Military Review

The troops receive new T-72B3: the problems of dynamic protection have somehow begun to be solved

108
The troops receive new T-72B3: the problems of dynamic protection have somehow begun to be solved

Not so long ago, photos of modernized vehicles loaded onto railway platforms appeared on the net. tanks T-72B3, which are less and less reminiscent of the original version of this machine in 2011. And, as is clear from the title, and from the pictures themselves, too, a characteristic feature of the new "Be-Three" was the total body kit of their hulls and towers with dynamic protection.


It’s better not to even talk about how long the discussions about the far from ideal location of “reactive armor” on tanks last. Let's just say: finally, at least some progress in this matter began to appear. Yes, without the “Relic” that has become a byword, and not without controversial decisions. But already something. However, let's get to the point.

Still, the experience of "Slingshot" and T-90M would be useful


First of all, I would like to note that in this material there is no talk of any discrediting of tank builders. The fact that our manufacturers were able to establish a stable production of the same modernized T-72B3 and T-90M is a big plus, respect and respect. This is important, since NATO does not plan to reduce the volume of arms supplies to Ukraine. Including tanks, which, how we calculated, Europe has enough for 3-4 brigades. So what we need is not even parity, but superiority in quantity and quality. And we can achieve it. Not without cost, of course.

Now on to the case.

More than a month ago, a Vesti report was released on the federal channel from the workshops of Uralvagonzavod, where T-72B3 tanks being upgraded to the new standard got into the frame. They are made, if anything, from the T-72B / B1 - the most armored serial vehicles of the "seventy-two" family.

Upgraded T-72B3. Additional dynamic protection is clearly visible in the area of ​​​​the machine gun embrasure and the gun mantlet. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru
Upgraded T-72B3. The additional dynamic protection in the area of ​​the machine gun embrasure and the gun mantlet is clearly visible. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

Quickly scattered across thematic forums, the screenshots of this video caused a lot of questions from the public interested in armored vehicles. Chief among them: the forehead of the tank did not receive the coveted dynamic protection "Relic". Here, of course, there is a double-edged sword, since the regular "Contact-5" in many cases, specifically in the NWO zone, is quite enough, and just the less protected projections - sides, feed and, if possible, the roof - require more protection. But the rejection of a more modern "reactive armor" complex, especially when the same T-80BVM is fully equipped with it, looks strange. Still, a more favorable overlap of the forehead of the tower and increased security are also needed by the “seventy-two”, and the “Relic” itself has already been tested on the T-72B2 “Slingshot” - if you wish, it is quite possible to install.

Anti-cumulative mesh screen in the front of the upgraded T-72B3. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru
Anti-cumulative mesh screen in the front of the upgraded T-72B3. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

But changes in the set of dynamic protection for the tower still took place. And it's not just about anti-cumulative nets a la T-90M. As you can see, the right "cheekbone" of the tower received a reduced DZ block in the area of ​​​​the embrasure for a machine gun. But this was not the end of the matter.

One of the weakest zones in the frontal projection of the tank is the gun mantlet area. Combined booking is almost completely absent there, and the thickness of the steel mass cannot give any kind of direct confident protection against cumulative weapons. And here the same "Relic" would have looked a little more profitable, but for lack of fish and cancer - a fish, as they say.

To increase the security of this zone, DZ "Contact" blocks were installed to the right and left of the gun (parallel to its axis). Considering that the projectiles in the blocks are both at an angle and horizontally, this "hole" in the turret armor is partially blocked.

Additional dynamic protection in the area of ​​the gun mantlet. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru
Additional dynamic protection in the area of ​​the gun mantlet. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

However, here the experience of installing a "beak" on a gun like the T-90M would be useful. At the very least, dynamic protection in it can be installed more rationally, and it would also be mobile - it would rise and fall along with the gun.

"Beak" in the area of ​​​​the mask of the gun of the T-90M tank. Source: sibnarkomat.livejournal.com
"Beak" in the area of ​​​​the mask of the gun of the T-90M tank. Source: sibnarkomat.livejournal.com

By the way, above the cannon, already on the roof of the tower, a number of Contact blocks were also installed. It's the right thing, but then again, why "Contact"? Something fresher.

Boards, feed and more


Turning to the topic of the protection of the sides and other weakened projections of the updated T-72B3, it is necessary to dwell on dynamic protection in the area of ​​fenders and sloths. In fact, the issue of providing at least some kind of anti-cumulative resistance of this zone has been hanging for a very long time - since the days of the Soviet Union.

In this place, a combat vehicle, even one equipped with reactive armor, is what is called a “passage yard”. Getting into the sloth area in the heading angles of the tank maneuvering, the cumulative projectile (and the sub-caliber, in fact, too) encounters practically no resistance - at most the caterpillar itself and the sloth, and this is at best. And then a completely open side, the thickness of which for a cumulative jet, albeit passing at a certain angle, is not very significant.

Until recently, this problem at the level of mass production was not solved at all, therefore, even in the zone of the special military operation in Ukraine, handicraftsmen are trying to get rid of this flaw on their own, “sculpting”, for example, the same “Contact”.

Handicraft modified "seventy-two" with dynamic protection over sloths. Source: topwar.ru
Handicraft modified "seventy-two" with dynamic protection over sloths. Source: topwar.ru

For the first time, standardly installed dynamic protection (in the series, of course) for these weakened zones appeared on the T-90M, and now it has also migrated to the new T-72B3. Well, it remains only to express gratitude to the teams of the Research Institute of Steel, Uralvagonzavod and all those involved who paid attention to this aspect.

Dynamic protection in the fender and sloth area on the updated T-72B3. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru
Dynamic protection in the fender and sloth area on the updated T-72B3. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

Well, as for the rest of the sides of the tank hull, then, as we can see, the dynamic protection units are attached almost along the entire length to the very stern. Earlier, we recall, in the area of ​​\u7b\u50bthe engine compartment, the sides were protected exclusively by anti-cumulative lattice screens. At the same time, it must be understood that the main purpose of the gratings is protection against anti-tank grenades of the PG-XNUMX type, which with a probability of about XNUMX% can be neutralized without detonation by these very gratings. In all other cases, the screens work like platoon ones and do not really provide any security.

Overlapping of the board with dynamic protection along its entire length. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru
Overlapping of the board with dynamic protection along its entire length. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

Replacing lattice screens with dynamic protection is the right decision. In heading maneuvering angles, this looks much more useful. It remains to be hoped that, in addition to this, the vehicles along the entire length of the sides will be equipped with dynamic protection in a soft case - the very “bags” or “backpacks” that have already become an indispensable attribute of the T-72B3, T-80BVM and T-90M. These gizmos are designed to counter HEAT munitions when fired into the side at a right (or so) angle and can, according to various estimates, give the equivalent of 600-700 mm from HEAT jets. At the same time, the presence of regular on-board dynamic protection increases these indicators even more.

But there are no changes with the stern of the hull - the lattice screen and the log are still the same.

The stern of the hull is practically unchanged - gratings and a log. Source: warfiles.ru
The stern of the hull is practically unchanged - gratings and a log. Source: warfiles.ru

As for the tower, there are fewer compromises there, at least because they decided to wrap the “head” with dynamic protection around. In the standard version of the T-72B3 model of 2016, the DZ, in addition to the forehead itself, was placed on the sides of the tower. These are the same rectangular steel boxes in which explosive projectiles were installed at some inclination from the vertical to provide protection when fired at a right (or so) angle, similar to a remote sensing weapon in a soft case.

