A strange situation: we gave thermal imagers to tank gunners, but deprived commanders

68
Source: royalscale.ru

What Tanks we have now - this is really progress, and there are no jokes here. Fifteen years ago, almost the entire tank fleet of Russia consisted of vehicles produced in the Soviet Union. At the same time, a considerable part of it, represented by the T-72B, did not have more or less sane means of automating the preparation of a shot at all. What can we say about thermal imaging sights - rare curiosities from the total mass of domestic tanks of those times. Therefore, optics for aiming and monitoring the battlefield during the day, and at night - infrared devices on electron-optical converters (EOP) with illumination from tower searchlights, well, or without it, but with a shorter target detection range.

The T-72B1 tank is one of the representatives of the Soviet heritage. Source: contract.mil.ru
The T-72B1 tank is one of the representatives of the Soviet heritage. Source: contract.mil.ru

Now we have a large number of T-72B3, T-90A and T-80BVM. The tanks received a completely modern fire control complex, which includes both digital ballistic computers and a set of sensors that measure all important parameters, from wind speed and direction to the temperature of powder charges. And most importantly - thermal imaging sights. These gizmos have seriously expanded the fire capabilities of our vehicles. With them, the range of detection and identification of targets has increased to several kilometers even in difficult conditions, such as night, smoke on the battlefield, and so on.



Tank T-72B3 model 2016. Source: v-grebennikov.livejournal.com
Tank T-72B3 model 2016. Source: v-grebennikov.livejournal.com

Tank T-80BVM. Source: sibnarkomat.livejournal.com
Tank T-80BVM. Source: sibnarkomat.livejournal.com

Tank T-90A. Source: bg.rbth.com
Tank T-90A. Source: bg.rbth.com

Equipping tanks with modern electronics was required for a long time. There is no need to explain anything here - everything is clear and logical. The benefits of this turned out to be very tangible in the zone of the special military operation in Ukraine.

Although there were no large-scale tank raids or tank battles, our heavy vehicles began to be used with exceptional regularity to suppress infantry positions and fortifications, occasionally diluting their ration with enemy armored vehicles. In these circumstances, the presence of thermal imaging devices greatly facilitates the life of tankers, since manpower, especially in shelters, is not in vain considered an inconspicuous target.

Everything seems to be fine, but it seems that something is very much missing


Our tanks are really good and quite prove their effectiveness, but there is one trick that is not noticeable from the outside. She does not make rubbish from a combat vehicle, but it would, of course, be worth fixing.

The fact is that the functionality of the gunner and commander is not limited to pointing and shooting for the first, and for the second - receiving and transmitting commands. Both towers, in addition to a host of other tasks, must be engaged in the search for targets, observation of the battlefield and assessment of the situation. However, due to the nature of the duties performed and the design capabilities of the tank, the gunner's field of view is mainly limited by the sights at his disposal. Therefore, the lion's share of the load falls on the shoulders of the commander of the vehicle.

To perform these tasks, the commander's workplace is equipped with a TKN periscope sighting and observation device with the possibility of circular rotation for panoramic visibility, which is ensured by installing this product in the movable structure of the commander's hatch cover. There are many options for the implementation of TKN. For example, the upgraded TKN-72MK was used on the T-3B3, and the TKN-90S on the T-4 series. They differ from each other in functionality and some capabilities, but they have one circumstance in common - both the first and the second use image intensifier tubes to monitor the battlefield and target designation at night.

Commander's observation device TKN-3MK in T-72B3. Behind the right, you can see the display of the "Double" system, which displays an image from the gunner's thermal imaging sight. Source: techinsider.ru
Commander's observation device TKN-3MK in T-72B3. Behind the right, you can see the display of the "Double" system, which displays an image from the gunner's thermal imaging sight. Source: techinsider.ru

Yes, from generation to generation, the characteristics of image intensifier tubes are improving, the visibility range and image clarity are increasing. However, all that they can give in the format of a commander's observation device is visibility no further than one kilometer when using active illumination with an infrared searchlight. The thermal imager, unlike the image intensifier tube, “sees” the infrared radiation coming from the target, which contrasts very strongly with the background on the ground. Hence the high indicators of the enemy detection range. So, for example, at our Sosna-U sight, installed on the T-72B3 and T-80BVM, it reaches 5 kilometers. The difference, as you can see, is enormous.

But this difference is manifested not only at night, but also during the day. All that the commander has in these conditions is an optical channel. What if the battlefield is covered in fog or smoke? The gunner with his thermal imager, even among these interferences, will be able to see the target, and the commander will only see fog with smoke.

