Anti-mine protection of modern armored vehicles - solutions and examples of implementation

Anti-mine protection of modern armored vehicles - solutions and examples of implementation

Throughout the relatively short stories armored vehicles of the ground forces of about a hundred years, the nature of the conduct of hostilities has changed several times. These changes were of cardinal nature - from “positional” to “maneuverable” war and, further, to local conflicts and counter-terrorist operations. It is the nature of the alleged hostilities that is decisive in the formation of requirements for military equipment; accordingly, the ranking of the basic properties of armored vehicles (BTT) also changed. The classic combination of "firepower - protection - mobility" has been repeatedly updated, complemented by new components. At present, the point of view has been established, according to which protection is given priority.

A significant expansion of the nomenclature and capabilities of anti-armored vehicles made its survivability an essential condition for the performance of a combat mission. Ensuring the vitality and, in a narrower sense - the protection of BTT, is based on an integrated approach. There can be no universal means of protection against all possible modern threats, therefore, various protection systems are installed on the objects of armored vehicles that complement each other. To date, dozens of designs, systems and protective systems have been created, ranging from traditional armor to active protection systems. Under these conditions, determining the optimal composition of complex protection is one of the most important tasks, the solution of which determines to a large extent the perfection of the machine being developed.

The solution to the task of integrating protective equipment is based on the analysis of potential threats in the intended conditions of use. And here it is necessary to return again to the fact that the nature of the hostilities and, consequently, the “representative anti-tank outfit” have changed dramatically in comparison with, say, the Second World War. The most dangerous for armored vehicles at the present time are two opposing, both in terms of technological level and in terms of methods of application, groups of vehicles are highly accurate. weapon (WTO) on the one hand and the means of close combat and mines on the other. If the use of the WTO is typical for highly developed countries and, as a rule, leads to fairly quick results on the destruction of enemy armored vehicles, then the widest use of mines, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers from various armed formations is long-lasting. In this sense, the experience of US combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is very indicative. Considering precisely such local conflicts as the most characteristic of modern conditions, it should be recognized that mines and melee weapons are the most dangerous for armored vehicles.

The level of the threat that mines and improvised explosive devices presently present is well illustrated by generalized data on the losses of US military equipment in various armed conflicts (Table 1).

Table 1

Analysis of the dynamics of losses allows us to unequivocally state that the mine action component of the integrated protection of armored vehicles is particularly relevant today. The provision of mine protection has become one of the main problems facing the developers of modern military machines.
To determine ways to ensure protection, first of all, the characteristics of the most likely threats should be assessed - the type and power of the mines and explosive devices used. Currently, a large number of effective anti-tank mines, differing, including in the principle of action, have been created. They can be equipped with both push-type fuses and multichannel sensors - magnetometric, seismic, acoustic, etc. The combat unit can be both simplest high-explosive and with striking elements of the “shock core” type, having high armor-piercing ability.

The characteristics of the military conflicts in question do not imply that the enemy has “high-tech” mines. Experience shows that in most cases mines are used, and more often IEDs, of high-explosive action with radio-controlled or contact fuses. An example of an improvised explosive device with the simplest type of fuse is shown in figure 1.

Rice 1. Improvised explosive device with push type fuse

Recently, in Iraq and Afghanistan, cases of the use of improvised explosive devices with striking elements of the “shock core” type have been recorded. The appearance of such devices is a response to the increased mine protection of armored vehicles. Although, for understandable reasons, it is impossible to manufacture a high-quality and highly efficient cumulative unit with “improvised means”, nevertheless, the armor-piercing ability of such IEDs is up to 40 mm of steel. This is quite enough for a reliable defeat light armor technology.

The power of the used mines and IEDs depends largely on the availability of certain explosives (BB), as well as the possibilities for their laying. As a rule, IEDs are manufactured on the basis of industrial explosives, which at the same power have much greater weight and volume than “combat” explosives. The complexity of the hidden tab of such cumbersome IEDs limit their power. Data on the frequency of use of mines and IEDs with various trotyl equivalents, obtained as a result of summarizing the experience of US combat operations in recent years, are given in Table 2.

Table 2

Analysis of the data presented shows that more than half of the explosive devices used in our time have TNT equivalents 6 ... 8 kg. It is this range that should be considered the most probable and, therefore, the most dangerous.