Now these "boxes" cover not only the sides of the tower, but also its aft part. And, I must admit, the idea is useful. This is primarily a safer fire maneuver without exposing weak areas for the enemy. Although even in the case of a turret turned at 12 o'clock and direct shelling at its side or stern, such a remote sensing, for example, can completely protect against monoblock grenades.

The circular arrangement of dynamic protection on the tower of the updated T-72B3. Both standard "boxes" and "Contact" are visible in the area of ​​aerosol grenade launchers. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru
The circular arrangement of dynamic protection on the tower of the updated T-72B3. Both standard "boxes" and "Contact" are visible in the area of ​​aerosol grenade launchers. Source: otvaga2004.mybb.ru

You can also notice that the side of the T-72B3 turret at the location of the Tucha aerosol grenade launchers has also received reinforcement. True, no longer "boxes" with dynamic protection, but "Contact" blocks. The decision is explained simply - they did not increase the width of the tower.

Conclusions


In fact, innovations in new batches of T-72B3 are not limited to exclusively dynamic protection. For example, from what is visible from the outside, this is the mechanism for automatically opening the armored shutter of the Sosna-U sight, which until then was fastened exclusively with bolts and, accordingly, was opened manually. Also, the heads of some devices or antennas appeared on the tower, the purpose of which is still not really known.

In general, it is too early to talk about the full scope of modernization.

Dynamic protection, in contrast to the "internal", we see. Yes, "Relic" has not yet registered for "be-three", but let's hope that in the end it will still appear on these tanks.

As for the rest, with regard to protection in the area of ​​​​the gun mantlet, equipping the sides of the hull with DZ and the circular overlap of the tower with it, the steps are correct. Of course, not everything is perfect, but there are some thoughts that these events were done in an accelerated mode, so the ideas need to be insisted, go through all the bureaucratic obstacles and turn into a worthy product.

The only thing left to do is to wait, because the equipment does not show off at exhibitions, but participates in battles, therefore, the natural selection of all its improvements takes place in an accelerated mode.
Author:
108 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 28st region
    28st region 10 December 2022 04: 53
    +3
    I apologize for getting off topic, it is interesting. I want to know what kind of "accelerator" it worked on the MSTA, see 36 seconds

    https://ok.ru/video/4172479335040
    1. svp67
      svp67 10 December 2022 07: 46
      +18
      Quote: 28st region
      I apologize for getting off topic, it is interesting. I want to know what kind of "accelerator" it worked on the MSTA, see 36 seconds


      Auxiliary power plant GTA-18A.
      With a capacity of 16 kW, it was installed on the Msta-S self-propelled guns. It was chosen as the best option for a power unit due to its compactness and high power density. The energy consumption of the Msta is quite large (the mechanism for loading, turning and aiming the gun, the FCS, etc.). Preparation for firing and firing itself, as a rule, is carried out from closed positions, so it would be irrational to use the main engine for power supply.

      SAU "Msta-S". Starting the turbine of the auxiliary power unit. Fire exhaust visible.
      A good thing, it would not hurt to install it on our tanks during modernization
      1. 28st region
        28st region 10 December 2022 10: 35
        +6
        Quote: svp67
        Auxiliary power plant GTA-18A.

        That's what I meant, unusual. Thanks for the answer
      2. lucul
        lucul 10 December 2022 11: 19
        +11
        A good thing, it would not hurt to install it on our tanks during modernization

        Quite good.
        But let's remember that we were "rubbed" into our ears before the NWO, all sorts of God-chosen authorities here at VO Professors and Warriors Wow and other brethren.
        1 myth - T72B3 - frankly a garbage tank, without armor and KAZ (no, not so - without the great and mighty KAZ, the significance of which was extolled to the skies), roughly speaking a mass grave that any Javelin will destroy at once.
        If it’s Merkava’s business, wow, she would have crushed the T-72B3 in hundreds.)))
        But in fact - as the SVO T-72B3 showed, the tank is quite at the world level, it has good protection against most Western weapons.
        Myth 2 - MRAP and only MRAP will save our infantry on the battlefield. Mine protection was put at the forefront at the expense of patency.
        What do we see in SVO?
        All the vaunted Western MRAPs are sitting up to the glass in the mud, completely not fulfilling their functions. But all our equipment quite successfully overcomes the mud, successfully performing its functions.
        The only significant drawback of our technology - situational awareness on the battlefield leaves much to be desired - this is the number one priority for our modernization, and we need to work in this direction, everything else - the designer guessed almost correctly - turned out cheap and cheerful.
        1. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 10 December 2022 12: 19
          +14
          I disagree a little. Bushmasters and wolfhounds, along with native-made ukromashins, are used by Ukrainians. Only this week there was a video - they walk normally in the fields.

          Our tigers are actively using them on the front line - cars save the guys from mines, fragments and bullets. I have not seen typhoons in the photo for a month, but the patrols recently shone in the rear. One car was obviously from Lapua, or the larger it was processed, but the crew and the landing force were alive, and the sensible driver took the car out of the shelling. Our new Spartaks also worked in the mud. Not without loss, but they worked.

          So the question is how to apply it - MCI is not just mine protection, but also protection against land mines, ambush fire, and therefore from bullets and shrapnel. And this is just modern conditions. And the tank can get stuck in the mud - I saw a photo of how, on one of the roads of the enemy there, 64 climbed into the mud up the tower and stood up there.
          1. lucul
            lucul 10 December 2022 19: 14
            -4
            Only this week there was a video - they walk normally in the fields.

            Yeah, as the ground froze, they began to crawl, and a month ago - a bunch of videos where they all sit on their belly.
            1. Blackgrifon
              Blackgrifon 10 December 2022 23: 16
              +6
              I respect your opinion, but I do not agree with it - photos and videos of materials used by both Cossacks, Bushmasters, Humvees and our tigers are all "dirty" months to hell. Wolfshounds met. Actually, purely off-road armored cars - tigers and humvees - feel fine. And somewhere the goose does not pull out.
        2. svp67
          svp67 10 December 2022 13: 31
          +9
          Quote: lucul
          MRAP and only MRAP will save our infantry on the battlefield

          On the battlefield? Only people who do not understand why such machines were created can think so
          MRAP (mine resistant ambush protected - mine-resistant ambush-protected, that is, resistant to mine explosions and protected from ambush attacks) - wheeled armored vehicles with enhanced mine protection. By and large, these are "armored buses"
          Quote: lucul
          The only significant drawback of our technology is situational awareness on the battlefield leaves much to be desired

          Far from being the only one... Our light armored vehicles are obsolete long ago. Right now it is necessary to form test companies on new, experimental samples and send them to the NWO zone, let them show in real conditions what they are capable of and whether it is worth relying on them at all
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 10 December 2022 23: 20
            +2
            Quote: svp67
            By and large, these are "armored buses"

            They have already greatly evolved from the level of an armored car. In fact, this is already a light and massive armored personnel carrier. Another thing is that armored cars with a great emphasis on cross-country ability (tigers and the remaining lynxes) perform very well. But the pure mrap of the mid-10s - the wolfhound - is crawling and in its purest form it is an "armored bus".
          2. RVAPatriot
            RVAPatriot 10 December 2022 23: 53
            0
            For example, they sent it, they were destroyed in real conditions (the data was naturally not received), many of these samples should be sent to the front ???
          3. alexmach
            alexmach 11 December 2022 20: 31
            +1
            On the battlefield? Only people who do not understand why such machines were created can think so

