Military Review

The advantages and problems of wheeled tanks

Over the past decades, the global defense industry has come up with many new types of weapons. Among others, the idea of ​​installing relatively powerful weapons on a relatively light wheeled chassis with a corresponding reservation is of particular interest. Such military equipment received the unofficial name "wheeled tank." In this case, the question of the classification of such armored vehicles still does not have a clear and unambiguous answer. The fact is that different countries use different terms. As a result, in some armies heavy armored cars serve, in others - cannon armored cars, and still others use armored reconnaissance vehicles. Finally, in the CFE Treaty, such equipment is listed as heavy armament combat vehicles (BMTV). At the same time, all three or four "classes" of the technician almost do not differ from each other in the basic features of their appearance.

Unfortunately of the authors of the idea, problems with classification are far from the most serious difficulties of wheeled vehicles. tanks. At the level of their ideology themselves, they have a number of characteristic features that over the years have provoked active debate in military circles, as well as among experts and lovers of military equipment. Most often, wheeled tanks are compared with heavy tracked armored vehicles, which is why discussions very rarely end with the consent of the parties. Let's try to figure out what the wheeled BMWs are good and bad for, and also try to predict the future of armored cars with powerful guns.

First of all, it is necessary to understand the prerequisites for the appearance of the first wheeled tanks and the formation of their appearance. If their older tracked cousins ​​formed to work in European conditions, where the largest wars of the last century took place, wheeled armored vehicles with cannon armament are to some extent a “product” of the landscape of other continents. As an example of the first wheeled tank, the French Panhard AML armored car is often given, one of the modifications of which carried an 90-mm cannon. The wheeled suspension of this armored car has proven itself in Africa during various wars involving France. As for weapons, the CN-90FJ cannon was effective against almost all the targets French soldiers had to fight. However, the main impetus to the creation of a heavy armored car with a serious gun were fighting in southern Africa. The South African military quickly came to the conclusion that the most effective in the local conditions would be wheeled armored vehicles with, at a minimum, anti-bullet protection and anti-tank weapons, such as a cannon or anti-tank systems. At the same time, the first ideas appeared with regard to the armored vehicles of the MRAP system.

Panhard AML

Wheel chassis were considered the most promising because of their good resource. During the battles with the Angolan armed formations, South African soldiers very often had to make long marches along the roads. Caterpillars of classic tanks in this case quickly fell into disrepair and the vast majority of the new technology began to do on a wheeled course. In addition, affected the production capabilities and geographical features of the area. Due to the comparatively hard ground of the savannahs, the tracked tank maneuverability characteristics turned out to be excessive, which, however, had almost no effect on the track wear. Such an interesting approach to the selection of the undercarriage ultimately affected the entire look of the South African army - even full-fledged self-propelled artillery installations were made on the wheelbase.

The advantages and problems of wheeled tanks
Ratel FSV90

As a matter of fact, it was the good road performance on normal roads, together with the high propulsion resource, that became the main reason that other vehicles of similar appearance began to appear after the South African armored vehicles Ratel FSV90. Over time, the number of heavy armored cars with cannon armament reached the size at which it was possible to talk about the emerging trend. At the moment, the French ERC-90 and AMX-10RC, the Italian Centauro, the American M1128 MGS and other cars of this class are widely known. Russian military and designers have not yet decided on the need for such equipment for our armed forces, but have already shown interest in foreign developments that can help form a general idea of ​​the design features of a wheeled tank.



It should be noted, basically you will have to be content with only constructive details. The fact is that of the entire mass of wheeled tanks in real large-scale hostilities managed to participate only the South African Ratel FSV90. Other vehicles of this class participated in battles only in small numbers and only in small local conflicts, where they had to fight with a poorly equipped opponent. So, in 1992, eight Italian Centauro were sent to Somalia, where they participated in a peacekeeping operation. Almost immediately it became clear that the power of the 105-mm LR cannons was superfluous to combat the overwhelming majority of targets encountered by the Italian peacekeepers. Therefore, most of the missions concerned the observation of the terrain and the release of information to the patrols, for which new observation instruments proved to be very useful. Heavy weapons armored vehicles used only in some cases for self-defense. At the same time, it was not without complaints. First of all, the soldier did not accept the strength of the tires. The condition of the roads in Somalia was, to put it mildly, unsatisfactory: even the main highway of the country, Imperial Highway, had not seen repairmen for four years by the time of arrival of the armored vehicles Centaur, and on other roads the situation was even worse. Because of this, Italian peacemakers too often had to change wheels due to permanent damage. Over time, Centauro began to be equipped with more durable tires. More serious problem was booking. The body of the Italian wheeled tank was made with the expectation of shelling from a 12,7-millimeter rifle weapons, but in some cases during the ambushes the “Centaurs” were seriously damaged by the DShK machine guns. More serious weapons, such as RPG-7 grenade launchers, could simply destroy the armored vehicle. For these reasons, the Italians urgently had to order ROMOR-A dynamic protection kits from the UK. Due to the timely strengthening of protection, Italy has not lost a single wheeled tank in Somalia.