From the point of view of the nature of the lesion, there are types of undermining under the bottom of the car and under the wheel (track). Characteristic lesions in these cases are shown in Figure 2. In case of explosions under the bottom, the integrity of the hull and the destruction of the crew are very likely both due to dynamic loads exceeding the maximum permissible and due to the impact of the shock wave and splinter flow. When explosions under the wheel, as a rule, the mobility of the machine is lost, but the main factor in the destruction of the crew are only dynamic loads.

Figure 2. Characters defeat armored vehicles under blasting under the bottom and under the wheel

Approaches to the provision of mine protection of armored vehicles are primarily determined by the requirements for the protection of the crew and only secondly by the requirements for preserving the operability of the vehicle.

The preservation of the performance of internal equipment and, as a result, technical combat capability, can be achieved by reducing the impact loads on this equipment and its attachment points. The most critical in this regard are the components and assemblies, mounted on the bottom of the machine or within the maximum possible dynamic deflection of the bottom during undermining. The number of equipment attachment points to the bottom should be minimized as much as possible, and these nodes themselves should have energy-absorbing elements that reduce dynamic loads. In each case, the design of attachment points is original. At the same time, from the point of view of the bottom structure, to ensure the operability of the equipment, it is necessary to reduce the dynamic deflection (increase rigidity) and to ensure the maximum possible reduction of the dynamic loads transmitted to the attachment points of the internal equipment.

The preservation of the performance of the crew can be ensured under certain conditions.

The first condition is to minimize the dynamic loads transmitted during the blasting on the attachment points of the crew seats or the landing force. In the case of mounting seats directly on the bottom of the machine, almost all the energy imparted to this bottom section will be transmitted to its attachment points, therefore extremely efficient energy absorbing units of chairs are required. It is important that providing protection at high power charge becomes doubtful.

When mounting seats to the sides or roof of the case, where the zone of local "explosive" deformations does not extend, only that part of the dynamic loads that apply to the body of the machine as a whole are transferred to the attachment points. Considering the considerable mass of the machines under consideration, as well as the presence of such factors as suspension elasticity and partial energy absorption due to local deformation of the structure, the accelerations transmitted to the sides and the roof of the hull will be relatively small.

The second condition for the preservation of the crew’s working capacity is, as in the case of internal equipment, the elimination of contact with the bottom at maximum dynamic deflection. This condition can be achieved purely constructively by providing the necessary clearance between the bottom and the floor of the habitable compartment. Increasing the rigidity of the bottom leads to a reduction in this necessary clearance. Thus, the performance of the crew is provided by special shock-absorbing seats fixed in places remote from the areas of possible application of explosive loads, as well as by excluding the contact of the crew with the bottom at maximum dynamic deflection.

An example of the integrated implementation of these approaches to the provision of mine protection is the relatively recent class of armored vehicles MRAP (Mine Resistant Ambush Protected - protected from undermining and attacks from ambushes), which have increased resistance to both the effects of explosive devices and small arms fire. It is necessary to pay tribute to the high efficiency shown by the USA, with which the development and supply of large quantities of similar cars to Iraq and Afghanistan were organized. This task was assigned to quite a large number of companies - Force Protection, BAE Systems, Armor Holdings, Oshkosh Trucks / Ceradyne, Navistar International, etc. This predetermined a significant disunification of the MRAP fleet, but allowed them to be delivered in the required quantities in a short time.

The general features of the approach to providing mine protection on automobiles of these companies are the rational V-shape of the lower part of the hull, the increased strength of the bottom through the use of thick steel armor plates and the mandatory use of special energy-absorbing seats. Protection is provided only for the habitable module. Everything that is “outside”, including the engine compartment, either has no protection at all, or is poorly protected. This feature allows you to withstand the undermining of rather powerful IEDs due to the easy destruction of the “outer” compartments and assemblies while minimizing the transmission of effects on the habitable module (Figure 3). Similar solutions are being implemented both on heavy machines, for example, Ranger from Universal Engineering, and on light ones, including IVECO 65E19WM. With obvious rationality in conditions of limited mass, this technical solution still does not provide high survivability and preservation of mobility with relatively weak explosive devices, as well as bullet shelling.

Simple and reliable, but not the most rational in terms of mass, is the use of heavy-gauge steel to protect the bottom. Lighter bottom structures with energy-absorbing elements, for example, hexagonal or rectangular tubular parts, are used for the time being very limited.