And here is a very interesting situation. It turns out that the tank commander, whose duties include searching for targets and, accordingly, target designation, has several times worse capabilities for monitoring the battlefield than the gunner with his thermal imaging sight. Yes, there is a “Double” system that displays an image on a display mounted on the commander’s seat, so both turrets can use the thermal imager in almost the same way, but the fact remains that they have one channel for night and, most importantly, long-range technical vision. Under such conditions, it is very difficult to organize their well-coordinated and effective work according to the “hunter-shooter” principle, when one identifies the target, and the second hits it, it is very difficult.

In addition, such banality as the convenience of using the device interferes with the matter. In order to look around, the commander's observation device must be turned by hand. The process is not very energy-consuming, but it does not add ergonomics and makes it impossible to stabilize the field of view in the horizontal plane.

Is there an alternative?


To date, the requirements for the sighting and observation device of the commander are defined very precisely. Among them, of course, first of all, it is necessary to note the presence of a thermal imaging channel - a lot has already been said about this.

In addition, the product must have a stabilization of the field of view and ensure that the commander fires from a cannon and machine guns. Well, of course, something needs to be done with ease of use.

At one time, the commander's observation device TKN-3TP was actively proposed for installation on tanks. Visually, it does not differ much from the solution installed in the T-72B3, but at the same time it has a thermal imaging camera capable of detecting tank-type objects at a distance of up to 3 meters at any time of the day in difficult conditions, including smoke, fog and dust curtains.

Commander's observation device TKN-3TP. Source: romz.ru
Commander's observation device TKN-3TP. Source: romz.ru

As a more "sighted" alternative to the observational command complexes of our tanks - yes, it seems to be quite acceptable. But for full-fledged firing from machine-gun and cannon weapons, two-plane stabilization is required, which simply cannot be provided in a manually moved device, and a laser rangefinder.

In fact, the only way out of this situation can be tank multi-channel panoramic sights / observation devices, which for many years have been considered an indispensable attribute of all modern foreign tanks. And they are not considered in vain.

T-72B1 "White Eagle". On the right, behind the gunner's hatch, a panoramic observation device is visible. Source: freemg.wiki
T-72B1 "White Eagle". On the right, behind the gunner's hatch, a panoramic observation device is visible. Source: freemg.wiki

The design of the tank "panorama" allows, without any "crutches" to combine in one system both the sighting channels - television and thermal imaging - and the laser rangefinder, and ensure the stabilization of all this, both vertically and horizontally, making the commander's field of view independent of turns turret and roll of the tank hull. And this already opens up opportunities for full-fledged firing from cannons and machine guns, as well as the use of automatic target tracking.

What positive changes such innovations will lead to - there is no need to say much.

Firstly, in addition to the ability to fire from a cannon and machine gun, the commander gets the maximum all-round view from the tank, which does not depend on weather conditions and time of day.

Secondly, the principle of the “hunter-shooter” operation is fully implemented, when the commander, having detected and identified the enemy, issues accurate target designation to the gunner, including due to automatic target tracking. All this greatly increases the combat effectiveness of the machine.

Upgraded T-72B3. In the middle, above the hatch for ejection of spent pallets, there is a panoramic observation device. Source: www.comgun.ru
Upgraded T-72B3. In the middle, above the hatch for ejection of spent pallets, there is a panoramic observation device. Source: www.comgun.ru

We have experience in using such components of a tank fire control system. There are many examples, since their carriers were not only piece copies in the form of the T-72B2 "Slingshot" or exhibition versions of the T-72B3, but also quite serial T-90M, which at the same time also take part in a special military operation in Ukraine. So here we can talk not only about field tests, but also completely combat tests, which only emphasize the need for a full-fledged sighting and observation system.

Tank T-90M. Behind the commander's hatch is a panoramic sight / observation device and a machine gun mount. Source: moddb.com
Tank T-90M. Behind the commander's hatch is a panoramic sight / observation device and a machine gun mount. Source: moddb.com

Yes, such systems are expensive. Very expensive, requiring intervention in the design of the tower. But this is not a newfangled toy, but a working tool that a tank needs, since a simple principle has long been in effect on the battlefield: whoever saw it first, fired first.