B1 Centauro

It is noteworthy that during the fighting in Somalia, all the main shortcomings of the wheeled tank concept emerged. Despite preliminary calculations, in practice, the wheel propulsion did not have much advantage over the crawler one. Large maximum speed in real conditions was impossible due to the lack of good roads, and off-road wheeled vehicles were often worse than those of tracked vehicles. In addition, the "Centaurs" with the first version of the wheels, as already mentioned, were subject to regular tire damage. As for the chassis resource, due to specific loads when driving on rough terrain, the actual wear of parts was much higher than estimated, just at the level of tank tracks. As a result, all seeming advantages associated with various aspects of movement were “killed” by the real situation. In the future, the Centauro armored car was slightly modified, in particular, the running gear life increased.

The second "Somali" problem was related to the level of protection. When creating the first wheeled tanks, it was assumed that this technique would assume the role of the main tanks in conflicts with a weakly armed enemy. Therefore, most armored vehicles with heavy weapons are not equipped with counter-armor booking. Nevertheless, the very first cases of using wheeled tanks in local conflicts demonstrated, at a minimum, the dubious nature of such a technical solution. Cars with anti-bullet reservation can adequately resist the enemy, armed only with small arms. But against artillery or tanks, they are simply useless. Here you can also recall the excess power of weapons, which appeared even in Somalia. The result is a rather strange machine with a wheelbase, powerful weapons and weak protection. Throughout stories armored vehicles developed along the path of the balance of weapons and protection. Wheeled tanks, in turn, tried to break this technical "tradition", but did not achieve much success. Moreover, the installation of a powerful tool in the case of some BMTV had very interesting consequences. Most wheeled tanks have a relatively high center of gravity (higher than the tanks of the classical scheme), which, if the turret is rotated at a large angle from the longitudinal axis, can lead to the machine tipping to the side. Tracked MBT do not have such a problem.

B1 Centauro

As already mentioned, the Italian “Centaurs”, while working in Somalia, received additional protection modules. Other countries have taken the same path. For example, the American wheeled tank M1128 MGS of the Stryker family is equipped with a whole set of tools to enhance the level of protection. All these armored panels and anti-cumulative grilles increase the overall weight of the vehicle, which impairs its driving performance. At the same time, almost all wheeled tanks have a battle mass of no more than 20-25 tons, which is significantly less than the corresponding parameter of any modern main battle tank. As a result, the transfer of heavy vehicles with wheeled vehicles becomes more simple than transporting tanks.

M1128 MGS

Possibility of transporting wheeled tanks for military transport aviation by the forces of the most common aircraft (C-130 and the like) is one of the main reasons that this class of equipment continues to develop and until it leaves the military "scene". The military conflicts of recent years have led to the formation of a new concept for the use of troops, implying a quick transfer to the area of ​​hostilities. The military of some countries developed this idea into an interesting form: the first to arrive at the battlefield is relatively light equipment, like armored personnel carriers, infantry fighting vehicles, and all the same wheeled tanks. Further, if necessary, heavier armored vehicles like full-fledged tanks or self-propelled artillery can be delivered to the front line. Thus, light and medium armored vehicles, including wheeled tanks, are given the functions of the main striking force of the ground forces, which has high mobility.

Yet the use of wheeled vehicles with powerful weapons requires the right approach to planning operations. For example, wheeled tanks should not be encountered in combat with tracked or artillery, otherwise the result of this collision is unlikely to be good for vehicles on a wheeled course. In this case, wheeled tanks must fight with lightly armored vehicles of the enemy, for example, with armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, without entering the zone of destruction of their weapons. This applies to high intensity armed conflicts. In the case of counter-terrorism, counter-guerrilla or peacekeeping operations, the use of wheeled tanks also requires proper planning, but it is no longer necessary to “protect” wheeled armored vehicles from encounters with tracked tanks and artillery. At the same time, guerrilla attacks of the enemy may require an appropriate approach to the protection of vehicles, which must be performed in accordance with the concept of MRAP.

For specialists, it has long been no secret that wheeled tanks with tracked ones have only one word in the title, besides unofficial, as well as a large caliber gun. However, from time to time, in a different context, the issue of crowding out the main tanks with wheeled armored vehicles with heavy armament comes up. As is clear from the above facts, in the current state of affairs, a wheeled tank will not only be able to fully perform all the functions of the MBT, but even just get close to the latter in a number of characteristics. In this regard, the replacement of tracked wheeled vehicles, even if only partially, is out of the question. As for the future of wheeled tanks, the further development of this idea is likely to go along the path of improving protection while maintaining a relatively small combat mass. Armament should remain the same, because the installation of even more powerful guns than, for example, the Italian "Centaur", is associated with a number of technical problems that are simply impossible to solve, while retaining the existing advantages of this class of technology.