Fig. 3 Separation of wheels, powerplant and outdoor equipment from the habitable compartment when a car explodes in a mine
Photo courtesy of Concern "Tractor plants"

Cars of the “Typhoon” family (figure 4) developed in Russia also belong to the MRAP class. Practically all currently known technical solutions for ensuring mine protection are implemented in this family of vehicles:
  • V-shaped bottom,
  • multi-layer bottom of the habitable compartment, anti-mine pan,
  • internal floor on elastic elements,
  • crew location at the maximum possible distance from the most likely place of explosion,
  • aggregates and systems protected from direct weapons impact,
  • energy absorbing seats with seat belts and head restraints.

Fig. 4 The Typhoon family car with a high level of mine resistance.

The work on the Typhoon family is an example of cooperation and an integrated approach to solving the problem of ensuring security in general and anti-mine resistance in particular. The lead developer for the protection of vehicles developed by the Ural automobile plant is OAO NII Steel. The development of the overall configuration and layout of the cabs and functional modules, as well as energy absorbing seats was carried out by EurotechPlast OJSC. To perform a numerical simulation of the impact of the explosion on the design of the car, experts of Sarov Engineering Center LLC were involved.

The current approach to the development of mine protection includes several stages. At the first stage, a numerical simulation of the impact of the explosion products on the draft design is performed. Further, the external configuration and the overall design of the bottom, mine pallets are clarified and their structure is tested. The testing of structures is also performed first by numerical methods, and then tested on fragments with a real undermining.

Figure 5 shows examples of numerical modeling of the impact of an explosion on various structures of anti-mine structures made by NII Steel as part of work on new products. After completion of the detailed design of the machine, various versions of its detonation are modeled.

Figure 6 shows the results of a numerical simulation of an undermining of the Typhoon car, performed by the Sarovsky engineering center. According to the results of the calculations, necessary improvements are made, the results of which are already being verified by real tests for demolition. Such a multistage development makes it possible to evaluate the correctness of technical solutions at various stages of design and, in general, reduce the risk of constructive errors and choose the most rational solution.

Fig. 5 Pictures of the deformed state of various protective structures in the numerical simulation of the impact of an explosion

Fig. 6 Picture of the pressure distribution in the numerical simulation of the explosion of the car "Typhoon"

A common feature of the developed modern machines is the modularity of most systems, including protective ones. This allows you to adapt new machines to the intended conditions of use and, conversely, in the absence of any threats to avoid unnecessary costs. With regard to mine protection, such modularity allows us to quickly respond to possible changes in the types and capacities of used explosive devices and effectively solve one of the main problems of protecting modern armored vehicles with minimal costs.

Thus, the following conclusions can be made on the problem under consideration:
  • one of the most serious threats to armored vehicles in the most typical local conflicts today are mines and IEDs, which account for more than half of the losses of equipment;
  • To ensure high mine protection of armored vehicles, an integrated approach is needed, which includes both layout and design, "circuit" solutions, as well as the use of special equipment, in particular, energy-absorbing crew seats;
  • samples of armored vehicles with high mine protection have already been created and are actively used in modern conflicts, which allows analyzing the experience of their combat use and identifying ways to further improve their design.
Our news channels

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

21 comment
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. vylvyn
    2 October 2012 08: 54
    Mikhalych, thanks for the article. Success in work, successful technical developments, outstanding samples and serious contracts for your research institute. Photos are generally awesome belay
  2. 0
    2 October 2012 09: 40
    The Ural has a large car, respectively, there is not a lot of space for distributed reservations and other lotions, But you can’t shove the Urals everywhere, you need smaller cars such as the Tiger and UAZ - as is the case with the development of their mine protection. Thank you for the article. I would like to add that, unlike armor, the amount of charge in an IED can be increased indefinitely, here it would be to develop devices for remote detonation.
    1. +1
      2 October 2012 10: 14
      About the mass of explosives - yes, that's right, but due to the design it is necessary to give soldiers at least a chance to survive. Almost any armor is also sewn, but there is always a chance that the adversary will not find the required caliber (ammunition) and will apply it. Or home-made crap will work out of the ordinary - in general, the efforts of constructors are not in vain, article +.
    2. borisst64
      2 October 2012 10: 43
      Quote: kotdavin4i
      the amount of charge in the VCA can be increased indefinitely