Our tank builders and senior military officials are well aware of this, so it remains to be hoped that multi-channel panoramic sights will not become the exclusive prerogative of the T-90M, but will also be included in the modernization kit for the T-72B3 and other vehicles.
68 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    28 September 2022 04: 11
    Yes, such systems are expensive. Very expensive, requiring intervention in the design of the tower. But this is not a newfangled toy, but a working tool that a tank needs, since a simple principle has long been in effect on the battlefield: whoever saw it first, fired first.

    Whenever I see all these bells and whistles (expensive) on a tank over armor, I have vague doubts that they are able to withstand small arms fire (caliber 7,62 mm and above) without losing their intended functions and characteristics.
    I don’t have the practice of modern combat, which is why I assume that:
    Our tank builders and senior military officials understand this very well, so it remains to be hoped

    hi
    1. +1
      28 September 2022 04: 29
      Quote: yuriy55
      I am tormented by vague doubts that they are able to withstand small arms fire (caliber 7,62 mm and above) without losing their intended functions and characteristics.

      12.7mm will already sweep away everything ... a matter of distance.
      1. -2
        28 September 2022 11: 18
        12.7mm will already sweep away everything ... a matter of distance.

        That's right, distances, because it is written:
        Thermal imager ..... at our Sosna-U sight, installed on the T-72B3 and T-80BVM, it reaches 5 kilometers.

        And 12,7 mm hits up to 2m.
        That is, the tank has about 2 km of head start to hit the machine gunner before he damages the sights of the tank.
        1. +1
          29 September 2022 12: 31
          There is another question to get from 2 km. While the machine gunner is trying, the tank will spot him and cover him with shrapnel. I think the tank has a handicap of 3,5 km.
        2. TIR
          +2
          29 September 2022 19: 43
          I would definitely not shoot a machine gun at a tank hoping to damage the equipment. You can't damage the gunner's day sight, but you'll give up your position. I don’t think that there are such daredevils to shoot at a tank from a rifle
        3. -1
          3 October 2022 13: 58
          This is if the machine gunner sits on the machine gun, and the machine gun is mounted on the table and is visible from all sides. And if the bastard machine gunner hides behind stealth, then he is a real bastard. Then they won’t see him from half a kilometer. And if they throw a grenade on the hatch of a tank, then don’t think about the bad at all, the tank will sit down, the grenade will fly past.
      2. +2
        28 September 2022 12: 50
        12.7mm will already sweep away everything ... a matter of distance.

        What to waste on trifles right away from 30mm 2A42
        I’ll open the secret of a 122mm HE shell that will blow everything off the grandmother, don’t go wink
    2. +5
      28 September 2022 04: 34
      Quote: yuriy55
      I am tormented by vague doubts that they are able to withstand small arms fire (caliber 7,62 mm and above)

      The sight / panorama has an armored tip, at least not inferior in durability to the protective glass of the sight. Agree that there is no point in piling up anti-shell armor in this case, the glass will still not withstand the projectile.
      The author’s question about equipping tanks is understandable, but let me remind you that even the United States and others began to equip commander’s devices with thermal imagers far from immediately and not so long ago. At first, only gunners' sights.
      1. +1
        28 September 2022 06: 39
        at least not inferior in durability to the protective glass of the sight
        .
        Where does this information come from?
        Armored glass must be 40 mm thick to equal the strength of 5 mm steel armor. Look at the cockpit of the fighter and evaluate the thickness of the front armored glass made of blocks. Moreover, a thermal imager requires germanium glass. There is no bulletproof glass on thermal imaging devices, otherwise they will not work .. On tanks of the past generation with simple optics, this problem was solved by quickly changing the optical head. That's why
        began to be used to suppress infantry positions

        The author is lying. Breaking an expensive thermal imager is easy. Therefore, normal designers separate the head parts of the devices, separately with a thermal imaging head and separately with simple optics, both of which are protected only by armored curtains. And use against infantry is difficult due to the enormous dimensions of the thermal imaging entrance window. From a kilometer distance, you won’t especially fight against infantry.
        1. -1
          28 September 2022 07: 24
          Quote: Konnick
          Where does this information come from?
          Armored glass must be 40 mm thick to equal the strength of 5 mm steel armor.
          Read your words, in your opinion, the armor of the head is inferior in terms of durability to glass. hi
          1. +1
            28 September 2022 10: 40
            The point is that the panorama on the T-90 is almost a quarter of the vertical projection of the tower, but hitting a bullet from a sniper rifle is heavier, that glass, that the head is unlikely to withstand. I'm already silent about the line of BMPs.
            1. 0
              28 September 2022 11: 28
              Quote: Dimax-Nemo
              The point is

