“The canopy helps even with shelling”: the Russian crew spoke about the combat value of the “visors” on tanks

Screening with lattice structures of Russian tanks from above did not receive mass distribution both in the zone of the special operation and in the army as a whole. At the same time, this equipment demonstrated a number of advantages that the MBT receives on the battlefield due to the installation of "visors".

Metal protection allows you to withstand even the explosion of artillery ammunition:

This canopy helps well even with shelling. If there is a direct hit from above, then he can save the crew, although there will be a strong shell shock

the crew says.

At the beginning of the SVO, when the Armed Forces of Ukraine were crammed with thousands of Javelin anti-tank systems, the "visor" saved the lives of tankers when firing enemy ATGMs, capable of making a "slide" when approaching the target and hitting armored vehicles from above.

At first, the "visor" helped very well against the Javelin. Now they [APU] do not use Javelin

- explained the tanker.

Shielding copes with drones enemy:

The main thing is that the hatches of the commander and the gunner are closed and the fragments do not fly to them

- the tanker noted about the combat value of the "peaks".

Judging by a number of videos, tanks undergoing modernization at production facilities are equipped with brackets in the upper part of the turret, which, apparently, are intended for attaching the "visor" frame. In this regard, we can expect the massive use of this protective structure on the battlefield.

Comments

[Mavrikiy]

The canopy helps even with shelling ": the Russian crew spoke about the combat value of the "visors" on tanks

Yes, when driving in forest plantations ..... hemorrhoids?

[svp67]

Quote: Mavrikiy

Yes, when driving in forest plantations ..... hemorrhoids?

Why? This thing does not climb beyond the dimensions of the tank, and if it breaks from contact with tree branches, then how will it withstand the impact of an anti-tank system or a projectile in general
And it’s interesting, when this “thing” was invented, did they think about impact UAVs and shells?

[Alekseev]

Well, they probably do it against any ammunition attacking from above.
Only, as well as the screen (grille) on the side or behind the car, this is probably not a panacea. It is necessary that the grille (the real one, from the steel research institute) work together with the remote sensing. After all, if a cumulative warhead works half a meter above 30 mm of the armor of the tower roof from hitting a simple screen in the form of a steel sheet or mesh, penetration and consequences cannot be avoided.

[mitroha]

Now they [APU] do not use Javelin

A strange statement, just a few days ago, during the capture of the opornik, they showed footage, atom including with javelins.
Does anyone know where the legs grow from not using javelins?

[alexmach]

Probably from the fact that tanks shoot from closed firing positions and don’t go on the attack, but if they go oh-oh-very carefully.

[lucul]

Well, they probably do it against any ammunition attacking from above.

And how is it here in VO, previously all sorts of God's chosen ones made fun of these visors)))

[Zaurbek]

But you can’t cover the canopy itself with DZ (even if it’s not explosive, metal-rubber, like on the side)

[loki565]

You can try to hang such bags, if they hang on the straps on board, then the visor can easily withstand them

[alexmach]

The bags have already been labeled "impractical" and replaced with steel boxes of a similar size.

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Zaurbek

But you can’t cover the canopy itself with DZ

If they are justifiably afraid to put remote sensing on the armor of armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, then what will happen to the visor when the remote sensing is triggered? Although there is an idea to use ... something like a fragmentation or "nuclear strike" mine of directional (!) Action with a non-contact radio frequency sensor that "forces" the mine to work at a distance of 2,5-4 m to the target ... Of course, "mine" of directional action "for visors" must be specially worked out! (If we say: "MON-100 type", then we mean: "looks" like MON-100! But, of course, you can use directional ammunition of the "MON-50/90" type!)

MON-100..... ND-non-contact radar sensor...

[Uprun]

I think that such a "spoiler" does not greatly affect the speed of the tank - not a car, aerodynamic issues can be discarded, if it helps to survive, then why not.

[voice of reason]

I think this is the right approach. Provide mounting brackets. If the crew believes that it is necessary to set, based on the conditions of the terrain, the nature of the enemy’s weapons and the assigned combat mission, let them have the opportunity to establish. If he thinks that it is not necessary, let him not bet. Well, maybe not at the crew level, but at the level of the unit commander responsible for the combat mission.

[Leshak]

I think it's up to the crew to decide. Some tankers claim that the visor interferes with the evacuation of the crew from a wrecked tank. Others, like this article, praise its functionality.