            And here, at my leisure, I’m just trying to estimate the right amount of equipment by eye.
            Here mobilized 300 thousand. Let's say, strictly by eye, half of them will go to infantry units. How many light armored vehicles do they need? We divide 150 thousand by 8,5 and get 17,5 thousand light armored vehicles ... In my opinion, you can’t do without these MCIs of yours, and what’s more, the cheapest ones. And this is only one modest wave of mobilization.
        3. Old tanker
          Old tanker 10 December 2022 14: 02
          +10
          Well, yes, everyone is good according to your T-72B3. Only now, almost all of them were knocked out in the first six months. And at this stage, the most massive tank in the NWO is the T-80BV removed from storage. It’s good that under Shoigu they weren’t cut into needles. And they promptly abandoned the full transition to a single T-72B3 / T-90A. And now there would be nothing to fight on. I hope the situation will change with the new batches of T-90M and T-72B3 mod.2022.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach 11 December 2022 18: 06
            +3
            Only now, almost all of them were knocked out in the first six months

            All? One and a half thousand available? Something hard to believe to be honest.
          2. this
            this 30 January 2023 21: 51
            0
            Don't talk nonsense, it hurts. The tanks have a lousy motor resource, more than 90% of it is just equipment sent for repair. All these echelons of tanks are not due to destroyed, but simply broken and simply spent their motor resource.
        4. Mustached Kok
          Mustached Kok 10 December 2022 15: 09
          +8
          I hope you are not being disingenuous. Because the main reason why it was proposed to focus on Merkava was not in security (which he still has excellent). And because of the high chance of crew survival when hit. The difference between the Merkava and many other tanks (And our "T-s" and Abrams, etc.) is that in the event of a heavy hit, which puts the equipment out of action. The crew of the merkava has a better chance of survival due to internal protection and layout that is created with priority on the survival of the crew. Given the complexity of modern technology, it is more important to save the life of an experienced, and even a novice crew. So you can either give them a new one, but the crew is studying and gaining experience for several years.
          1. this
            this 30 January 2023 21: 53
            0
            Merkava 4 only had better, and even then it’s not accurate, the Jews quickly classified the losses in the second Lebanese when they went too fucked up.
        5. Belisarius
          Belisarius 10 December 2022 17: 54
          +3
          Quote: lucul
          But in fact - as shown by the SVO T-72B3, the tank is quite at the world level, it has good protection against most Western weapons

          Given the scale of the losses, which led to the fact that during the "SVO" the T-62 and T-72A will already be reactivated on a massive scale, and the main tank is now the T-80BV, such a message looks like an outright mockery.
          1. lucul
            lucul 10 December 2022 19: 12
            +7
            Considering the scale of losses, which led to the fact that during the "SVO" the T-62 will already be massively reactivated

            Do you have data on the scale of losses of the T-72B3 in order to assert this?
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 11 December 2022 21: 03
              0
              In addition, there were about 80 thousand T-3BVs in storage. Even if a significant part of them are not conditioned, they should not be removed from storage anyway.
              PS: they say about the T-62 that it was easiest to remove them from storage and put them into operation, but I’ll never know why they removed the T-72A from storage, to be honest.
          2. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 10 December 2022 23: 25
            +5
            Quote: Belisarius
            Given the scale of the losses, which led to the fact that during the "SVO" the T-62 and T-72A will already be reactivated on a massive scale, and the main tank is now the T-80BV, such a message looks like an outright mockery.

            You are greatly mistaken. T-62s went only to the part of the reservists and partly to the part of the NM. The "old" personnel both fought on standard equipment and are fighting. And the example of sending the T-27B3 mod 22 to the front already proves that your statement is erroneous - 72B was much smaller than 72A. Moreover, photo / video 62ek on LBS is minimal, but 72B3 and captured 64 are over the roof.
            And finally - what are you guided by? The statement of the pro-Western and absolutely false oryx and the British Institute, cat. at the end of the summer, they somehow issued a pearl that the Ukrainians lost "only 64 MBTs"? This is despite the fact that only near Mariupol and Kherson over a hundred 64 Ukrainians burned down or were abandoned.
            1. Belisarius
              Belisarius 11 December 2022 04: 07
              +3
              Quote: Blackgrifon
              You are strongly mistaken. T-62 went only to the part of the reservists and partly to the part of the NM

              My message is simple and corresponds to the reality given to us in sensations (at the same time it does not give out any extra information). It can be easily checked by anyone who simply has eyes (not to mention people who know how to use a search engine). In response, you wrote a bunch of theses that were not related at all to what I wrote, and besides, they were erroneous in themselves.
              1) The fact of where the T-62s go is in no way connected with the reality that they will be mass-produced and put into the troops.
              2) The fact of sending new tanks to the troops (which, of course, is good in itself) has nothing to do with the fact of large losses. This is from the category of elderberry in the garden, and Kyiv uncle.
              3) In one sentence with this, you have a completely surprising statement about the fact that B is less than A-nis. What is the connection here? And this is simply not true, before the SVO T-72 A, only one part was preserved in the troops (I won’t write which one). The main tank was B3, then B. But now there are more and more of them, since they are being reactivated.
              4) Just an analysis of the photo / saw clearly shows a significant change in the tank fleet, the percentage of T-72B3 has sharply decreased (although they, of course, remain), but the T-80BV has just as sharply increased. Plus, there were a variety of rarities.
              Quote: Blackgrifon
              And finally - what are you guided by? The statement of a pro-Western and absolutely false oryx

              Oryx, of course, is such and such, but he relies on video / photo. Empty words won't work. They really greatly underestimate dill losses, since real losses are always much greater than what they managed to photograph and post, but also since the first months there was an idiotic order not to post enemy equipment and corpses so as not to offend "respected negotiating partners". Yes, and there was nothing to remove it. Now, thank God, this is not the case, but from the first months of their losses there are few.
              So, according to the oryx, the T-72 BZ-422 tanks are irrevocable. Even if we consider that 30% is overstated due to Oryx's deceit, this is a lot. And that's just what there is a photo / video. And this is not all losses. Another thing is the reason - there is a huge percentage of abandoned tanks due to the enchanting conduct of the SVO as a whole.
              But still, against such a background, only a bot with a completely stupid training manual or a person who scoffs could argue about the world level of the T-72B3. As noted in the original post.
              1. Blackgrifon
                Blackgrifon 11 December 2022 13: 19
                +3
                Quote: Belisarius
                given to us in sensations (at the same time it does not give out any unnecessary information

                Correction - your feelings.

                Quote: Belisarius
                ) The fact of where the T-62s go is in no way connected with the reality that they will be mass-produced and put into the troops.

                Connected because you said "the T-62 and T-72A will already be re-opened on a massive scale." At the same time, he omitted that the T-62 was officially listed as a mobilization tank all these years. The T-62 is not supplied to the personnel units of the RF Armed Forces. Those. Army men still ride 72s and 80s. And, accordingly, the chain "great losses of T-72 = deliveries of T-62" is false. Moreover, we recall what army has been built over the past 15 years - not "professional and draft", but "small and contract", i.e. in fact, none of the 72B3s went into reserve.

                Rumors about the T-72A were born from the same train from the Republic of Belarus.

                Quote: Belisarius
                The fact that new tanks were sent to the troops (which, of course, is good in itself) has nothing to do with the fact of large losses. This is from the category of elderberry in the garden, and Kyiv uncle.