              The point is that the head is in no way weaker than glass, especially if we assume that it does not have protective properties, which is not the case.
          2. +1
            28 September 2022 15: 17
            if it is a specially grown polymer, then yes it is inferior
            1. 0
              28 September 2022 15: 22
              Quote: xASPIDx
              if it is a specially grown polymer, then yes it is inferior

              Yeah, but Connick writes that there is no protective glass at all.
      2. +1
        28 September 2022 13: 24
        the tactics of using tanks differ from the author's vision
        tank T-72B3 on the defensive - a gunner's sector sight and several spare positions (caponiers) are enough
        tank T-72B3 in attack - at least a platoon of 3 tanks - each has its own sector of 35 degrees
        + turret rotation when searching for targets <15-25 degrees> = 105 degrees
        3 T-72B3 tanks x 105 degrees = 315 degrees with a front turn of 90 degrees
        + as NBO shows, informing tankers comes from:
        - UAV operators
        - second line: 2nd platoon 3 tanks T-72B3
        - command tank T-90AM with panorama
        - motorized rifles on infantry fighting vehicles are also big-eyed
        - observers from the forward positions of assault units, incl. and their UAVs
        1. 0
          29 September 2022 09: 04
          And it’s interesting about UAVs, this tactic of their use only recently dawned on the heads of our command, and where were they before and most importantly, and where did they spend the allocated money for the production of modern technology.
          1. 0
            29 September 2022 09: 10
            go to specialized resources and read about money yourself - no need for idle chatter - check out the facts yourself
            if you don't want - you can't - these are your personal difficulties - and your opinion
            which is of course very important.
            no access to the state defense order - to the secret - no license - SORRY
      3. 0
        30 September 2022 11: 36
        Why, there’s nothing there ... And for a long time ... Everywhere there are only thermal imagers wink
        1. 0
          30 September 2022 17: 27
          Quote: stankow
          Why, there’s nothing there ... And for a long time ... Everywhere there are only thermal imagers

          The commander's thermal imager appeared only on the Leopard-2A5 and Abrams M-1A2, if you know what I mean, although it's unlikely.
          1. +2
            30 September 2022 17: 53
            A small nuance.
            Abrams M1A2 went into mass production in 1992.
            Leopard 2A5 in 1995
            Let me remind you that it is now 2022 and that version of Abrams is already 30 years old. Naturally, these are already outdated modifications and several new upgrades have been made.
            That's just the T-72B3 / T-80BVM (still in production) is inferior to these old men and is comparable to the variants of Western tanks of the late 80s.
            Although there is a T-72 variant with a commander's panoramic sight, though for the Serbs, our tankers did not deserve it.
            1. -1
              30 September 2022 18: 53
              Quote from cold wind
              A small nuance.
              Abrams M1A2 went into mass production in 1992.
              Leopard 2A5 in 1995
              Let me remind you that it is now 2022 and that version of Abrams is already 30 years old.
              A nuance, of course, but firstly, this is not a modernization of tanks already released from storage, namely new (at that time) tanks with new turrets, etc. failure in the 90s Russia.
              Quote from cold wind
              That's just the T-72B3 / T-80BVM (still in production) is inferior to these old men and is comparable to the variants of Western tanks of the late 80s.
              It's a shame to confuse MANUFACTURED and UPGRADED cars. And it's a shame to forget about the T-90 of various modifications, which were produced when the T-72 and T-80 were in storage. Where is the money to take for everything at once, huh?
          2. +1
            30 September 2022 21: 17
            I understand, of course. I, maybe not very successfully, ironically those who call the West
      4. +1
        3 October 2022 14: 01
        There is no need to take an example from the USA. They deceive us all the time. They did not let their states fall apart, but we easily. If the presidents were with heads, then there would be no such turbidity at all and people would be people, not slaves.
    3. +6
      28 September 2022 11: 17
      Quote: yuriy55
      Whenever I see all these bells and whistles (expensive) on a tank over armor, I have vague doubts that they can withstand small arms fire

      Are you not tormented by doubts that a boxer enters the ring with unprotected eyes? After all, it can fly into his eye, and then he will not be able to see. The reality on the modern battlefield is this: who first saw the enemy, and first hit him, he most likely won. During the Second World War, by the way, German tankers did not shy away from leaning out of the tank turret to the waist in order to monitor the environment. Although it was also dangerous in terms of small arms.
    4. -2
      28 September 2022 11: 21
      T72 B3 is the most disgraceful and sloppy Russian tank.

