonation - closes the dead zone above the tower
    2. +5
      7 July 2021 08: 05
      Quote: Jacket in stock
      T72 go to our troops in the configuration worse than in any Serbia.

      "New ones are born" - the principle by which the generals still live. The issue of equipping KAZ tanks was already overripe, and there were no plans. Only a video of tests against the antediluvian RPG-7.
      Israel and Turkey already have serial KAZ on tanks participating in hostilities. USA, Germany, Britain are already purchasing KAZ. We have pointless, poorly done propaganda videos.
      1. +2
        7 July 2021 12: 48
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        T72 go to our troops in the configuration worse than in any Serbia.

        "New ones are born" - the principle by which the generals still live. The issue of equipping KAZ tanks was already overripe, and there were no plans. Only a video of tests against the antediluvian RPG-7.
        Israel and Turkey already have serial KAZ on tanks participating in hostilities. USA, Germany, Britain are already purchasing KAZ. We have pointless, poorly done propaganda videos.

        Where do these come from? It has long been found out that Zhukov did not say such words, and not Stalin. Generally speaking, this was said by a German general. So don't drive the blizzard. Antediluvian RPG-7? And what did the Turks construct a KAZ which knocks down the BPOS? You are not talking nonsense here. Turks BUY KAZ, not make it themselves. And everyone else BUY, only Israel does. All the rest in the world are just developing their own variants of KAZ. So you are different here, I do not understand.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +4
          7 July 2021 13: 25
          Quote: Usher
          It has long been found out that Zhukov did not say such words, and not Stalin.

          Yes, well-delivered misinformation. At the end of the Battle of Kursk, there was a serious showdown and, as a result, many goals could answer seriously for the losses. The time was such that they began to reckon with the cadres and they were needed no matter when, so they avoided reprisals, but the analysis of losses was serious and it was Stalin who initiated it.
        3. 0
          12 July 2021 20: 26
          The Turks and KAZ, why did their Leopards from the RPG-7 burned down Syria, and the towers were flying.
      2. +1
        7 July 2021 14: 15
        well, or is it a banal "you need to test and order in a large batch" .. a few years ago in our troops there were only a few tanks with thermal imagers, now almost all tanks with teplaks and a new weapon ... So it is with KAZ-sense to drive tanks for the sake of installing one KAZ, no, KAZs will go as part of the modernization package, i.e. in the form of a T-72B4 or something like that and will go to the troops for 70-80 sets per year in accordance with the supply of modernized tanks
      3. 0
        8 July 2021 19: 00
        New ones will be born

        This is the problem.
  2. -1
    7 July 2021 05: 21
    He hasn't finished testing yet. Literally a month ago, it was exactly like that. Experienced parties were simply sent to the districts.
  3. +6
    7 July 2021 05: 48
    In general, they shoot at the tank with a standard (combat) rocket. They are not afraid, it means they are sure.
    I remember that when 30 years ago we were supposed to show the prototype of the KAZ to the generals, they also offered to shoot combat ...
    These generals were asked if they would go ... to look for those shells, if suddenly they did not explode, and the generals somehow immediately changed their minds ... wink
  4. +5
    7 July 2021 05: 52
    Why don't they put "Afghanit" on T-72, T-90? Not compatible? Expensive? Or is it still in development?
    1. +5
      7 July 2021 05: 58
      Quote: riwas
      why not put "Afghanit" on the T-72, T-90?

      Most likely not compatible.
      The Armata Tower is uninhabited, you can integrate anything into it. And old tanks have to hang their "ears" from above.
    2. +1
      7 July 2021 14: 15
      too much alteration with similar performance characteristics ..
    3. +1
      7 July 2021 15: 34
      Quote: riwas
      Why don't they put "Afghanit" on T-72, T-90? Not compatible? Expensive? Or is it still in development?

      As far as I know, "Afganit" is a little more complicated than KAZ. This thing is integrated into the OMS of the tank, part of it. It needs a different level of firing automation.
  5. +2
    7 July 2021 06: 35
    Messages are encouraging ... especially since I am a "fan" of KAZ "Arena" ... Sometimes, when describing the complex, they do not "forget" to indicate the "shortcomings" of the "Arena": top ...; 1. "defenselessness" in front of BOPS ... 2. danger for their infantry ... I think that such "shortcomings" are exaggerated! To my regret, I cannot work with computer graphics and therefore I cannot present graphic images of my "internal video"! But, almost everyone who is interested in tank KAZs saw how the "Arena" counter-ammunition was fired and at what angle ... 3.What "prevents" from changing the shooting angle of the counter-ammunition in order to more effectively defeat the attackers from above (but "under angle ") PT-ammunition using the appropriate launchers? (If you look at the pictures of the defeat of a tank with a similar anti-tank ammunition, you will notice that the ammunition attacks not "strictly" vertically, but at an angle!) Even if the anti-tank ammunition acts vertically downward ... ammunition "Arena"? It is also possible to create movable launchers that shoot counter-ammunition "Arena" (KBA), both at an angle and vertically!
    2. Protection against BOPS ...: The development of the corresponding KBA will help ... The following options for KBA are possible: a) with a fragmentation plate (even, with high energy tungsten FEM ...); b) with a copper plate and a steel mesh (a bunch of small "shock nuclei" of high energy is formed); c) with a thrown metal plate (just against BOPS ...)
    3.Danger to your infantry? Here, too, a lot is exaggerated (!): A) already tired of statements in the "spirit of WW2", requiring the infantry to "cluster" around the tank ...; b) the design of the KBA allows you to form a precisely directed narrow (!) beam of striking elements ... (for example, with the help of adjustable KBA or a thrown metal ("solid") plate ...) By the way, for some reason, the German KAZ ADS is "praised" how very safe for the infantry, when it is possible to make "exactly the same" version of the "Arena" for armored vehicles, but with the KBA! (It is not "recommended" to stand under protective ammunition even with ADS KAZ!)
    4. KAZ "Arena" has good opportunities for creating various modifications! a) For example, you can make a version of the "Arena" for armored vehicles like the German KAZ ADS or the Ukrainian-Soviet "Barrier" ... that is, without the "traditional" radar system ...; b) A variant with optoelectronic detection and guidance, supplemented by a laser designator or an active radio detector of low radiation!
    5. There is a possibility of creating adjustable (!) KBA ... Already now there is a KBA with impulse rocket micromotors capable of "cranking" the counter ammunition around the longitudinal axis, like a "Segner wheel" ... a) I would add lateral correction blocks from impulse rocket micromotors or BG-type micromotors ...; b) Shooting KBA not with powder charges, but with "pushers" like "silent" cartridges; c) Equipping the KBA with a stabilizer (different options are possible) ...; d) detonating the KBA at the right time by radio command or a laser "code" ... e) equipping the KBA with an accelerometer that determines the angle of inclination of the ammunition (all smartphones have a similar capability) and with data transfer to CIUS; f) equipping with a rocket engine to increase the height of the ammunition rise during vertical shooting (optional)
    1. +6
      7 July 2021 07: 10
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      ..1.What "prevents" from changing the angle of fire of counter. Ammunition in order to more effectively defeat attackers from above