[ivan1979nkl]

someone thinks about aesthetics (as with a beard) like, they put some kind of grill on a combat vehicle, and someone - how to survive in battle

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: voice of reason

I think this is the right approach. Provide mounting brackets. If the crew believes that it is necessary to set, based on the conditions of the terrain, the nature

It's true. It would be nice if our designers came up with a mechanism for folding the visor. He opened the hatch, pressed the visor on the "pimpochka" and folded back behind the tower, pulled the lever, the visor stood over the tower. I think tankers would love it.

[T.A.V.]

What if he gets knocked out? How will tankers get out?

[Alexander Salenko]

And he will be crushed, and if in the summer a drone throws a simple grenade into an open hatch? Questions to hell can be asked and there is no perfect answer, I would speak for the visors.

[fa2998]

Quote from uprun

if it helps to survive, then why not.

If you need it, why not put it in the factory? So that the soldiers at the front "from the city of me and sticks" do not collect. I think an experienced engineer, foreman and welder figured out in a couple of hours how to make it reliably and firmly.
Or do we need a state program again, a competition, to cut several billions - otherwise there is no way?

[Sanichsan]

Quote: fa2998

If it is needed, why not put it in the factory?

so the article says what they put. on modernized already factory installation for the visor, and the visor itself comes as additional equipment that can be installed or removed.

[solar]

not written exactly like that

equipped with brackets at the top of the tower, which, apparently, intended for fastening

They don’t put any factory visors, about brackets, this is an assumption.

[Havoc]

At first, the "visor" helped very well against the Javelin. Now they [APU] do not use Javelin
And what is no longer given, or everything has been sold to the left.

[Sanichsan]

Quote: Havoc

And what is no longer given, or everything has been sold to the left.

tse broke, tse lost ...

[cold wind]

Tanks do not go on the attack, infantry and artillery wage war. In general, tanks try to keep away from LBS. Therefore, the percentage of losses from artillery and UAVs has increased. Can't get ATGMs.

[dnestr74]

Yeah ..... Oporniks shoot point-blank, didn’t you see?

[cold wind]

Quote: dnestr74

Yeah ..... Oporniks shoot point-blank, didn’t you see?

Video in the studio.

[Slon1978]

Come on, now let's rush to look :) I also saw several videos where the tank went to the opornik at 200-300 meters and shot him point-blank where the terrain allows using this tactic. Javelin, Thaw, and birds in general are good where the tank can be seen from afar. When the terrain consists of fields and forest plantations, it is often possible to drive up to a position 200-300 meters along these plantings, avoiding visibility sectors for ATGM calculations. It's about cases like this.

[solar]

Tanks have drastically reduced the situations when they go into the range of anti-tank systems, especially the manual Javelin.

[Arbeiternegast]

Yes, on the first British tanks, diamond-shaped MK-|, there was also a mesh roof with a house, protection from hand grenades. New - well-forgotten old.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

In addition to such visors on tanks, armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, anti-cumulative grilles are desirable. I used to consider them almost useless, but due to the widespread use of kamikaze drones by the enemy, they have become very relevant.

[alexmach]

Only gratings from RPGs were mainly placed at the level of the side, and from drones it probably makes sense, first of all, to hide from above.

[Roman Efremov]

Quote: Zaurbek

But you can’t cover the canopy itself with DZ (even if it’s not explosive, metal-rubber, like on the side)

If "not explosive", then this is not any remote sensing, but just a screen.

[solar]

nowadays it has become rare to see MBTs with shielding from above - protective "visors" have practically disappeared as a type of equipment.

https://topwar.ru/208840-rossijskim-tankam-neobhodimo-vernut-zaschitnye-kozyrki-iz-za-atak-dronov.html
Despite the fact that strikes from above continue, most likely not from ATGMs (since they began to use tanks in their reach much less often), but from kamikaze drones.
The fact that after a year of active hostilities they disappeared is more likely to indicate their low real effectiveness, which does not justify the problems they create with getting out of the tank, using a machine gun and others.
It is possible that if factory designs appear, tested at least in field conditions, the situation will change, but so far there are none and there are no reports of attempts to create them.

[Rainfall]

The canopy can be made more durable by attaching sandbags on top. Sandbags act like a berm.