      There is no panoramic multispectral gyro-stabilized observation device for the commander with the possibility of replacing the gunner's sight in case of damage.
      No instrumentation all-round observation for the driver.
      The crew during marches and during the search for the enemy in unfamiliar terrain is completely blind.

      No KAZ.

      No DZ from above - the results of the use of Javelins, Spikes and TOW (modification of B2 that strikes from above) can be found in free space.

      Settling and incomplete protection (DZ) of the frontal projection of the tower. Huge gaps between remote sensing modules. There is not only BOPS, but the cumulative is also assembled in diameter!

      Settling and insufficient protection of the side of the tank hull, including the area where the automatic launcher and the entire ammunition load is located.

      Slow speed in reverse gear, which is very necessary in urban battles, there is no point in commenting.
      1. +2
        28 September 2022 15: 13
        Quote: Bulgarian_5
        T72 B3 is the most disgraceful and sloppy Russian tank.

        Whether it's an advanced Bulgarian tank! What is it called by the way?
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +2
          28 September 2022 20: 53
          Why troll, and do not answer with real arguments on this topic?

          Theme for the T72 B3 tank, and its tech. parametr.
          If you have something to say to argumentsI'm ready to hear.
          1. +1
            29 September 2022 03: 31
            Quote: Bulgarian_5
            Theme for the T72 B3 tank, and its tech. parametr.
            If you have something to say with arguments, I'm ready to hear it.

            T72 B3 is budget and accelerated modernization old tank, if you don’t understand this, then you’re stupid, and if you understand but write this nonsense, then you are the troll.
            1. +1
              29 September 2022 11: 30
              Stop making excuses with the magic word 'budget' already
              If you compare other samples of your modern weapons, the same thing happens.

              Tank T72 B3 simply does not meet modern requirements.
              How else can you call it 'modernized'?
              If you are embarrassed to give money for good equipment, then think about the people who are dying, or better convert all T72 tanks to be unmanned and control them remotely. And people only after the battle will work on repair evacuation vehicles.

              The Ka 52 is the same: the helicopter is beautiful, but because it has a bad optical filling in the turret, the pilots will have to fly to an extremely low altitude and range in order to detect the enemy, and immediately fall into the MANPADS and cannon fire.
              The most striking example of a helicopter shot down near Gostomel.
              1. +1
                29 September 2022 16: 50
                Quote: Bulgarian_5
                The Ka 52 is the same: the helicopter is beautiful, but because it has poor optical filling in the turret, the pilots will have to fly at an extremely low altitude and range in order to detect the enemy

                The person who writes such nonsense about combat helicopters, in principle, understands nothing in military affairs!

                Quote: Bulgarian_5
                If you are embarrassed to give money for good equipment, then think about the people who are dying, or better convert all T72 tanks to be unmanned and control them remotely.
                Give advice to your warriors on how to make Bulgarian tanks even better. As dumb as the nonsense about helicopters.
              2. +1
                30 September 2022 14: 03
                I would really like to see Leopard and Abrams there. To what extent will they, having got there, meet "modern requirements".
                As for the Ka-52 near Gostomel, almost all MANPADS went into "milk" there. Because in addition to the Ka-52, another Mi-8 was shot down.
          2. +1
            4 October 2022 02: 11
            Quote: Bulgarian_5
            Why troll, and do not answer with real arguments on this topic?

            Theme for the T72 B3 tank, and its tech. parametr.
            If you have something to say to argumentsI'm ready to hear.


            Yes, you are completely right - this T72B3 tank is an unpleasantly smelling substance. This is the ugly brainchild of our Defense Ministry screaming about 85% of new weapons (more than in any other country in the world wassat ) multiplied by an unbearable passion for embezzlement, the greatest stupidity and outdatedness of decision-makers and general mutual responsibility. Rot.
            Over here recently, one old man argued with a smart look that everything turns out to be fine with first-aid kits, it’s just that a soldier needs to go to the hospital, and everything is fine with first-aid kits.
    5. 0
      4 October 2022 02: 00
      Quote: yuriy55
      Yes, such systems are expensive. Very expensive, requiring intervention in the design of the tower. But this is not a newfangled toy, but a working tool that a tank needs, since a simple principle has long been in effect on the battlefield: whoever saw it first, fired first.