      Theoretically, nothing, in practice you need one more set of antennas / sensors and a set of launchers, and so the not weak "birdhouse" becomes larger than the tower itself.
      And yes, it will still not protect against the shock core.
      2. Protection against BOPS ...: The development of the appropriate CBA will help ... The following options are possible ...

      And you get a completely different complex.

      3.Danger to your infantry? Here, too, much is exaggerated (!):

      Rather understated.
      There is a golden rule - do not stand under the arrow. In the shooting range, the first thing they will tell you is not to point a weapon at people, not even loaded. And here is not just a weapon, here is a loaded cannon, which, moreover, shoots by itself.
      Although, if something hits the tank, even if there is a KAZ, at least not, the infantry will simply crumble.
      Here you are right, it is more expensive to cluster around the tank.

      4. KAZ "Arena" has good opportunities for creating various modifications! a) For example, you can make a version of the "Arena" for armored vehicles like the German KAZ ADS or the Ukrainian-Soviet "Barrier" ... that is, without the "traditional" radar system ...; b) A variant with optical-electronic means is possible

      Earlier, you suggested replacing the KBA, now the detection system ...
      And then what will be left of the Arena? Nothing.
      5. It is possible to create adjustable (!) KBA ...

      Or maybe to fasten the Thor air defense system to each tank at once and not waste time on trifles?
      1. -1
        7 July 2021 07: 54
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        And you get a completely different complex.

        Perhaps ... (I foresaw such an objection ...), but on the basis of "Arena" (using the principles of "Arena" ...) ... (Isn't "Arena-M" or "Arena-E" not " other ", in their own way, complexes in comparison with the original" Arena "?)
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        it will not protect against the shock core anyway.

        Why is this categorical? request For some reason, the "tovarischi Jews" without any hesitation claim that their "trophy" is capable of protecting against EFP-ammunition, and the counter-ammunition (CB) "trophy" can be compared with the "Arena" design bureau in the "multinuclear" version, but not fired to the side (like in "Arena"); and "attached" to the armor ...? Moreover, I mentioned the version of the "Arena" design bureau with a thrown plate opposite the bop!
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        In practice, one more set of antennas / sensors and a set of launchers are needed.

        Well, here you have to "get out"! Carefully think over the placement and configuration of the antenna array system ("dual-mode" radars (antenna system) ... movable (rotatable) launchers (I have already mentioned them ...) ... launchers can have 2 "degrees of freedom" ...
        PS Here, again, the "tovarischi Jews" are boasting that the "trophy" antenna system works "at 360 degrees." And in the "Arena" it is not necessary to have "2 KAZs" ... it is only necessary to improve the launcher and the antenna system ... Although I do not exclude the modification of the "Arena" with an optoelectronic detection and guidance system with a laser scanner ...
        1. +5
          7 July 2021 08: 04
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          but on the basis of the "Arena" (using the principles of the "Arena" ...

          As a matter of fact, your suggestions are just a rejection of the Arena in principle, other ammunition, other methods of detection, other methods of placement ...
          There, again, the "tovarischi Jews" boast that the "trophy" antenna system works "at 360 degrees."
          Well Duc, they have a different element base. We do not know how to do this, but we will not be able to buy - however, there are sanctions.
          they say that as many as 2 KAZ are deployed on "Armata"!
          Armata's tower is uninhabited, you can insert anything into it. Moreover, there is an opportunity from scratch to design a tower around attachments, and not hang the equipment on a ready-made "basin", where and besides the KAZ, there is still a lot of things hanging.
          1. -6
            7 July 2021 08: 51
            Quote: Jacket in stock
            Armata's tower is uninhabited, you can insert anything into it

            Quote: Jacket in stock
            they have a different element base. We do not know how to do this

            Well, as always! Who wants to work, solve problems ... he works and solves! And who does not want, he is looking for excuses! recourse request
            1. +5
              7 July 2021 09: 48
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              Who wants to work, solve problems ... he works and solves

              So they decided, made T14 with Afghanite.
        2. +3
          7 July 2021 09: 07
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          PS There, again, the "tovarischi Jews" are boasting that the "trophy" antenna system works "at 360 degrees."