                So after all, you, dear, declare that the T-72A will be reactivated due to heavy losses, and even this article directly shows the result of the modernization of the T-72B.
                Although, following your statement, just 72A should be upgraded. At the same time, the T-72B in warehouses was generally several times smaller than the T-72A. Moreover, earlier there were rumors that even before the SVO, all 3Bs were raked out for modernization in B72. 72A from that very "unnamed unit", fortunately, did not go to the front.

                Quote: Belisarius
                The main tank was B3, then B. But now there are more and more of them, since they are being reactivated.

                The main ones were B3 and B. Although Bashki, even before the SVO, as part of the modernization, they raked out from everywhere for overhaul and refinement to B3. And in the photo / video, I personally see B3 more often, and not Bashki.
                Quote: Belisarius
                Oryx, of course, is such and such, but it relies on video / photo.

                How the oryx "relies" on the photo, I have already come across more than once - it's better to dig into the English version of lostarmore - there the infa is a little different and the breakdown is much more objective in terms of type.

                Quote: Belisarius
                that's a lot

                Undoubtedly. Only the conflict has not been local for a long time. And a complete one.

                Quote: Belisarius
                an idiotic order not to lay out enemy equipment and corpses so as not to offend "respected negotiating partners."

                Well, yes. I agree.

                Quote: Belisarius
                about the world level of the T-72B3 could only be a bot with a completely stupid training manual or a person who scoffs.

                IMHO in the world it will only be with KAZ or with a fighting compartment and a body kit from the T-90M. But already in this state, in terms of security, it should surpass the most massive current serial modifications of the leopard (but not the abrams).
              2. this
                this 30 January 2023 21: 55
                0
                Comrade, didn’t you think that the tank seemed to be breaking down and it had a short motor resource and they wouldn’t even drive it to its limit, but they would send it to the factory earlier.
            2. Vashek
              Vashek 11 December 2022 09: 15
              0
              Before my eyes, 90 new T-4000s were dismantled in the 72s. Mileage 300 km. Staff members watched as they cut a hole in the hull and cut the barrel in half. The shiny new gears of the boxes were piled onto trailers and taken to Finca. And now here is the T-62.
        6. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 10 December 2022 23: 28
          +4
          "which any Javelin will destroy at once." ///
          ----
          Javelin equally easily disables both T-72 and T-90.
          It does not always destroy, but breaking through the tower provides.
          If there is no detonation of charges from splashes of the cumm jet,
          then the tank can be returned to service after repair.
        7. Sebostyuan
          Sebostyuan 11 December 2022 19: 26
          0
          For being active. Ate to expose myths, then what about the ability of equipment to swim and land to the detriment of armor. Your opinion?
      3. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 10 December 2022 11: 46
        +8
        Quote: svp67
        it would not hurt to install it on our tanks during modernization
        If they put it, then most likely, the same APUs as on the T-90M, they are with a piston engine, much cheaper than a turbine.
        1. svp67
          svp67 10 December 2022 14: 02
          +7
          Quote: Bad_gr
          If they put it, then most likely, the same APUs as on the T-90M, they are with a piston engine, much cheaper than a turbine.

          That cannot but cause some pity.
          The T-90MS is equipped with a DGU7-27 with a capacity of 7 kW based on a single-cylinder diesel engine. Unit weight - 125 kg, excluding a separate control panel. The declared working resource of work is 4000 hours.

          The DEA-72T installation is placed on the T-10. It weighs about 280 kg (including the armored hull) and produces up to 8 kW of power.


          The units are large and heavy due to the presence of a cooling system. From here "-" require heating, before starting, in cold weather.
          Now let's compare.
          The T-80U is equipped with a GTA-18A installation, which combines a turbo engine and a DC generator and is used to start the main engine (starter) and to provide the tank with electricity when the main engine is turned off. This unit has a power of 18 kW, the weight of the turbo engine with a gearbox is about 40 kg, the length is about 40 cm. It runs on diesel fuel, it can also use gasoline and kerosene.


          Stronger, smaller and lighter. One problem - the price, it is more expensive. But if it were unified with what is installed on the same "MSTA", the price could be reduced.
          By the way, the T14 "Armata" of the Armed Forces of Ukraine still has a GT
          1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
            Kote Pan Kokhanka 10 December 2022 17: 40
            +2
            The turbine will always "eat" more fuel than the "ICE". It is necessary to calculate very precisely what is better for a light, but more voracious turbine or a heavy, but economical "diesel".
          2. Eug
            Eug 11 December 2022 19: 08
            +1
            Damn, but to make a single sample of the Auxiliary Control System for all armored vehicles and not only? It doesn’t fit in my head, pure sabotage ...
            1. alexmach
              alexmach 11 December 2022 22: 09
              0
              Damn, if they installed at least some kind of Auxiliary control system, it would already be good. Neither the T-72B3 nor the T-80BVM have them. There are none at all, not exactly the same.
      4. SincerityX
        SincerityX 15 December 2022 16: 38
        0
        A good thing, it would not hurt to install it on our tanks during modernization

        I'm not sure that this is a good idea, the APU has a rather powerful thermal footprint of 20 meters, and you can't do without a system for suppressing this trail. Another thing is if you use it somewhere in the rear, for some other needs. But there, as a rule, there are rear services. Yes, and for the operation of any turboshaft engine you need fuel, a lot of fuel.
        1. svp67
          svp67 15 December 2022 16: 46
          0
          Quote from SincerityX
          the APU has a fairly powerful thermal footprint of 2 meters

          This is just not a big problem, the "heat" goes away from the combat vehicle, so let it catch it
          1. SincerityX
            SincerityX 16 December 2022 08: 08
            0
            This is just not a big problem, the "heat" goes away from the combat vehicle, so let it catch it

            No, I'm not talking about heat-contrast homing, I'm talking about the unmasking factor. Such nonsense is visible for many hundreds of meters, even for kilometers, it will not be possible to disguise positions, artillery will instantly fly there.
            1. svp67
              svp67 16 December 2022 08: 15
              0
              Quote from SincerityX
              Such nonsense is visible for many hundreds of meters, even for kilometers, it will not be possible to disguise positions, artillery will instantly fly there.

              Yes, you can, with the help of a diffuser, but the same problem applies to the tank in general, especially when using the main engine. Otherwise, there is no way to solve the problem of power supply to numerous tank systems
              1. SincerityX
                SincerityX 16 December 2022 13: 16
                +1
                The diffuser is also not omnipotent, it has boundaries, although if you scatter it in all directions to heat as large an area as possible, then it will turn out to be a plus - a heat-contrasting homing head will go to smoke.
  2. voice of reason
    voice of reason 10 December 2022 05: 11
    +1
    Mass war has its own laws. I myself, to confess, believed that the era of manned ground armored vehicles was a thing of the past. indeed, if there are reliable control channels for high-speed aerial drones, fit into a small body, why not tanks go in the same direction. And the first steps in this direction were saddled by all tank-building powers, in the form of the creation of uninhabited towers. However, large-scale hostilities have their own laws. The economy loves cheap mass simple solutions. So, apparently, NWO is the swan song of tanks. So already on the battlefield there are too many means of defeating and incapacitating them. From the notorious "roof-breakers" to banal mines. But while still a modern tank, it remains a terrible weapon of war. The shots of the tank cannon not only concuss the allied soldiers around, but have shown their incredible effectiveness. and in the NWO I note the emergence of a new tactic of use. Tanks no longer climb forward in the notorious rhombus and do not move across the field in even ranks. They sneak around the forest regiments and settlements in cooperation with the infantry covering them. Small groups of two or three cars. They strike and immediately change their location. And also very interesting is the new tactic in the form of shooting "at howitzer" from a closed position to aim an air drone, for example ...
    1. Edward Perov
      10 December 2022 05: 29
      +19
      Mass war has its own laws. I myself, to confess, believed that the era of manned ground armored vehicles is a thing of the past

      I will say this about unmanned tanks.