      Provided that the charge is solid (the problem of filling and transporting a large volume), or the detonator is connected to each individual charge (the risk of detonation during installation increases).
      They did an experiment - they tied a couple of grenades without fuses to the RGD. When the main grenade exploded, the others simply tore into pieces, there was no detonation.
  3. +2
    2 October 2012 10: 48
    We must pay tribute to the highest efficiency shown by the United States, with which the development and delivery of large quantities of such vehicles to Iraq and Afghanistan were organized..When such an attitude will be to Our army, thanks for the article is very interesting and informative.
  4. bask
    2 October 2012 12: 35
    Efficiency, this is their press with greens. But the topic is endless and relevant. And comments 0l. About the Typhoons they have not yet been tested for real detonation. How many kg. they don’t clear TNT. But Russia needs all the armored vehicles using MRAP technology. The mine war continues in the Caucasus. And our guys die almost monthly on IEDs. But there are no armored vehicles with mine protection. ,, Lynxes, Tigers ,, Not designed for this purpose . They are designed for a maximum of 2-3 gk in tr ... ekrivalente. And the militants, according to information from the press, put no less than 8-10 kg in tr..ek..It is urgently necessary to develop and adopt the brn..aut..spo MRAP technologies up to 15 tons of armored personnel carriers and reconnaissance missiles up to 7 tons. The landing party is 8-10 people and 5-6 hours is up to 7 tons. !!!!
  5. smprofi
    2 October 2012 14: 00
    An example of the comprehensive implementation of these approaches to providing mine protection is the relatively recently emerged class of armored vehicles MRAP (Mine Resistant Ambush Protected - protected from undermining and attacks from ambushes), which are highly resistant to both explosive devices and small arms fire. The highest speed shown by the United States

    hmm ... that's how legends come out of the blue ...

    Mine protected vehicles. It is inconvenient and unusual to call them "vehicles with PMZ", therefore, according to world terminology, they will be first MPV (Mine Protected Vehicle), then MRAP (Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, Resistant to mines / Protected from attacks). The pioneers in the creation of such means of countermine warfare were the Rhodesians, who had experienced the terror of black militants since the early 1970s, and on the roads as well. Improvisations began: the Land Rover car was sheathed from below with armor plates, inclined so as to divert the shock wave to the side; rubber containers with water were laid on the floor, and rubber tires were placed on the roof of the car as shock absorbers (in case the car turned over). With this method, it was possible to reduce the death of people in cars with such equipment during explosions in comparison with conventional ones from 22% to 7.5%.

    Well, here ( you can see the evolution of MPV to MRAP.

    well, according to the data. Afghanistan is not mentioned in the table "Loss of equipment from mines and IEDs". one report sounded figures that when mines were blown up in Afghanistan, 70% of armored personnel carriers were not subject to restoration, but only 4% of tanks.
  6. +3
    2 October 2012 14: 36
    Quote: smprofi
    when mines were blown up in Afghanistan, 70% of armored personnel carriers could not be restored, but only 4% of tanks.

    If so in reality, then this is the most obvious answer to the question - Caterpillars or wheels?
    1. smprofi
      2 October 2012 15: 28

      I can only add:

      “Before we got the Leopard tanks, even the massive fire of the 25 mm guns of our LAV combat vehicles could not penetrate nearly meter-long stone-clay duvols, as strong as concrete,” Army Army Journal Canadian wrote in a Canadian military journal "Major Trevor Kadiyu, who fought in Afghanistan. “Therefore, we were often forced to request aviation or risk our lives by sending them closer to the wall in order to penetrate it with anti-tank weapons or to undermine it with a mine or explosives.” But only a 105-mm Leopard C2 shell from a distance of up to 4000 meters — that is, twice as effective as the effective fire range of a 25-mm gun of the LAV armored car — pierced a 5x5 meter hole in such a “fortress” without touching the same time, neighboring buildings or nearby infantrymen. ”

      only now in the Russian Ministry of Defense somehow they don’t really remember the experience of Afghanistan and they don’t read such statements. Well, gringos in the same Afghanistan ate both MRAP and Stryker.