          An antenna, of course, can be boasted, but mechanical aiming cannot be very fast, that is, it should be critical to the speed of flying up ammunition.
          1. -2
            7 July 2021 09: 19
            Quote: Bad_gr
            An antenna, of course, can be boasted, but mechanical aiming cannot be very fast,

            "Everything flows, everything changes !" In addition to the mechanical drive of antenna systems, there is also an "electronic" one ... just for AFAR!
            1. +2
              7 July 2021 09: 23
              Quote: Nikolaevich I
              "Everything flows, everything changes !" In addition to the mechanical drive of antenna systems, there is also an "electronic" one ... just for AFAR!

              smile I'm not talking about the antenna (the radars are fixed tightly), but about the ammunition aiming device, which knocks down an approaching enemy.
              1. 0
                7 July 2021 09: 45
                Quote: Bad_gr
                I'm not talking about the antenna (the radars are fixed tightly), but about the ammunition aiming device, which knocks down an approaching enemy.

                ??? I cannot grasp your deep thought in the hole ... hands are short! Can it be easier?
                1. 0
                  7 July 2021 19: 03
                  Quote: Nikolaevich I
                  Can it be easier?

                  The photo shows a fragment of the Israeli Trophy. The blue arrow is a locator (one of 4), the red one indicates launchers (mortars), throwing out interceptors towards them, which destroy the warhead before it strikes. So, these mortars, in the direction of the approaching enemy ammunition, are guided mechanically, which cannot be very fast. At our KAZ, a submunition is fired, which forms a bundle of fragments into the desired sector, which knocks down an approaching rocket (grenade), no mechanics.
                  1. 0
                    7 July 2021 20: 46
                    Thanks ... now it's much clearer! although everything is "comparative and relative"! And in the KAZ "Arena" the "mechanical" guidance of the launcher is still used! For example, in the "original" "Arena" it is also a turn of the tower! But the use of adjustable counter ammunition will increase the "rate of fire" (reaction time) of the complex (!); since you can shoot the counter-ammunition closest to the target, and then "correct"!
        3. +1
          7 July 2021 13: 46
          .... movable (rotatable) PU.
          .... PU can have 2 "degrees of freedom".

          so there is already one rotatable element - the tower itself. if you do the second degree of freedom, it will be unreliable in terms of mechanical resistance to enemy fire and will lead to overweight.
          the mortars on the t-14 turning are of course cool, but the sizes are tiny - I propose to put this one 10 times larger in the rear of the car, like the second tower.
          everything will come to this
      2. +1
        7 July 2021 08: 43
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        Earlier, you suggested replacing the KBA, now the detection system ...
        And then what will be left of the Arena? Nothing.

        Seeming contradiction! I am not suggesting replacing the "detection system"! On the main (!) Version, it remains and is improved! But on the "base" (!) Of the main variant, it is possible to create "derivative" KAZs ... for example, for light armored vehicles or simplified (cheaper) tank KAZs for "old" tanks or for local conflicts with a "non-technological" enemy! In addition, the presence of corrected counter ammunition "Arena" (KBA) does not exclude (!) The use of "conventional" (not corrected ...) counter ammunition ...
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        Or maybe to fasten the Thor air defense system to each tank at once and not waste time on trifles?

        Retrograde, you my friend! Terry! Do you want the "conversation": "Why does NATO have 3-generation anti-tank missiles with might and main, but we do not have them? ..." Added "suffering": "Why does NATO have KAZs with adjustable design bureaus, but we do not have them? "... The future of tank KAZ vehicles is for guided (and even with seeker) protective ammunition (ZB)! Moreover, such STs (KB) are already being developed! I will not indicate them yet ... mentions of them can be found on the Internet ... (And more ... "TOR" you need to ask ... and you get it or not get it .... And then your own! "Dear"! )
        1. +7
          7 July 2021 09: 33
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Retrograde, you my friend! Terry! Do you want the "conversation": "why does NATO have 3 generation anti-tank missiles with might and main, but we do not have them? ..." added "suffering": "why does NATO have KAZs with adjustable design bureaus, but we do not have them? "

          Suffering?
          I do not want.
          I know exactly why.
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          The future of tank KAZs is for guided (and even with seeker) protective ammunition (ZB)

          Exactly.
          We do not have ATGMs with GOS, what kind of ZB are already there. Because there is no element base.
        2. +1
          7 July 2021 10: 04
          The future of tank KAZs is for guided (and even with seeker) protective ammunition (ZB)!

          The country will not have a future with tanks with such a KAZ with GOS, we will be left without trousers, the most expensive thing will have to be protected, and only tanks with "active protection" will remain with the cost in the annual budget of a small town and cost more than an aircraft. Moderate your ardor, "gentlemen" without pants, but with the "best" tanks. Enough, one country was ditched by the defense budget, you want to ruin everything in general. There is a reaction to every action. The more complex the technique, the more unreliable it is. A country with a normal economy can allow the development of the Aerospace Forces, and not "iron kaputs" for the war against the Zusuls.
          1. 0
            7 July 2021 10: 28
            Well, why then did our country not stay with the T-34, MiG-15, with the PPSh, ZiS-2, the Malyutka ATGM, and the Scud OTR? What "roll" in the VO is delightful about the latest publications about "Hermes"? fool
            1. -5
              7 July 2021 10: 32
              Well, why then did our country not stay with the T-34, MiG-15, with the PPSh, ZiS-2, the Malyutka ATGM, and the Scud OTR? What "roll" in the VO is delightful about the latest publications about "Hermes"?