      In order to provide communication with an unmanned vehicle for many kilometers with its control, only satellite communications or loitering repeaters are needed. While normal radio communication between neighboring units can not always be provided in urban areas or in hilly areas. What are the options for management?

      And if the control of tanks can be provided at a distance, how will motorized infantry and other units interact with them? They will also need a separate and at the same time integrated communication channel with operators. Problems again.

      So far, all unmanned tank concepts are projects completely divorced from reality. And that's not all the problems. Unmanned tanks will not replace ordinary ones for another 50 years offhand.

      So far, the introduction of unmanned tanks looks something like this. The only shop in the village for 5000 residents has received a terminal for contactless payment for purchases. New, fashionable, youthful, but 98% of the village remained hungry. Technologies are needed, but all village grandmothers need to bring cards with contactless payment - in this case, upgrade the entire army to a drone and communication standards.
      1. Stas157
        Stas157 10 December 2022 05: 59
        +1
        Quote: Eduard Perov
        In order to provide communication with an unmanned vehicle on 100-200 km with its management, you need

        And if you control an unmanned tank from a nearby vehicle (tank or BMP Kurganets), for example!
        1. Edward Perov
          10 December 2022 06: 11
          +6
          And if you control an unmanned tank from a nearby vehicle (tank or BMP Kurganets), for example!


          Then the tanks lose their advantage in the form of separately operating units in subunits. What is the point in a company of unmanned tanks conditional if it is accompanied by a "detachment" of operators a few kilometers away, which not only can get under attack, but also from the ground will not provide a normal communication distance again due to the landscape and buildings. An increase in staff and nothing more.

          In order for an unmanned tank to completely replace a conventional one, it needs a maneuver width like that of a conventional tank, calculated in tens of kilometers.
          1. Timur_kz
            Timur_kz 10 December 2022 20: 11
            0
            That is why we will not have them, because of such thinking. And the first ones will appear, as always, with the Americans. What tens of kilometers? What for? Drones will work side by side in pairs, as in aviation - links - master / slave. The leading drone will ram, identify firing positions, the slave drone from behind cover will suppress targets. Work in pairs, 100 meters maximum radius, in urban conditions, generally nearby. What's difficult?! You just need to make and test in military conditions. The same T62 can be redone, stick a turret from a BMP3 with a carousel, overlay screens around the entire perimeter (you don’t need to worry about the driver’s mechanic).
        2. svp67
          svp67 10 December 2022 07: 56
          +2
          Quote: Stas157
          And if you control an unmanned tank from a nearby vehicle (tank or BMP Kurganets), for example!

          Long overdue version. It has both its pros and cons.
        3. Fitter65
          Fitter65 10 December 2022 11: 51
          +5
          Quote: Stas157
          And if you control an unmanned tank from a nearby vehicle (tank or BMP Kurganets), for example!

          We immediately recall remote-controlled torpedo boats and TB-3 aircraft in the 30s. And of course tanks
          Teletank (abbreviated as TT) is a tank without a crew, controlled from a distance.
          In 1929-1930, the Soviet Union tested a modified light French Renault-FT tank (Light Tank MS-1), on which telecontrol equipment was installed. After the tests, it was decided on the advisability of continuing the development of the topic of remote control over a radio channel (another name is Radiotank).
          TT-26 and TU-26
          Development began in 1932. The first series of 35 groups was converted at the plant number 192 in Moscow from 2 turret T-26s in 1936-37. The second series of 30 groups was built on the basis of new tanks in 1938-39. The group consisted of a TT-26 teletank - a light chemical (flamethrower) tank and a TU-26 control tank.
          TT-BT-7
          During 1938-1939. in NII-20 NKAP, work was carried out to create and test telemechanical equipment for a group of tanks TT-BT-7, which consisted of a teletank and a control tank. The teletank was intended for reconnaissance of minefields, making passages in barbed wire, flamethrowing, placing a smoke screen, degassing or contaminating the area with combat agents.
          The equipment of the teletank included a receiving device and automation devices for controls, weapons and servo control of onboard clutches and brakes. The radiotelemechanical line was protected from false commands and interference and provided a maximum range of up to 4000 meters. The duration of continuous control was 4-6 hours. The teletank could be controlled both directly by the driver, and at a distance using a push-button panel. The weight of the control equipment did not exceed 147 kg.
          As you can see, nothing is new under the sun. And the most interesting thing is that the above samples were noted even in battles. But ... After the remote-controlled BT-7, the TT-T-34 and KV-1 did not appear. and I haven’t heard about the TT-T-44/54/55/62 to be honest, there is a mention of the radio-controlled T-72, but it was still in the last millennium ...
        4. Old tanker
          Old tanker 10 December 2022 14: 09
          +4

          And if you control an unmanned tank from a nearby vehicle (tank or BMP Kurganets), for example!


          Then, when the control tank is disabled, we lose not one, but two or how many he controlled there.
      2. voice of reason
        voice of reason 10 December 2022 06: 06
        +2
        Well, the communication channel is precisely the bottleneck, which delays progress in this direction. So, Tukhachevsky also had ideas for robotic tanks controlled by wires. To break through the Mannerheim line, etc. However, the issue of a secure communication channel is being solved not only for these purposes, and, apparently, there are still some options at the present time. And as for direct interaction on the battlefield, the presence of the crew in battle inside the tank does not make it any easier in principle. Communication still goes through technical means. cocoa difference operator in a tank or a couple of kilometers behind. You still won’t reach the tankers, you won’t shout, and when they start shooting, it’s better to lie down and not shine. Firstly, because each shot is an acoustic shock to everyone around, and secondly, because it means now from all sides in this place the answer will fly from the enemy. Speaking about operators, I rather imagined something like drone operators. That is, perhaps some more secure and disguised management model. possibly a lightweight portable remote control. And operators located in the LBS but not directly in the tank. So that in the event of his defeat there would be no threat to life. Of course, such personnel should be more technically advanced than a driver mechanic, but now we already have drone operators in almost every single group. The general level of development of computer technologies is growing. in addition, the survival rate of such a crew will be higher. Well, there are certainly additional difficulties. An enemy strike at the control center, fixing the control signal and pointing at it. suppression of the control signal by means of electronic warfare, etc. that is why we now see manned armored vehicles on the battlefield.
        1. Edward Perov
          10 December 2022 06: 35
          +8
          You still won’t reach the tankers, you won’t shout, and when they start shooting, it’s better to lie down and not shine.


          There are and have been many situations when the infantry crew of the tank had to literally point a finger at the target. What is in the Chechen wars, what is in its own. It is not for nothing that many tanks from different countries modified for urban combat have a telephone to communicate with the infantry around the vehicle. It is conditionally possible to get by with radio communications in an open field (not always).
        2. svp67
          svp67 10 December 2022 08: 01
          +6
          Quote: voice of reason
          So, Tukhachevsky also had ideas for robotic tanks controlled by wires.

          Tukhachevsky had the idea of ​​equipping the Red Army with "teletanks", that is, radio-controlled. And as such, XT-130 flamethrower machines were used
          Quote: voice of reason
          You still won’t reach the tankers, you won’t shout, and when they start shooting, it’s better to lie down and not shine.