      Whenever I see all these bells and whistles (expensive) on a tank over armor, I have vague doubts that they are able to withstand small arms fire (caliber 7,62 mm and above) without losing their intended functions and characteristics.
      I don’t have the practice of modern combat, which is why I assume that:
      Our tank builders and senior military officials understand this very well, so it remains to be hoped

      hi


      And how are you going to approach such a tank with a machine gun?
      A thermal imager is not just a necessary thing in modern warfare, it is a key element even for an infantryman, even for a tank, even for an airplane, even for a drone, even for an infantry fighting vehicle.
      Those with thermal imaging have a critical advantage over those without.
      We don’t have them / few / poor quality, 1 per company. We can now see the result.
      NATO members and Ukrainians are charged with them at the most do not indulge. Everyone understood everything about this 15 years ago, well, those who have brains, of course.
      And who does not think that since this device can be destroyed by an exact hit of a bullet, then it is not necessary to install it. Yes, I'll look at those brave and crazy who go on foot with a machine gun to the tank hung with sensors :) it's not even a suicide, it's some kind of pervert
  2. +3
    28 September 2022 04: 22
    I really want to have everything that is really necessary for the successful conduct of hostilities, because the most "expensive" is the crew!
  3. -1
    28 September 2022 04: 32
    It is necessary to add to the function of a panoramic thermal imager the possibility of additionally connecting a simple monitor and bring it to the post of commander ... business then ...
    I do this with a computer system unit when I need to work visually simultaneously with two or more programs.
    The military-industrial complex is slowly responding to the requests of the military ... has the bureaucracy overcome or what?
    1. -2
      28 September 2022 11: 05
      It is necessary to add to the function of a panoramic thermal imager the possibility of additionally connecting a simple monitor and bring it to the post of commander ... business then ...

      You need helmets with a screen, such as a multimedia one.
      1. +2
        28 September 2022 12: 43
        Quote: Konnick
        You need helmets with a screen, such as a multimedia one.

        And then we'll try to make war in this garbage ...))) Have you ever sat in tanks of the T-72/80/90 family? Such helmets, but alas, not for them. Here in the T-14 it would still be possible, but where are those T-14s?
        1. +1
          28 September 2022 21: 24
          Quote: Lech from Android.
          It is necessary to add to the function of a panoramic thermal imager the possibility of additionally connecting a simple monitor and bring it to the post of commander ... business then ...
          I wonder who else in the tank has a panorama besides the tank commander?
    2. +1
      28 September 2022 11: 25
      And who will pay 7 bucks for a 12 inch screen 480x720 pixels from aliexpress ??

      Deripaska and his friends?

      It's better to buy a house in Tyrol or somewhere in Switzerland, don't you think?
    3. +4
      28 September 2022 12: 47
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      The military-industrial complex is slowly responding to the requests of the military ... has the bureaucracy overcome or what?

      If a dog's tail is cut in parts, then you can receive money for each operation, as for a full-fledged operation ... And you want to cut it off right away ...
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      It is necessary to add to the function of a panoramic thermal imager the possibility of additionally connecting a simple monitor and bring it to the post of commander ... business then ...