              Because we launched a satellite in 1957. And it was not the tanks that influenced the fact that we were not attacked, but the nuclear missile shield, the weapon of retaliation. And the tanks were not even able to fight normally in Chechnya, even in Syria, the main combat load on aviation. and a T-34 with a more reliable design would be enough in Syria, because on the vaunted Armata it is impossible to approach the militants closer than 2 km, glass birdhouses interfere.
              1. -1
                7 July 2021 15: 15
                Why did I read this ... How to unsee this !?
      3. 0
        7 July 2021 12: 50
        Theoretically, nothing, in practice you need one more set of antennas / sensors and a set of launchers, and so the not weak "birdhouse" becomes larger than the tower itself.
        And yes, it will still not protect against the shock core.
        Why won't it protect you from the shock core?
    2. +1
      7 July 2021 09: 36
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      What "prevents" from changing the shooting angle of counter-ammunition in order to more effectively defeat the attackers from the top (but "at an angle") AT-ammunition using the appropriate launchers? (If you look at the pictures of the defeat of a tank with a similar PT-ammunition, you will notice that the ammunition attacks not "strictly" vertically, but at an angle!) Even if the PT-ammunition acts vertically downward ... which prevents the counter from being fired vertically upwards. Arena ammunition? It is also possible to create movable launchers that shoot counter-ammunition "Arena" (KBA), both at an angle and vertically!

      I think the problem is that with such a detonation of ammunition there is a considerable chance to fill the tank with fragments, but it doesn't matter for the main booking, but the tank has enough weakly protected equipment, which is very important nonetheless (various sighting systems, thermal imagers, etc.).
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      2. Protection against BOPS ...: The development of the corresponding KBA will help ... The following options for KBA are possible: a) with a fragmentation plate (even, with high energy tungsten FEM ...); b) with a copper plate and a steel mesh (a bunch of small "shock nuclei" of high energy is formed); c) with a thrown metal plate (just against BOPS ...)

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      4. KAZ "Arena" has good opportunities for creating various modifications! a) For example, you can make a version of the "Arena" for armored vehicles like the German KAZ ADS or the Ukrainian-Soviet "Barrier" ... that is, without the "traditional" radar system ...; b) A variant with optoelectronic detection and guidance, supplemented by a laser designator or an active radio detector of low radiation!
      5. There is a possibility of creating adjustable (!) KBA ... Already now there is a KBA with impulse rocket micromotors capable of "cranking" the counter ammunition around the longitudinal axis, like a "Segner wheel" ... a) I would add lateral correction blocks from impulse rocket micromotors or BG-type micromotors ...; b) Shooting KBA not with powder charges, but with "pushers" like "silent" cartridges; c) Equipping the KBA with a stabilizer (different options are possible) ...; d) detonating the KBA at the right time by radio command or a laser "code" ... e) equipping the KBA with an accelerometer that determines the angle of inclination of the ammunition (all smartphones have a similar capability) and with data transfer to CIUS; f) equipping with a rocket engine to increase the height of the ammunition rise during vertical shooting (optional)

      It will no longer be an arena, but another complex, and not even on the basis of the arena ...
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      3.Danger to your infantry? Here, too, a lot is exaggerated (!): A) already tired of statements in the "spirit of WW2", requiring the infantry to "cluster" around the tank ...; b) the design of the KBA allows you to form a precisely directed narrow (!) beam of striking elements ... (for example, with the help of adjustable KBA or a thrown metal ("solid") plate ...) By the way, for some reason, the German KAZ ADS is "praised" how very safe for the infantry, when it is possible to make "exactly the same" version of the "Arena" for armored vehicles, but with the KBA! (It is not "recommended" to stand under protective ammunition even with ADS KAZ!)

      There is always a threat, because KAZ works quickly enough and without much participation from the crew ... the infantry may not hide behind the tank, but be close and hide in the folds of the terrain or on the street corner ... for example, there is a battle, vehicles roll out from both sides, fires a shot and back ... right to the position (there were such cases in Georgia, in Syria, in the Donbas)
      1. +1
        7 July 2021 10: 14
        Oh my gosh!
        Quote: parma
        There is always a threat

        Well, yes .... there is ... but this is war! Anything can happen ... often not without losses! But when reading a number of posts, the assumption arises that the "commentators" adhere to the principle in life: "and eat a fish, and sit on the tree with bare butt, without scratching it!" For example, "Western" media praise KAZ ADS ... they say the most "safe" for their infantry! But one has only to imagine the construction of this KAZ, then would you want to "cluster" near an armored vehicle with this "safe" KAZ under "pyro" (high-explosive) protective charges? I'm sure not! Nobody wants to! So why did this "pi cheering accordion, playing the accordion"? But it "jiggles"!
        Quote: parma
        It will no longer be an arena, but another complex, and not even on the basis of the arena ...

        Everything is "comparative and relative"! You are not right ! If you do not agree, then explain specifically! So far, I see only an "unfounded statement"! It is not excluded that after some time there will be KAZ "Arena-M2" or "Arena-U / UM", "Arena-S", built according to the principles I have described! For, both "Arena" and "Arena-M" and "my" "Arena" have and remain general principles that have not disappeared after my "changes"!
        1. +1
          7 July 2021 11: 58
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Well, yes .... there is ... but this is war! Anything can happen ... often not without losses! But when reading a number of posts, the assumption arises that the "commentators" adhere to the principle in life: "and eat a fish, and sit on the tree with bare butt, without scratching it!" For example, "Western" media praise KAZ ADS ... they say the most "safe" for their infantry! But one has only to imagine the construction of this KAZ, then would you want to "cluster" near an armored vehicle with this "safe" KAZ under "pyro" (high-explosive) protective charges? I'm sure not! Nobody wants to! So why did this "pi cheering accordion, playing the accordion"? But it "jiggles"!