          And why scream in vain, it’s easier to connect to the external telephone socket of the TPU (tank intercom), it is under a protective cover by the left rear position light, and express all your thoughts in a completely normal voice




          1. voice of reason
            voice of reason 10 December 2022 15: 31
            0
            are you laughing? The tanks roll out into the wooded area and all of their own immediately hide. Firstly, the tankers can take theirs not for their own and "nervously" react. "There is also a mess on the front. The Akhmatovs, volunteers, allies of the DNR and LNR members of the Russian army and all are interconnected in a very specific way. Takni perform their task - they shoot back and immediately gas to recharge. what sockets are there? what kind of interaction is there, you obviously have no idea what kind of porridge is being cooked there ...
            1. svp67
              svp67 10 December 2022 21: 06
              +4
              Quote: voice of reason
              There is porridge on the front. Akhmatovs, volunteers, allies of the DNR and LNR members of the Russian army

              and...

              So there is such a point in the organization of the battle - the organization of interaction. And so that there would be no garbage, the commander is obliged to work out this issue from A to Z
      3. Dilettante_broad_profile
        Dilettante_broad_profile 10 December 2022 06: 29
        0
        Well, or an unmanned tank should become independent in battle. But this is already beyond even projects and is approaching science (or not so science) fiction.

        for the Russian Federation, this could be suitable with its huge borders and very small population, especially in the Far East and Kamchatka
      4. Doccor18
        Doccor18 10 December 2022 07: 01
        +1
        Quote: Eduard Perov
        upgrade the entire army to drone and communication standards.

        you are just doing something multi-domain there ...
      5. Reklastik
        Reklastik 10 December 2022 16: 20
        +1
        only satellite communications are needed, or loitering repeaters
        - Won't the production of electromagnetic interference in a wide range interfere with satellite communications and repeaters?
      6. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 10 December 2022 20: 40
        +5
        Off topic. There are no villages with 5000 inhabitants. In the regions of the Non-Chernozem region, many regional centers have such or even smaller populations. And in all villages, towns, towns with a population of around 5000, without exception, there are at least a few shops. In the villages of the Non-Chernozem region, usually several dozen, less often several hundred inhabitants live. And sometimes, several people.
      7. SOF
        SOF 11 December 2022 11: 33
        +1
        Everything becomes much easier - the network is called. Like cellular communication, with the only difference that each subscriber, in addition to the consumer, is also a repeater....
        The concept is ancient and quite workable.
    2. saigon
      saigon 10 December 2022 05: 44
      +2
      Yes, a new tactic, firing at a howitzer (And how to fire from a gun without an elevation angle along howitzer trajectories?) Small groups here are the reasons for their first low density of troops or do not want to think so, just not the ability to use troops in an amount greater than the BTG of the notorious saint and immaculate. In a word, there are a lot of questions, but from 500 -600 meters the tanks work so very well on targets and believe this is extremely unpleasant when a tank hammers at your positions like that.
      1. voice of reason
        voice of reason 10 December 2022 05: 51
        -2
        Basically, the tank does not go to such a distance in the NWO. Hits from afar. There are, of course, cases of sudden fire contact. not regulated so to speak. But the main tactic of application is still to go to the forest shed to shoot back and roll off. Tanks perfectly shoot "at howitzer", and tankers of the Chebarkul division, 6 Cossack and 2 corps of the LPR. That is, both the armies of the Russian Federation and the allies. I don't know how they achieve hits, but they do. Perhaps they correct by hit or something else.
        1. SincerityX
          SincerityX 16 December 2022 08: 40
          +1
          I don't know how they achieve hits, but they do. Perhaps they correct by hit or something else.

          Hello, we have arrived, all our tanks have a side level and an azimuth indicator, you can use a compass as a compass, offline maps in your phone, it also has a rough compass for quick orientation. There is also a ballistic calculator. Well, there is a firing table for all guns produced in the USSR and the Russian Federation (in my opinion, even for machine guns (!) I saw somewhere)
    3. svp67
      svp67 10 December 2022 07: 54
      +10
      Quote: voice of reason
      So, apparently, NWO is the swan song of tanks

      Only now it has been sounding for almost a century, since the civil war in Spain, although it is either fading a little, or becoming louder ... No, the time for abandoning tanks has not yet come
      Quote: voice of reason
      Tanks no longer climb forward in the notorious rhombus and do not move across the field in even ranks. They sneak around the forest regiments and settlements in cooperation with the infantry covering them. Small groups of two or three cars. They strike and immediately change their location. And also very interesting is the new tactic in the form of shooting "at howitzer" from a closed position to aim an air drone, for example ...

      It’s funny to read all this ... Not only do you absolutely not know the history of the development of the tactics of using tanks, but in general you are poorly versed in military affairs ...
      Under no circumstances will a tank be able to shoot "at a howitzer", no matter how much you want to. But shooting at long ranges or from a place at identified and reappearing targets, in order to support the actions of their troops, was ALWAYS used.
      There is nothing new in this regard, only new means of reconnaissance and correction have been added. If earlier this was done by a ground artillery reconnaissance spotter or an air spotter, now controlled optical reconnaissance drones are used for this.
      1. voice of reason
        voice of reason 10 December 2022 15: 25
        0
        that's exactly what I meant
      2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
        Kote Pan Kokhanka 10 December 2022 18: 06
        0
        Under no circumstances will a tank be able to shoot "at a howitzer", no matter how much you want to.

        History knows at least one example when they tried to give the properties of a howitzer to a gun of a serial tank.
        During one Arab-Israeli war, captured IS-3s were driven by Jews onto specially built ramps with a 30-degree slope. Given the 20 degree elevation of the tank gun itself, the total vertical reached more than 45 degrees, and this is already close to howitzer.
        The 122 mm rifled gun made it possible to fire accurately enough.
        In modern realities, only various adversary tanks based on the T-55 with 100 (105mm gifts from partners) rifled guns have such an opportunity. Domestic diesel fuel, as far as I remember, can accurately shoot at 15 km. Smooth-bore guns of domestic tanks of the second and third generations are accurate only within the range of a direct shot.
        1. svp67
          svp67 16 December 2022 09: 23
          +1
          Quote: Kote pane Kohanka
          Smooth-bore guns of domestic tanks of the second and third generations are accurate only within the range of a direct shot.

          No, it's not. Well, do you think that rifled artillery barrels, when firing conventional shells at long ranges, are sniper accurate? So no, there the spacing can reach hundreds of meters
      3. SincerityX
        SincerityX 16 December 2022 08: 43
        +1
        Under no circumstances will a tank be able to shoot "at a howitzer", no matter how much you want to. But shooting at long ranges or from a place at identified and reappearing targets, in order to support the actions of their troops, was ALWAYS used.

        You are greatly mistaken, all tanks made in the USSR have the ability to fire from closed positions. Moreover, it is in the technical description.
        1. svp67
          svp67 16 December 2022 09: 20
          0
          Quote from SincerityX
          You are greatly mistaken, all tanks made in the USSR have the ability to fire from closed positions.

          And what is long-range shooting, do you know? So figure it out, and then we'll talk about who and what is wrong
          1. SincerityX
            SincerityX 16 December 2022 13: 19
            +1
            Thank you, you're in the know. What is it that I really don't understand. The tank just has a flat trajectory, when you turn the artillery to a flat trajectory according to the firing table, the projectile flies further. True, there is no "panorama" for high accuracy.
            1. svp67
              svp67 16 December 2022 20: 24
              0
              Quote from SincerityX
              The tank just has a flat trajectory

              Because it has a gun on it.
              Quote from SincerityX
              when turning the artillery to a flat trajectory according to the firing table, the projectile flies further

              You said something that I didn't understand.
              According to the Theory on external ballistics, that is, according to the description of the behavior of the projectile outside the gun barrel
              Flat trajectory - a trajectory obtained at elevation angles smaller than the angle of greatest range.
              What and where are you going to turn? And how to achieve greater range?