      1. DIMS
        2 October 2012 20: 17
        The 105 mm gun is installed on the Stryker, which is interesting. Three cars per company
    2. Darck
      3 October 2012 00: 49
      If so in reality, then this is the most obvious answer to the question - Caterpillars or wheels?
      How did you connect all this? In Afghanistan, there are more wheeled vehicles than tanks and they patrol large areas. Therefore, they have more losses, in the first photo of Kugar, he wasn’t sickly spread, if in his place the T72, the result would be more disastrous.
      By the way, abrams on IEDs, in the first one crew member died.
      1. 0
        3 October 2012 00: 58
        Quote: Darck

        Cool - an explosion right under the tank, and he jumped up, the screens scattered to the sides - and drove even further))))))))))
        1. Darck
          3 October 2012 02: 50
          and he jumped
          He threw, the tanks do not know how to jump.
          screens flew apart
          The screen (if it was it) and this is logical, when the explosion under the tank, the left screen remained in place. By the way, in the second video, from 2,58 minutes, an invisible man runs to the tank, I heard that they tested such a suit, does anyone know what the heck is that ?
          1. 0
            3 October 2012 10: 20
            Quote: Darck
            He threw, the tanks do not know how to jump

            CEP, honestly?
            Quote: Darck
            Screen (if it was he)

            It was he, tore off and he flew off --- and for some reason he did not freeze over the funnel.
            1. Darck
              3 October 2012 14: 57

              But you don’t even know that.
              It was he

              What are you, at first it was them, now he ... is evolving before our eyes.
              tore off and he flew off

              Hmm ...
              and for some reason didn’t freeze over the funnel

              Hey ... Well ... he has a whole chassis, so he didn’t get up, these are the photos of those who were less fortunate.
  7. bask
    2 October 2012 16: 55
    Doubler, if you want to know the first MRAP, and in Russian with anti-mine protection, this is an IS7 with a V-shaped bottom. Long before the South African Republics ... All WWII experience was embodied in this tank. The experience of Afghanistan in Chechnya 1 2 was completely disregarded. One BTR 90 was created with MRAP, but its release was discontinued. It is not clear from the articles, will the new platforms have a full mine protection?
    1. 0
      2 October 2012 17: 59
      And what side is the tank - Mrap?
  8. bask
    2 October 2012 20: 10
    Hello Eugene. 10 comments on this topic, on such a site? It’s chaos. You’re connected. On the topic, the IS7 has a V-shaped bottom to MO. There it is flat but reinforced.
    1. 0
      2 October 2012 21: 35
      It doesn’t make the tank Mrap, you’ll excuse me. This leaves him with a V-shaped tank. Read the definition of MDI
  9. bask
    2 October 2012 20: 31
    Why did they break away from the BTR 90 in the Moscow region, with 120 mm NONA?. Not worse than the 105 mm st..NATO on, Strikers ,,.
    1. DIMS
      2 October 2012 20: 38
      Because "Vienna" has a completely different purpose. And the main ammunition for it is 120mm mines. And besides, they did not abandon it, they just decided to supply cheaper "Host", which have a different base.
  10. 0
    2 October 2012 20: 45
    As a discussion.
    But what if, to the large ground clearance and the V-shaped bottom of anti-mine vehicles, add the protected containers with extinguishing liquid (for example, water at a positive ambient temperature)? It is necessary to place such containers in places where the probability of explosion is most likely (for example, wheel-mounted car niches).

    A prototype already exists. The special services are equipped with soft water tanks, which cover explosive devices (WU) to reduce the damaging effects on surrounding objects and people. Moreover, they even deliberately undermine WUs on the spot when it is not possible to take them to a safe place.
    What will experts say about this?
    1. smprofi
      2 October 2012 21: 54

      - Everything has long been stolen before us! © "Operation" Y "

      rubber containers of water were laid on the floor - started with this in Rhodesia when creating the MPV.
      we don’t read other people's comments ...
  11. bask
    2 October 2012 21: 02
    Dims, I’m not talking about SAU Vienna, and the host economy on the LB base. I’m talking about an armored personnel carrier 90 with mine protection. When fighting in a city or mountains, only along a hinged path.! 20 mm guns are simply irreplaceable. Or Russia still has that on technology -MRAP in service except BTR90
  12. 0
    3 October 2012 11: 15
    Quote: smprofi
    in the Russian Ministry of Defense somehow they don’t really remember the experience of Afghanistan

    I remember that in parts of TurkVO, while Afghanistan was in, books were distributed monthly describing the hostilities and the decisions that were adopted, very far from traditional ones ... Then I was still surprised - where did it all go? It seems that this literature did not go beyond the boundaries of the okrug.

    Quote: Darck
    How did you connect all this? In Afghanistan, there are more wheeled vehicles than tanks

    And I don’t argue. But losses are given as a percentage, not in quantity.

"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)

“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"