          Well, let's start with the fact that I just gave you an example when the infantry may not want to clump together at the equipment, but the equipment itself drives up (in the city, do you offer the tank to move alone?) ...
          Let's continue about ADS - there are two versions - lightweight and full ... If I understood correctly at one time, lightweight interferes with ATGMs - smoke screens, heat traps, IR blinding, etc. ... there are no shooting elements ... this version is considered safe for infantry, they plan to put it on light equipment (SUVs, trucks, etc.). There is also a heavy version, here it shoots the liquidator, but the trick is that there is a 2-stage radar system and it seems like a central computer calculates the flight path of a grenade / rocket, and only if the object really poses a threat to it, this approach is also perhaps the safest for the infantry ...
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Everything is "comparative and relative"! You are not right ! If you do not agree, then explain specifically! So far, I see only an "unfounded statement"! It is not excluded that after some time there will be KAZ "Arena-M2" or "Arena-U / UM", "Arena-S", built according to the principles I have described! For, both "Arena" and "Arena-M" and "my" "Arena" have and remain general principles that have not disappeared after my "changes"!

          You propose to make drastic changes that change everything in general ... Let's just say, to make a KAZ of the 1nd generation from a KAZ of the 2st generation, if you like ... you can call it whatever you like, but it will not be an Arena in fact in honor of the old cars, assigning the number 2, but the thunderbolt 2 was not developed on the basis of the thunderbolt 1), only a name and a tribute (which is stupid, considering that the arena is not accepted for service) ...
          1. 0
            7 July 2021 14: 16
            Firstly, the "lightweight" version of ADS is called "MUSS" ... Secondly, when describing the "combat" version of ADS, you are clearly giving the data of another KAZ ...
            Quote: parma
            Let's continue with ADS - there are two versions - lightweight and full

            Quote: parma
            You propose to make drastic changes that change everything in general

            Everything is within the framework of a possible upgrade! And there is an example! Compare KAZ Arena and Arena-M!
            "Arena": 1) radar - "birdhouse" on the tower ... 2) PU on the tower around it ... 3) the most simplified counter ammunition ...!
            "Arena-M": 1) "distributed" radar (4 antenna arrays on the tank hull); 2) "distributed" on the PU body; 3) a modernized counter-ammunition with the possibility of partial correction ... Are these not "dramatic" changes? If there is a different radar, different launchers, another counter-ammunition !! However, as there was "Arena", so "Arena" remained ... current with the letter M ("Arena-M")! And the KAZ developers call all this "modernization", "modification", "new versions" of the same "Arena"! You first prove your KAZ developers, and only then argue with me!
      2. +1
        7 July 2021 10: 47
        Quote: parma
        I think the problem is that with such a detonation of ammunition there is a considerable chance to fill the tank with fragments, but it doesn't matter for the main booking, but the tank has enough weakly protected equipment, which is very important nonetheless (various sighting systems, thermal imagers, etc.).

        Well, nothing threatens the tank with an acre of shrapnel? Does the infantry not fire small arms at him, or throw hand grenades? Does it manage with slingshots? For "attachments" on tanks, one way or another, "bulletproof" (splinterproof "protection!
        1. +3
          7 July 2021 10: 53
          provides for "bulletproof" (splinterproof "protection!

          Photo in the studio, I want to look at this protection.
          1. +2
            7 July 2021 11: 41
            Photo of the T-90M tank ("Breakthrough-3").

            Armored flaps are visible on the "buckets". Nevertheless, of course, you can hit everything, even simply kill the driver's triplexes with rifles.
            Vladimir Nikolaevich, admittedly, is a fan of the "Arena".


            Nikolayevich, the principle is largely from shrapnel, one way or another, the dispersal of submunitions, it was on the infantry, it was on the approaching missile. However, the infantry, too, is better off staying away, both foreign and their own. About
            Well, as always! Who wants to work, solve problems ... he works and solves! And who does not want, he is looking for excuses!
            This is a variation from "The willing seeks opportunities, the non-willing seeks reasons."

            What can I say, there is such a "naughty thing" among the people - "an ax is floating down the river, from the village of Kukueva" ... Probably, the same "Javelin" and it is not necessary to knock it down, you can somehow blind it, take it aside. It is possible to discharge the striking elements upwards. But, again, you have to think about it, in any case, an integrated approach is better, that is, when you are well greeted in your clothes, and you are well guided in your mind (not to be confused "and eat a fish, and sit on the tree with your bare backside, without scratching it" ).
            1. 0
              7 July 2021 12: 09
              the principle is largely from shrapnel


              But it is in the picture that the striking elements are flying directed, but in life there is a possibility that something will fly in the direction of the tank - there is not gunpowder, but a blasting charge.
              1. -1
                7 July 2021 12: 53
                Quote: Konnick
                the principle is largely from shrapnel


                But it is in the picture that the striking elements are flying directed, but in life there is a possibility that something will fly in the direction of the tank - there is not gunpowder, but a blasting charge.