              Shooting along a flat trajectory is used by guns, and howitzers are used along a mounted trajectory
    4. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 10 December 2022 09: 16
      +3
      Quote: voice of reason
      voice_of_mind (voice)

      mihan, where is your godzilla? died?
    5. filibuster
      filibuster 10 December 2022 16: 57
      0
      I myself, to confess, believed that the era of manned ground armored vehicles was a thing of the past. indeed, if there are reliable control channels for high-speed aerial drones, fit into a small body, why not tanks go in the same direction.


      At the UAV, I sit high and look far away, and in the tank, the view of the remote operator will be completely different even if he is provided with 360-degree cameras, even UAVs will not greatly improve the situation.
    6. Alexander Fomichev
      Alexander Fomichev 13 December 2022 01: 25
      +1
      When entering us, the Tank item is a striking element for the infantry "huddled" around, any hit in the Tank leads to the activation of the cumulative protection, except for the Relic (which the author noted that 2 is missing). Before a platoon, soldiers instantly "fail" from the ranks. "Three" who are in the tanks remain with contusions, absent tympanic membranes, gouged out eyes .. March-Kharkov, ..Volnovakha, Mariupol
      1. SincerityX
        SincerityX 16 December 2022 08: 48
        0

        Where do you collect this nonsense ...
        1. Alexander Fomichev
          Alexander Fomichev 24 December 2022 01: 32
          0
          Dr. Bormenthal.. In the furnace.
          in the '80s, during an "accidental" situational passage along the embankment at the ordinary platform of the Moscow Railways, being a frisky kid, I found about TEN wristwatches in rubble, not "last year's", but quite "yesterday's". and at the same platform in 2002, on one of the boardwalks, there was a normal Russian Railways shield "Dear passengers, 9 people were shot down at this place in 2002 months of 39. Be careful when crossing in front of an approaching train." By the way, the skull shatters approximately like an F-1 on "chocolate bars" the body is lying around in an ordinary black "churbachka" nearby.
    7. this
      this 31 January 2023 06: 24
      0
      Where are you from, what a diamond. Fighting tactics have changed a long time ago. I’ve been noticing for a long time that we can’t keep track of strategy and tactics from the couch for a long time, she really galloped forward for a very long time, and many still remember the Patriotic War.
  3. Dilettante grandfather
    Dilettante grandfather 10 December 2022 06: 30
    +2
    The fact that tank builders are working, and working fast enough, making changes, is optimistic. Well done. hi
  4. svskor80
    svskor80 10 December 2022 06: 42
    +1
    To control uninhabited armored vehicles, the use of artificial intelligence looks more promising. So far, of course, this is fiction, but technology with electronics is developing rapidly. Perhaps everything is not far off.
    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 10 December 2022 23: 38
      0
      IMHO, autonomous wedges like our Uranus-6 and robots like the Boston speaker will appear rather than autonomous robot tanks.
  5. Setavr
    Setavr 10 December 2022 06: 45
    -3
    Hanging Contact-1 vertically is a collective farm. Even the most distant person knows that K-1 is effective only at an acute angle. And in our FACTORY they hang vertically. We will NEVER see the commander's panoramic sight on the T-72 for Russia. It's pointless to even wait. They will do crafts for, but they will paint it, as if 1000 fittings were put into production.
    1. svp67
      svp67 10 December 2022 08: 13
      +4
      Quote: Setavr
      Hanging Contact-1 vertically is a collective farm.

      ?????????

      Quote: Setavr
      Even the most distant person knows that K-1 is effective only at an acute angle.

      Actually, a throwing plate is placed inside the K-1 container, at an angle
      And it's still better than nothing
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. Boris55
    Boris55 10 December 2022 07: 55
    -14
    The author laid out all the secrets about protecting our tanks ... For what?
    There are suggestions - write to the Design Bureau, and do not help our enemies kill our soldiers.
    1. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 10 December 2022 10: 13
      +8
      Quote: Boris55
      The author laid out all the secrets about protecting our tanks ... For what?
      There are suggestions - write to the Design Bureau, and do not help our enemies kill our soldiers.

      yes ... "contact" awesome "secret" ....
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 10 December 2022 10: 53
        -15
        Quote: Aerodrome
        yes ... "contact" awesome "secret" ....
        Quote from cold wind
        It was a "secret" in the year so 70th, 80th

        Nevertheless, this protection is established. The areas of protection, overcoming it and unprotected places are indicated.

        Commentators, spitting on the FSB warning, develop this topic. Don't you know that half of them here are TsIPs, provoking the disclosure of official information, which puts our military participating in the NWO in mortal danger?
        1. Aerodrome
          Aerodrome 10 December 2022 15: 57
          +6
          Quote: Boris55
          Nevertheless, this protection is established. The areas of protection, overcoming it and unprotected places are indicated.

          Commentators, spitting on the FSB warning, develop this topic. Don't you know that half of them here are TsIPs, provoking the disclosure of official information, which puts our military participating in the NWO in mortal danger?
          you don’t know that ours recently presented both t72b3 and t 90m. leaving them on the battlefield during the retreat?
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr 10 December 2022 16: 14
          +1
          Quote: Boris55
          Commentators, spitting on the FSB warning, develop this topic.

          In the photo, the T-64 is covered with a panel with K-1, and Ukraine sold its more modern T-84BM "Oplot" tank (Object 478DU9-1), with a more modern DZ, to America (at least one). So, our potential enemy has already studied this DZ and DZ "Knife" (which stands on the Oplot) in nature.
    2. cold wind
      cold wind 10 December 2022 10: 34
      +4
      It was a "secret" in the year 70th, 80th was already in the series. The fact that all this has only just appeared is nothing short of a disgrace.
      This modernization is relevant for the 90s, now it causes nothing but sad laughter.
    3. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 10 December 2022 12: 25
      +5
      I posted what officially UVZ has already shown.
      People must understand and see that the SVO continues, the production gives a lot of flow and there are still reserves and reserves, the fighters in the mass are studying and preparing. There are excesses and failures, but they are manageable.
      So such articles are better than the already standard and constant hype and lies of one of the authors of VO, cat. for a month now he has been riveting libels in the style of "the mustache is gone."
    4. savage3000
      savage3000 10 December 2022 20: 52
      +2
      secrets??? what are you talking about? what are the secrets??? there are no secrets in the subject. and after the delivery of the t-90m to the ukram, even in theory they cannot exist.
  8. Roman Efremov
    Roman Efremov 10 December 2022 10: 11
    +2
    Well, finally ripened to stick around the tank to the maximum DZ! Powerful 1130 hp engine (and it should now be installed on B3) allows you to increase the mass by several tons without deteriorating the dynamic characteristics. It would also be better to cover the forehead of the tower somehow better.
    1. Kote Pan Kokhanka
      Kote Pan Kokhanka 10 December 2022 18: 13
      0
      The novel was removed from the tongue. Only a nosebleed needs a more powerful diesel engine of 1200-1300 horses. To briskly pull the increased mass of armor.
      1. Roman Efremov
        Roman Efremov 10 December 2022 18: 24
        +2
        In the same dimensions, it is probably already impossible to squeeze more out of the engine. Otherwise, it would be 1130, but 1200. But 1130 is enough for the eyes until the mass has exceeded 50 tons.
      2. garri-lin
        garri-lin 10 December 2022 18: 48
        0
        An overly strong engine can cause problems with the transmission or chassis.
  9. Antey
    Antey 10 December 2022 11: 44
    +6
    Quote: Boris55
    Quote: Aerodrome
    yes ... "contact" awesome "secret" ....
    Quote from cold wind
    It was a "secret" in the year so 70th, 80th

    Nevertheless, this protection is established. The areas of protection, overcoming it and unprotected places are indicated.