      For a long time there have already been interface units and the so-called "commander control", it is not very difficult to quickly and efficiently make such a "Double", but it requires a strong will of military acceptance and timely provided technical requirements from the GABTU
  4. +1
    28 September 2022 05: 45
    Perhaps the "casket" opens very simply. The industry of the Russian Federation, so far, is not able to provide each tank with a double set of thermal vizls - the production capacity of the electronic element base is low. I am sure that there was a version of the tank with a double set.
    BUT, we must proceed from the realities of today. It's better that way than not at all.
    Let's hope for a revival of the past of electronic components. Moreover, there is information that this problem was identified by the GDP itself in the form of a national project.
    1. 0
      28 September 2022 21: 44
      Quote: bulava74
      Perhaps the "casket" opens very simply. The industry of the Russian Federation, so far, is not able to provide each tank with a double set of thermal vizls - the production capacity of the electronic element base is low .....
      Now the Army is supplied with T-90Ms that have it all. If the Moscow Region had a desire, then the T-72B3 would also have a panorama, especially since such an option was offered (since 2014)
  5. +3
    28 September 2022 06: 10
    Come on, on the T-72 it’s good that the gunner has a thermal imager. And what do you order the crew of the T-62 to do? Especially if the West decides that the Ukraine project deserves additional investment, and still supplies the Bandera regime with "Leopards" or even "Abrasha" in commercial volumes? These problems with a thermal imager will definitely not have, unless the crew changes equipment for lard and vodka.
  6. +2
    28 September 2022 06: 44
    I began to type comments ... and quit. Yes, there are thoughts. But it's not worth publishing them!) Because a good idea is realized in the West. But not with us. Crap...
  7. +1
    28 September 2022 08: 28
    The problem is relevant and, of course, it should be discussed, however, all technical solutions have been tested on the T-90M and, as we know from the results of its application in the NWO, they are effective. It's just time to move on to new tanks in the form of the T-90M and T-14, and gradually upgrade the old ones to the needs of foreign customers and sell them!
  8. +3
    28 September 2022 09: 41
    Based on the fact that the T72, T90 are relatives, it is necessary to launch the new T90M turret in series ... and put it under overhaul and modernization on all T72s that pass it.
  9. +1
    28 September 2022 10: 34
    As far as I remember, when thermal imagers first appeared on Western tanks, the commander had, at best, an "attachment" to the gunner's sight.
  10. +2
    28 September 2022 10: 41
    And are we the only ones? Vaughn I once watched a French war film, where there was one steering wheel for two! And nothing ... managed! (It remains to try to laugh when you want to cry!)
  11. +3
    28 September 2022 10: 45
    The Patriot Park was built, a temple was built with it, a tank biathlon was held, air parades of super-maneuverable aircraft were shown ... But it’s not enough for you. I do not deny that there are some shortcomings in our work. Let's fix it.
  12. 0
    28 September 2022 12: 09
    There are many examples, since their carriers were not only piece copies in the form of the T-72B2 "Slingshot" or exhibition versions of the T-72B3, but also quite serial T-90M, which at the same time also take part in a special military operation in Ukraine.
    And about the BMPT, why did they forget?
  13. 0
    28 September 2022 17: 09
    In my opinion, there is no need to fence a palisade on a tank tower at the present time. Information from the gunner's thermal imager is enough. And to get a panorama of the battlefield, it is necessary to introduce a reconnaissance vehicle armed with a drone into the armored group, transmit information from this vehicle to all commanders of the armored group. Accordingly, this vehicle enters into direct fire contact with the enemy in the most extreme case, as a reserve.
    Well, what about the "Bulgarian" and individuals who spray poison on Russian (Soviet) tanks, on the Patriot park, the temple of the Armed Forces, on tank biathlon, what can I say? Even if there is a grain of truth in your slander, the shooting of burning Abrams and leoperds will be all the more spectacular. This hour will come.
    1. 0
      28 September 2022 21: 56
      Quote: Batting
      Information from the gunner's thermal imager is enough ....
      Well, yes, of course ... The commander must see the whole situation around the tank, and set tasks, like a mechanic, to the driver, who does not see very much in his triplex, and even then only in front of the tank itself, look for targets for the gunner, and at the same time, look out for threats to the tank itself and select options on how to avoid the defeat of your tank and the destruction of the enemy.
      And you propose to receive information about all this through the gunner's sight?
    2. +2
      29 September 2022 00: 12
      As a guide, I disagree. The viewing angle is small, the side of the tank becomes blind. On a clear day, I did not see a green target in the field without a meticulous inspection, I wanted to lean out of the hatch, but this is strictly prohibited in the shooting task. And as a gunner, I would rather give this thermal imager to the commander in order to be sure that he will quickly detect the target and guide the gunner, and you can even get there without a thermal imager.
  14. +1
    28 September 2022 19: 21
    Kind article. The arguments are well chosen.
  15. +2
    28 September 2022 21: 25
    As practice shows, the most expensive and hard-to-replace component of a modern MBT is its trained crew.
    So saving "on matches" is indeed fraught.

    A modern tank is required to provide all working tools for each crew member.
  16. 0
    28 September 2022 21: 55
    Quote: Bulgarian_5
    Why troll, and do not answer with real arguments on this topic?

    Theme for the T72 B3 tank, and its tech. parametr.
    If you have something to say to argumentsI'm ready to hear.