                What? And what will the tank get from this? He's iron)))
            2. +1
              8 July 2021 08: 22
              Quote: Per se.
              Armored flaps are visible on the "buckets". Nevertheless, naturally, everything can be hit

              Gospidya! It was about the resistance of the devices to fragments from the top! You decided to show the "armored doors" designed to protect the device from a bullet!
              1. +2
                8 July 2021 13: 21
                Quote: Nikolaevich I
                You decided to show the "armored doors" designed to protect the device from a bullet!
                Nikolaevich, it was not for you, but for the "photo in the studio." I shouldn't have summarized the comment, and I'm not an opponent of the "Arena", if it seemed so.
                1. 0
                  8 July 2021 16: 33
                  "Tady, Oops!" Sorry! Me, simply, a little "for (f) got sick", attacks, ... plus late time "outside the window"! hi
          2. 0
            8 July 2021 08: 16
            Quote: Konnick
            provides for "bulletproof" (splinterproof "protection!

            Photo in the studio, I want to look at this protection.

            Well, what are you making fun of? I do not notice the "great" mind in this! Want a photo? There are a lot of such pictures on the Internet! Back in WW2, they began to protect tank observation devices, sights with armored shutters ... "Bullet-resistant" triplexes, transparent plastics appeared .... Now they use cameras that can be placed in optimal places .. Bullet protection is not only armored dampers! But also a "telescope" stand, capable of "sinking" the device and raising it when necessary ... But most importantly .... you, like a sharper, "twist" the cards! At the beginning, it was not about how to protect the device from a sniper bullet! Is it possible to protect the device from shrapnel falling from the top! Even, such a device is better protected from shrapnel from the top than from a sniper bullet!
        2. +1
          7 July 2021 14: 48
          Quote: Nikolaevich I
          Quote: parma
          I think the problem is that with such a detonation of ammunition there is a considerable chance to fill the tank with fragments, but it doesn't matter for the main booking, but the tank has enough weakly protected equipment, which is very important nonetheless (various sighting systems, thermal imagers, etc.).

          Well, nothing threatens the tank with an acre of shrapnel? Does the infantry not fire small arms at him, or throw hand grenades? Does it manage with slingshots? For "attachments" on tanks, one way or another, "bulletproof" (splinterproof "protection!

          Of course it threatens, another question is that such a "crossbow" is not much better than a damaged tank .. The protection itself is practically absent, but you can perform protection from armored glass, but it will only protect the device, and after being hit, it will not work (see the picture).
          You can make a curtain out of metal, but there is a chance that it will jam in the closed position, or, for example, a vehicle has left the hiding place (city battle) for a shot, and then the system notifies of an attack and closes the sight ...
          PS: I am for KAZ, any ... but until there are more accurate liquidators or some kind of laser KAZ will be dangerous both for the infantry and for the equipment of the tank itself ...
      3. 0
        7 July 2021 12: 52
        I think the problem is that with such a detonation of ammunition there is a considerable chance to fill the tank with fragments, but it doesn't matter for the main booking, but the tank has enough weakly protected equipment, which is very important nonetheless (various sighting systems, thermal imagers, etc.).
        Well, the scopes are protected enough.
        1. 0
          7 July 2021 14: 04
          Well the scopes are protected enough

          How and with what are they protected?
    3. sen
      +1
      7 July 2021 11: 03
      2. Protection against BOPS ...: The development of the corresponding KBA will help ... The following options for KBA are possible: a) with a fragmentation plate (even, with high energy tungsten FEM ...); b) with a copper plate and a steel mesh (a bunch of small "shock nuclei" of high energy is formed); c) with a thrown metal plate (just against BOPS ...)

      I once read our old article from May 2001, which suggested the use of firing plates. Several isolated micro-charges were located under each plate. Using the data from the sensors, the computer calculated which micro-charges and in what sequence should be initiated in order to give the plate the desired direction of flight and rotation based on the coordinates of the point where the plate meets the projectile.
      https://disk.yandex.ru/i/-f-ggJK2_5CKYA
    4. 0
      7 July 2021 14: 16
      well, developed at one time said so-the problem of protection from attackers from above-solved in the Arena-M
    5. 0
      7 July 2021 15: 53
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      Sometimes, when describing the complex, they do not "forget" to indicate the "shortcomings" of the "Arena"

      Well, you also remember that KAZ was developed in the USSR when its very concept was a fantasy.
      - Shoot down missiles on the way to the tank? You're laughing!
      This task came close only in the USSR, and then in the branch of the military-industrial complex of the USSR - Israel. "Arena" is the first working model suitable for installation on military equipment. Naturally, the complex is not perfect.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      2. "defenselessness" in front of BOPS ...

      KBM is not a tank design bureau, but a missile one. Its profile is missiles and guidance system. Shooting BOPS is not their specificity.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      What "prevents" from changing the shooting angle of counter.

      It's not about the ammunition. The point is in the radar field. It was not realistic to get a domed one on that element base in those dimensions.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      2. Protection against BOPS ...: The development of the corresponding CBA will help ... The following CBA options are possible

      Once again, this is NOT KBM specific. They don't develop ammunition.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      already tired of statements in the "spirit of WW2", requiring the infantry to "cluster" around the tank

      And what to do with her if she crowds around him? She hides behind him.

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      By the way, for some reason, the German KAZ ADS is "praised" as very safe for the infantry

      And the US planes are all invisible. Now what? :)

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      KAZ "Arena" has good opportunities for creating various modifications ...

      And it turned out "Afghanit". :)

      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      For example, you can make a variant of the "Arena" for armored vehicles

      There is. For the BMP, exactly.