    Commentators, spitting on the FSB warning, develop this topic. Don't you know that half of them here are TsIPs, provoking the disclosure of official information, which puts our military participating in the NWO in mortal danger?

    Dear, you don’t understand anything in intelligence and don’t follow the development of military technologies at all. About 15 years ago, in the journal Technique for Youth, there was a detailed article about our Contract -1. The authors have detailed why it is a big mistake, if not stupidity. Briefly - the dimensions of the throwing plate are matched to our (there should be a facepalm) sub-caliber projectile! And they made Contact to protect against NATO! The plate should break the core, and NATO has a different length. Tell the FSB about it too. How stupid our "guardians" are. As, however, and those whose asses they cover.
  10. Bingo
    Bingo 10 December 2022 12: 22
    +1
    Well, they told me that in the pictures of the T-90)))
  11. opposite28
    opposite28 10 December 2022 12: 48
    +2
    Quite adequate improvements based on the experience of combat use in the NWO. I hope that the subsequent improvements will not be long in coming. But in many ways, the implementation of the technical excellence of the tank fleet participating in the NWO is determined by the experience of the crews.
  12. Denis812
    Denis812 10 December 2022 14: 07
    +1
    >>heads of some devices or antennas appeared on the tower, the purpose of which is still not really known.
    One is for integration with ACS.
    Another one of them for working with UAVs. But here it is not clear. Either to control these very UAVs, or for the control center, or for the type of your own stranger.
  13. Sibiriya
    Sibiriya 10 December 2022 14: 39
    +1
    Thanks to the author for the article, commentators for the information. Informative.
  14. Barberry25
    Barberry25 10 December 2022 18: 32
    -1
    A relic in the tower will appear when the T-72A is driven for modernization ... Well, in general, to ensure the normal closing of the DZ, you need to put a grate and already attach blocks of DZ 1 to 1 on it.
  15. GRAFIN_32
    GRAFIN_32 10 December 2022 22: 43
    +1
    Protection is good. As a tanker, I am satisfied. Only a small gap, as always ... When will a remote-controlled machine gun be installed on all combatants? The commander should not leave the BO for the sake of firing from a machine gun. Tanks in the city are still relevant, no matter who resists. The commander is already overworked. PKT pukalka slanting, analogue of AKS-74U in comparison with AKM. But no one will even put 12,7 instead of 7,62. What's the point if Sparka. NSVT/KORD is just an accessory on the turret. Outcome one. The tank only fires in one direction. He has 3 weapons ... The first is the main one. The second paired misunderstanding. And the third just hangs out like that. NSVT / KORD must and must plow no less than the gun. PKT is a fart for one thing. Shoot the main one and, when leaving, scare the sparrows. To neither.
    1. Barberry25
      Barberry25 12 December 2022 12: 08
      -2
      there are 2 options here - either install a budget option like on the t-90, when the optics and machine gun are paired, or how to put a panoramic sight and cord on the t-90m ..
  16. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 10 December 2022 23: 06
    0
    It seems to me that in the future it is necessary to make the BMP from the T90m the main one and, when upgrading, immediately install it on all versions of 72ek. With communication, panorama and everything that is there.
  17. Alt 22
    Alt 22 11 December 2022 10: 56
    0
    Where is KAZ? Is there at least one tank with KAZ in the NWO zone?
    1. Roma 1977
      Roma 1977 11 December 2022 16: 50
      0
      Wangyu that is. But purely for field tests, in isolated cases. For the use of armored vehicles with KAZ has some problems, and is not at all a revolutionary solution. I remind you of an engineering estimate: it makes sense to change the old to the new only in the case of a conditional increase in efficiency by 1.5 or more times compared to the old solution. Wangyu also that KAZ has not yet reached this coefficient.
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 11 December 2022 21: 48
      0
      We don't have them. And so far it hasn't been heard. So far, the problem has simply led the tanks to a single passive defense.
  18. Mint Gingerbread
    Mint Gingerbread 12 December 2022 14: 49
    0
    How effective is this snot mesh compared to a rigid mesh?
  19. Iris
    Iris 12 December 2022 15: 41
    0
    The rooster pecked. They stirred. The question is, why is it necessary to be given on the head? Or an order from above? Of course, it can be attributed to the fact that the GBTU and the GRAU reassigned the Logistics of the Armed Forces as part of the optimization. That is, armor was equated with underpants. Which in the end did not turn out, armor - too. And the worst part is, it's nobody's fault! And the head of the Logistics even became a Hero!
  20. Iris
    Iris 12 December 2022 15: 46
    0
    Quote: svskor80
    To control uninhabited armored vehicles, the use of artificial intelligence looks more promising. So far, of course, this is fiction, but technology with electronics is developing rapidly. Perhaps everything is not far off.

    No fantasy. Such intelligence has already been implemented in the Russian Defense Ministry at all levels. True, there is no electronics or intelligence, but according to the reports, everything is in order.
  21. Iris
    Iris 12 December 2022 15: 52
    0
    Quote: voice of reason
    Basically, the tank does not go to such a distance in the NWO. Hits from afar. There are, of course, cases of sudden fire contact. not regulated so to speak. But the main tactic of application is still to go to the forest shed to shoot back and roll off. Tanks perfectly shoot "at howitzer", and tankers of the Chebarkul division, 6 Cossack and 2 corps of the LPR. That is, both the armies of the Russian Federation and the allies. I don't know how they achieve hits, but they do. Perhaps they correct by hit or something else.

    That is, tanks shoot along a flat trajectory, or they can use a mortar - what's the difference. IBs of the latest generation throw cast-iron bombs, and unparalleled turntables fire NURSs from a pitch-up. The opinion of associate professors and professors of the Academy of General Staff is interesting.
  22. usm5
    usm5 12 January 2023 17: 53
    0
    It would be interesting to know how much the weight of the tank increased with such an upgrade and how much its mobility decreased? Now the enemy has such means that it is much more reliable to make tactical efforts so as not to receive such hits. There is a glimmer of hope that they may have installed a system that automatically shoots towards the controlled (the most dangerous) charge that blinds it with an aerosol.
  23. sgrabik
    sgrabik 20 January 2023 10: 46
    0
    One thing is not clear, if the T72B3 are significantly inferior in all respects to the T90M, then why release them at all, I can still understand the deep modernization of the T72Bs in storage to the level of T72B3M, but why should they release new ones, it is much more logical and more useful for our army to release new ones, more combat-ready and protected T90M, while continuing to refine and improve these tanks in the process of production and operation in the army, the question of economy and combat readiness should always be in favor of combat readiness and nothing else.
    1. savage3000
      savage3000 31 January 2023 20: 21
      0
      and where did you get the info that the t-72b3 is being released new ???? we only produce t-90.
  24. savage3000
    savage3000 31 January 2023 20: 20
    0
    the main question here is: did we not have the brains to make such an upgrade initially?

    in short, everything is as usual. another question: is Excitement installed there?