How ours protect armored vehicles in a special operation: rubble, "visors" and other handicrafts
What a sin to conceal. There is an opinion among our people that the widespread use of handicraft protection of equipment is an indicator of the technological backwardness of the army of the belligerent. They say that the level of booking cars no longer corresponds to modern threats, which is why they hang sandbags on them, weld steel sheets, gratings, and so on. You don’t have to look far for an example: the same Syrian war clearly showed how the military tried to protect their obsolete Tanks, building entire "armored sheds".
But there is another aspect here as well. And it is simple: the desire to survive. No matter how modern the equipment is, the crews will still try to strengthen its armor with all available means in order to increase both combat effectiveness and their own chances of survival. So it was and so it will always be. And the Russian army, together with allied forces in a special military operation in Ukraine, is no exception.
There will be little text, but more photos.
"Visors" on the towers from the "Javelins"
Self-propelled artillery mount "Msta-S", which became a trophy for the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The roof of the car is equipped with a "visor". Its anti-cumulative value is doubtful, but its camouflage value may very well be.
In general, of course, "visors" have already become one of the symbols of the special military operation in Ukraine. And, although they were seen on Russian tanks long before February 24, such shielding became widespread already during the hostilities. Moreover, their quality literally varies from quite factory to fierce handicraft in the style of "they tore off the chain-link from the fence and welded it on."
An example of extremely poor-quality manufacturing of the "visor". They did it according to the principle, as they say, "blinded from what was."
They put "visors" on virtually everything to which they can be welded. These are, in fact, the tanks themselves, and self-propelled guns, armored personnel carriers and even transport vehicles such as MT-LB and others. However, the practical value of this protection has long been in question. Of course, they can save from anti-tank submunitions of cluster shells or mortar shelling, but hardly from the Javelin.
Many T-62Ms also received "visors".
It is known that the penetration of a cumulative projectile even increases when detonated at a distance from the armor. Of course, this distance is in the range of 5–6 charge calibers, after which the armor penetration characteristics begin to drop sharply. However, in order to contain the tandem warhead of an American missile, the distance between the "visor" and the thin roof of the tank's turret must be very large, and this already affects its stability and tendency to "hook" on any obstacles.
Light tracked vehicles are also not without the opportunity to have a second roof. Example: MT-LB.
Yes, and there are also operational moments: the inconvenience of loading ammunition, reduced visibility from the tank, limiting the aiming of a heavy machine gun, and so on. But, whatever one may say, there is a benefit from the second roof, as already mentioned above.
Self-propelled artillery installation "Acacia". Here, the screens in the upper hemisphere are already working as a frame for installing a camouflage net, which, given the abundance of enemy UAVs in the sky, is far from unreasonable.
Experiments with dynamic protection
Tank T-64A of the allied forces. This car, in principle, was not supposed to have dynamic protection according to the state, but it was definitely required. Yes, it was made handicraft and without corresponding structures on the tower, but at least that's how it was.
It just so happened that dynamic protection (DZ) is revered in our country as the most effective means against cumulative ammunition - well, a pure panacea in its natural form. It sometimes comes to the point that it is handicraft installed on light equipment such as infantry fighting vehicles or armored personnel carriers. This should not be done, because not only will it not protect against any anti-tank grenade, but it will also break through thin armor with its own explosion. And the gaps there are formed really huge: a width of 18-20 centimeters and above. So, in addition to the cumulative jet, the crew and troops will also receive a hail of fragments from the armored hull.
"Seventytwo" with a palisade of dynamic protection. Handicraftsmen tried to block the weakened zones of the tower with Contact blocks. Looks pretty monster. On the "wings" (above the guide wheels), "Contact" blocks are also visible. A similar solution is already being practiced in the serial version on the T-90M, since this is a vulnerable area, both for the chassis and for the side of the tank hull.
As for the installation of additional dynamic protection on tanks, this is categorically welcomed. Let's be honest, the standard sets of reactive armor on our heavy combat vehicles do not cover all projections, so there are plenty of bare spots. So the tanks, non-standard hung with the treasured "bricks" - it's understandable. In addition, in the ranks of the allied forces there are pieces of equipment that are not supposed to have dynamic protection according to the state, but are very necessary.
Another quite decent attempt to block the weakened zones of the tower with dynamic protection blocks.
T-80BVK, which, apparently, came as a trophy of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Turret blocks from Kontakt-5 were added to the regular "Contact" on the tank.
Screens
T-72B3 model 2016. Here, as they say, "combo". Shielding bags, "burdocks" made of rubber on the DZ tower blocks and "Contact" hanging on them.
Shielding the armor of tanks using artisanal methods is an attribute of almost all wars where these same tanks were used and are being used. Sandbags, gratings, steel sheets, and even stones in metal baskets are far from a complete list of artisanal modifications. However, to date, the characteristics of the armor penetration of anti-tank weapons are such that no reasonable (if you do not take into account the “armored sheds” from Syria) shielding, with the exception of properly made grates against PG-7 grenades, will not really add protection. So all these "burdocks" on the towers, stones and other things against powerful projectiles are rather moral support.
T-72B3 with rubble in baskets and bags in the frontal projection.
T-72B with additional blocks of dynamic protection "Contact". Visible "burdocks" (screens) of rubber sheets on the tower blocks "Contact-5".
Here, the "burdocks" on the tower blocks of dynamic protection, apparently, are already metal.
But light equipment in the face of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers will obviously not interfere with steel screens. No, we are not talking about anti-cumulative resistance. Everything is much simpler: to increase the bullet resistance of their armor and provide protection from machine guns in side projections, including large-caliber ones. For the BMP-3, for example, things are easier with this, but our armored personnel carriers with such a rifle weapons "friends" are very reluctant.
APC with additional steel plates. Of course, this will not save you from armor-piercing bullets of 12,7 mm and 14,5 mm caliber, but it can provide protection from 7,62-mm "armor-piercing" bullets.
BMP-2 with caterpillar tracks on the hull and turret.
Conclusions
Of course, the options for handicraft modernization of equipment presented in this material are the minimum of this motley company. However, even such a meager list provides food for thought.
Firstly, handicraft is really not going anywhere under any circumstances. Rest assured, tankers will massively transfer to the T-14 "Armata" - and they will hang it with something. This is not some kind of "mania" and stupidity, but the result of practice on the battlefield. Therefore, the military, working with equipment, must have a thorough knowledge of the operation of one or another type of shells in order to more effectively organize protection from improvised means (the phrase, of course, is terrible, but these are the realities), so as not to have a false sense of security, sitting behind self-made dilapidated screens rubber or metal.
Secondly, it is time for our Ministry of Defense to finally pay attention to the current situation. All these field refinements of technology are not born in a vacuum.
Information