      In general, the military accepted the "Arena" in principle, only then there was no money for it. At the same time, the Shtora appeared, which turned out to be cheaper and the military chose it during a period of lack of money.
      1. +1
        7 July 2021 18: 55
        Quote: abc_alex
        remember that KAZ was developed in the USSR when its very concept was a fantasy.

        "Arena" is the first working model suitable for installation on military equipment ..

        If KAZ was developed in the USSR, then what kind of fantasy could it be? The Soviet leadership called itself realists! The first operating KAZ is "Drozd"! And he was the first to be put into service (the T-55AD tank)! Received a combat check in Afghanistan ... The tank version of the "Arena" was used for the BMP (!) ... and only on the BMP-3! I will not comment on the rest of the "fad" ... they are too awkward for me ... You do not own the "theme"! (KAZ "Arena", for example, you call "the first" ...)
  6. +3
    7 July 2021 06: 40
    The sooner we put it, the more lives we save. At least for tanks, in the most combat-ready units.
  7. 0
    7 July 2021 11: 11
    "A standard grenade was fired into the side view of the tank from an RPG-7 grenade launcher. KAZ automatic equipment detected the threat in time and, when it approached, fired a protective ammunition."
    *
    I'll change the subject a bit. And I will ask, for the fifth or tenth time, a question ...

    And why not, according to the same principle, organize DIRECT and ALL-AROUND (including the upper hemisphere) defense of the "near line" of platforms, such as "Pantsir" or "Buk" and their combat crews? .. From, say, "bursting through" and flying up to the platform at a distance of 50 - 70 m of weapons fired by tactical or operational-tactical UAVs? .. Or from shelling from grenade launchers, all kinds of potential DRGs? ..

    After all, the speed of approach and the mass of the warhead launched by the same UAV does not differ much from the same parameters of the grenade launcher "shot" ...

    Or am I, being a person, far from military affairs, am I seriously mistaken? ..
    1. +3
      7 July 2021 13: 14
      Quote: ABC-schütze
      why not, according to the same principle, organize DIRECT and ALL-AROUND (including the upper hemisphere) defense of the "near line" of platforms, such as "Pantsir" or "Buk"

      Yes, you asked the right question.
      I will allow myself to answer.
      The carapace and the Beech are so arranged - the locator plus protective ammunition, only the locator is more powerful and the ammunition is larger. If you attach such a KAZ to them, you get one and a half Pantsir / Buk on one chassis. It is hard, it is difficult (we still need to ensure compatibility). And this is dangerous for the personnel. And yes, it's still not 100 percent protection.
      In principle, the task is solved by installing several Shells in one position so that they cover each other.
      1. -2
        7 July 2021 14: 23
        "The carapace and the Beech are so arranged - the locator plus protective ammunition, only the locator is more powerful and the ammunition is larger. If you attach such a KAZ to them, you get one and a half."
        Shell / Buka on one chassis. "
        ************************************************** ******************************
        It seems that I have not expressed my idea very clearly ...

        In my amateurish opinion, "Armor" "Buki" (or, the same "Iskander", in other cases ...), etc., are most vulnerable at the moment of exhaustion of their combat arsenals, during the ongoing (or completed) anti-aircraft battle. Exactly at
        this moment, when they are still in combat positions, they are "under the lenses", they are attacked with impunity by all sorts of Busurman "Baitakars" and other Israeli UAVs ...

        So the analogue of the KZA on the mentioned platforms and, in fact, the combat equipment of these platforms, must solve fundamentally different tasks.

        KZA, will defend the OWN platform, and the PLATFORM ITSELF, will defend the designated object, i.e. to conduct an anti-aircraft battle.

        The task of "repelling" a warhead flying up to the platform, fired by UAVs, ATGMs or grenade launchers, by means of KZA, can hardly be attributed to the conduct of "air combat" ...

        As for the "danger of defeat" for the personnel, here, in my opinion, the danger posed by the above means of attack, in the event of a strike on the platform, is much higher. And the consequences are worse ...

        Those. when the platform's KZA is activated, the personnel of all BRs should not lose their vigilance and not "wander" around the combat positions
        1. +2
          7 July 2021 14: 56
          Quote: ABC-schütze
          The task of "repelling" a warhead flying up to the platform, fired by UAVs, ATGMs or grenade launchers, by means of KZA, can hardly be attributed to the conduct of "air combat" ...

          Yes, this is precisely the task. Buk may get the planes and drones, and the destiny of the Shell is the shooting of bombs and Spikes.
          Placing the KAZ on the same chassis with the rest of the complex will require either an increase in the size / carrying capacity of the vehicle, or a decrease in ammunition, which directly contradicts its tasks.
          Although, on Shell, the problem is solved in approximately the same way as you described, albeit not so radically. Instead of "large" missiles, the so-called "large" missiles are added to the ammunition load. "nails".
          And the explosion of an attacking ammunition at a standard range for a tank KAZ from the Buka or Pantsir locator will damage the antennas, i.e. Spike will complete the task. About the grenade launcher, if it comes to this, then no KAZ will help, then drop everything and run to save yourself.
    2. 0
      7 July 2021 16: 55
      Theoretically, it is possible .... but went by booking a car, small-caliber missiles, increasing their number, installing AFAR, new optics ... and "brains". The Germans showed cheaper "inflatable KAZ" for light armored vehicles. Kamaz can hardly pull the Shell ...
    3. 0
      8 July 2021 14: 34
      A beech is not a tank, if what arrives at it is blown up 5 meters away from it, then there won't be much difference for the crew
  8. 0
    7 July 2021 13: 40
    A supersonic ATGM will appear and all KAZ children can be wiped out.
    1. +1
      7 July 2021 14: 19
      Quote: CastroRuiz
      A supersonic ATGM will appear and all KAZ children can be wiped out.

      vikinut not vikinut))) Supersonic ATGM has been there for a very long time.
  9. 0
    7 July 2021 14: 19
    Quote: Konnick
    Well the scopes are protected enough

    How and with what are they protected?