    Even when you pretended that "ours" and "brothers" no one would have answered such statements, and even more so now that you have sold all the good that was now in the camp of the enemy. You yourself have arguments at the level of the artist who painted the tanks on the poster.
  17. +1
    29 September 2022 08: 42
    There is a tanker man who makes reviews of tanks on YouTube right on the front line and he believes that an adequate modernization is the t-90m, and the 72b3 is a smoker's tank for cutting the dough, the layout is so bluntly made there that there is nowhere to sit, the devices cover each other, overlap VLD armor is not complete, etc., etc. For good, all 72 b3 should have looked like t90m if done wisely
    1. 0
      13 November 2022 20: 17
      Then you need to install a welded tower. On a cast hemispherical one, you can’t put a remote sensing properly (although it could have been better than it is).
      Or put a casing with straight, even edges on top of the cast tower, and everything else is already on it.
  18. 0
    29 September 2022 19: 47
    And here is a remark about "Yes, such systems are expensive. Very expensive." Of course, it would be interesting to know how much this all pulls for the state per car and how much margin is laid down by manufacturers. But it is strange that a more tenacious and cheaper solution is not provided, for example, for street fighting or in forest conditions, where a 5 km range of a thermal imager is not needed, but a constant 360-degree view is important, and a reserve in case of destruction of the TKN. A microballometer chip with a resolution of 640x480 pixels costs $25. Thermal imaging modules the size of a matchbox with interfacing with a telephone are widespread and already cost 10-18 thousand rubles in a store (for example, Flir-1, -2, etc.). Why not make a magnetic thermal imaging module (can be mounted anywhere on the body of the equipment), the video stream of 1-4 such modules can be transmitted (as an option) via high-speed Bt5.0 (well, or there are a dozen options) directly to a simple monitor with a quad, like for the commander and for the driver. Here's a real-time 360-degree view for you. A destroyed module is generally easy to replace (you can store a couple of spare ones already connected inside the tank). Such a kit can be made 100% and it will cost not 1 million rubles, but cheaper. I'm not a tanker, and don't judge strictly, it's just that such a decision is obvious.
  19. +1
    29 September 2022 23: 05
    If Stalin had lived for another 5 years, then Soviet tanks would have been flying during this time.
  20. 0
    30 September 2022 09: 09
    This is from the series: "They gave everyone boots, they didn't give me boots, give me boots." And the driver also needs a thermal imager. And to everyone on a headset: how to go to the toilet at night.
  21. -1
    3 October 2022 10: 24
    The answer is very simple ~$30.000 for a thermal imager and ~$150.000 for the Arena from each tank for the sake of "meat" - it's just a pity to spend it, but for the sake of your loved ones, cottages and golden chests - you can do everything and save on everything. By the way, yesterday I watched a night vision device 20.000 rubles. worth, thermal imager 160.000 rubles. - but in the "great army" there is simply no such huge money to arm the soldiers ... The comment is my personal opinion ...
  22. 0
    3 October 2022 11: 16
    Good article. On business.
    I, comrades, confess, starting to read, for some time now, I scroll to the end and see who wrote.
    There are authors here on VO ... However, this is not relevant.
  23. 0
    3 October 2022 13: 49
    During the war, when a new tank was created for the Red Army, Stalin took off his overcoat and crawled inside. Then he got out of there and say that this tank is better than the previous one? Let's read what they write to us from the front.
  24. 0
    6 October 2022 01: 05
    1. expensive - up to 25% of the cost of the tank
    2. it is not clear what is with bullet resistance
  25. 0
    28 October 2022 17: 26
    In my opinion, the problem is not only in the observation devices, although this is a priority.
    Look at the dynamic protection on the tower., Such a gap could come up with either a fool_k or an enemy
  26. 0
    13 November 2022 20: 12
    Quote: Bulgarian_5
    T72 B3 is the most disgraceful and sloppy Russian tank.
    No DZ from above - the results of the use of Javelins, Spikes and TOW (modification of B2 that strikes from above) can be found in free space.

    Nobody denies the shortcomings of the T-72B3. It is disgusting to look at the installation of DZ blocks on the forehead of the tower.
    But as for the Javelins and other "roof-breakers" .............. And what, does Abrams or Leopard have a good DZ from above ????????????????
  27. 0
    8 December 2022 15: 10
    Expensive pleasure .. And skirts and all sorts of games were kept at the expense of what you think. And such systems are successfully installed on machines of the T-72 series .... French are huge .. And Belarusian are normal. The quality of the matrix is ​​\u200b\u4ba little weaker, but they are not afraid of sub-zero temperatures, like the same French ones ... which were installed on our cars in the amount of 6 pieces ..... and just crumbled ... Here was such a modernization ..... In this case, the Sashists achieved good results both in size and in reliability .... The Germans are also not bad, but requiring careful attitude and constant routine maintenance ... however, like the French ones ... And this is combat readiness. So, for example, before going to firing, preparing the weapon system on French Leclercs takes XNUMX hours of time ... This is according to the standards .. And in real field conditions, preparing these machines for battle with it takes up to XNUMX hours. Although the article correctly noted that the main thing is to be the first to detect and be the first to hit from the first shot at maximum range. But alas, as noted above .... Shoigu was not up to it ...