    This shot is apparently a large-caliber bullet. And you talked about the fragments from above, you should not confuse warm with soft. All in a heap you interfere. We need to speak specifically. You personally wrote about protection from missiles from above, that is, the detonation will be above the roof. And the protection of the scopes has changed, to put it mildly. And what is this technique? On the T-72/90/80, there are not such sights.
    1. 0
      7 July 2021 21: 00
      On the T-72/90/80, there are not such sights.

      And this is not a sight. And you simply did not see bulletproof glass, at least 40 mm thick triplex, i.e. three layers, with the middle layer being made of a soft material such as silicone. And as it gets hit, it becomes covered with a network of cracks. Tank periscopes are simply a set of prisms and lenses without bulletproof glass.
      1. 0
        7 July 2021 21: 01
        Quote: Konnick
        On the T-72/90/80, there are not such sights.

        And this is not a sight. And you simply did not see bulletproof glass, at least 40 mm thick triplex, i.e. three layers, with the middle layer being made of a soft material such as silicone. And as it gets hit, it becomes covered with a network of cracks. Tank periscopes are simply a set of prisms and lenses without bulletproof glass.

        Well, so where is it here? It was about scopes.
        1. 0
          7 July 2021 21: 16
          Well, so where is it here? It was about scopes.

          Modern sights are much larger than the sights of tanks of the mid-20th century and are not protected by bulletproof glass.


          Therefore, modern tanks are shown to fight with tanks, and not with infantry. Apparently, Armata failed the tests in Syria due to the low bullet resistance of the anti-splinter casing of the tower and a bunch of optical receiving systems and radars.
          1. 0
            7 July 2021 21: 22
            Quote: Konnick
            Well, so where is it here? It was about scopes.

            Modern sights are much larger than the sights of tanks of the mid-20th century and are not protected by bulletproof glass.


            Therefore, modern tanks are shown to fight with tanks, and not with infantry. Apparently, Armata failed the tests in Syria due to the low bullet resistance of the anti-splinter casing of the tower and a bunch of optical receiving systems and radars.

            laughing Are you real? Are you serious. A wild laugh goes through me. In short, let's go with your alternate reality. Don't show me panormanics that are not on the T-72. And if you didn't know, then "Pine" is protected. As well as the gunner's main sight.
            1. 0
              7 July 2021 21: 26
              panormanics which are not on the T-72. And if you didn't know, then "Pine" is protected. As well as the gunner's main sight.

              There are panoramic views, but no KAZ. And what kind of familiarity, "you"? Just don't talk about the curtains, the shutter response time is not hundredths of a second.
              1. 0
                7 July 2021 21: 31
                Quote: Konnick
                panormanics which are not on the T-72. And if you didn't know, then "Pine" is protected. As well as the gunner's main sight.

                There are panoramic views, but no KAZ. And what kind of familiarity, "you"? Just don't talk about the curtains, the shutter response time is not hundredths of a second.

                That's it, the question is closed. Already turning to personalities, I do not care at all "you" are not "you". I address "you" to those whom I personally see or those whom I respect. Neither one nor the other is here. And what you wrote here speaks of you as a specialist. I myself did not serve in tanks. But my brother served, and close friends served and served and fought for them. So keep it simple. Watch out don't break the panorama on the T-72 laughing
  10. +3
    7 July 2021 14: 33
    It's funny about watermelon))
  11. 0
    8 July 2021 14: 37
    I believe that if a radar came to the tank from the KAZ, then it should be used to the fullest: both for situational awareness (detecting ambushes) and for controlling fire and for controlling ammunition (detonating on command) and as electronic warfare and even as a backup communication line.
    1. 0
      8 July 2021 19: 22
      With any KAZ, the tank glows in the radio range - I don't want to aim.
  12. 0
    8 July 2021 19: 29
    When will KAZ appear for aviation?
    1. 0
      8 July 2021 20: 15
      Again, what's the point? Anti-aircraft missiles rarely require a direct hit, they strike with shrapnel. The fact that the rocket is blown up 5 meters from the plane will not be any easier. Well, unless the Su-25 with the A-10 will be useful.
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. 0
    10 July 2021 11: 55
    For some reason, ours do not like their tankers. On the other hand, if they don't like their tankers, what kind of ours are they?
  15. 0
    12 July 2021 20: 17
    "On the other hand, while we are talking only about tests of such a system, which have been going on for several years, and the timing of their completion and the launch time of the series are unknown. Meanwhile, the massive modernization of existing tanks continues without the use of KAZ." This is the main and long-term problem of the tank forces and the Russian defense industry.
  16. 0
    17 August 2021 22: 22
    why not try to buy an Israeli Trophy.
  17. 0
    2 September 2021 00: 37
    in order to launch KAZ into a large series, the system must be at least at the "trophy" level, that is, to see and have time to shoot down projectors flying at a speed of 1000+ m / s. And if the Arena is only able to see an RPG grenade, then there is no point in putting this case.
  18. 0
    2 September 2021 16: 57
    At Army 2021, they showed a T-72 with a roof from a corner and "heat buckets" attached to the rear. Everything is made from a metal corner. In the West, they have a lot of fun with this. Sad. So when we have KAZ not only at exhibitions.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"