However, the last word in shaping the appearance of the wheel tanks of the future still remains behind the realities of the recent military conflicts in which this technology participated. During the practical application of all existing BMTV a large number of claims to the design have accumulated, some of which have already been resolved. Nevertheless, a considerable number of problems remain and their correction can significantly change the appearance of wheeled tanks. But, most likely, in this case, they will not be able to completely supplant the usual crawler tanks.

Based on:
Nikolsky M.V., Ilyin V.E. Wheel armored vehicles. - M .: Astrel / AST, 2001

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:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. MilaPhone
    MilaPhone 16 November 2012 08: 40
    It is advisable to have both wheeled and tracked and wheeled-tracked vehicles! smile
  2. MilaPhone
    MilaPhone 16 November 2012 08: 42
    It is more expedient to have both wheeled and tracked and wheeled-tracked vehicles! smile
    1. yllo
      yllo 16 November 2012 09: 55
      here a couple of wings and a propeller from the boat. good
      1. klimpopov
        klimpopov 16 November 2012 10: 16
        It is necessary to add the second stage, but how will it go into near-earth orbit? To destroy enemy satellites.
        On the topic, well, I don’t know how unusual it is to see a full-fledged art weapon on a wheeled chassis, but there hasn’t been any use for them in battle yet ...
        1. Nubia2
          Nubia2 16 November 2012 19: 21
          Quote: klimpopov
          Their use in battle has not yet been ...

          what is "wide application" for you? how under prokhorovka?
          the French have long used such machines and they had to fight.
          they did not complain and found a niche for them
      2. soaring
        soaring 16 November 2012 11: 09
        Cool car!!!!! Hold on the enemy !!!!!!!! good
        1. bask
          bask 16 November 2012 13: 31
          I wanted to thank Kiril. Ryabov. The article, as always, is super. Not any water but facts. The only thing I didn’t see was the wheeled tank, the Rooikat 105 mm gun. It was created by South African designers in the late 80s, specifically to combat Angolan, or rather Cuban T62. Because Ratel FSV-90. They didn’t penetrate the armor of these tanks ... So, that the massive use of wheeled tanks was in the 80s. In the war of Angola and South Africa + UNITA
      3. carbofo
        carbofo 16 November 2012 13: 07
        In vain you laugh, the combined chassis in some cases has advantages, at least for a reconnaissance vehicle, a tractor.
      4. tun1313
        tun1313 16 November 2012 16: 09
        I won’t say for the screw, but he has a couple of water cannons in my mine.
  3. Brother Sarych
    Brother Sarych 16 November 2012 08: 58
    "Wheeled tanks" have more disadvantages than advantages!
    The author himself says that for a weak adversary the cannon is redundant, and against a strong adversary the defense is insufficient - well, why bother with this garden?
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 16 November 2012 14: 04
      It is more expedient to make self-propelled guns on a wheeled platform to support infantry in low-intensity conflicts or amphibious operations (on the principle of "Nona" SVK, and not conditionally "anti-tank" Tsentauro). In addition, if promising BMDs are armed with similar weapons, then the meaning is almost lost in this.
      1. Goldmitro
        Goldmitro 16 November 2012 22: 11
        Which is better - wheels or tracks depends on the theater of war (TMD), which is going to use this technique. If we are talking about the defense of Russia - with our off-road and our soils, the wheels cannot withstand the competition with the tracks. If you need a breakthrough "to the Channel", then the wheels will obviously benefit, of course, subject to the appropriate level of protection, designed for a serious enemy, and not just for partisans. So we must first decide on a theater of operations.
  4. common man
    common man 16 November 2012 09: 32
    It’s unnecessary for a wheeled tank to mount a tank gun. Enough weapons complex, similar to that installed on the BMP-3. 30 mm and 100 mm guns for defeating infantry and lightly armored targets, and guided weapons for fighting tanks. And enhanced in comparison with the armored personnel carrier booking.
  5. borisst64
    borisst64 16 November 2012 09: 44
    An important topic has not been touched on - the load capacity of the caterpillar and wheel chassis. The tire has an inverse relationship - load capacity - resource, i.e. with an increase in one indicator, the other decreases (I will not go into details about layering and hysteresis). I consider this the main reason for the weak reservation of wheeled vehicles. It is no coincidence that our Belarusian brothers are making MULTIPLE rocket carriers.
    Well, the possibilities of a crawler shasi are almost endless (within reasonable limits, of course). Torsion bars are very compact and durable.
    1. aksakal
      aksakal 17 November 2012 23: 45
      Quote: borisst64
      Well, the possibilities of a crawler shasi are almost endless (within reasonable limits, of course). Torsion bars are very compact and durable.
      - torsion bars - the same springs, perform the same function. How many cars he changed in his lifetime, he even sent a couple to a landfill in old age - all springs were still alive and could still serve and serve. What will happen to tank torsion bars? Yes, they will not be anything! By the way, I also had a minibus Hyundai Stareks, I bought it from scratch at 98, when they won so much in Korea that this minibus cost less than 9000 cu So, there just stood torsion bars instead of springs - such thick rods. And behind - springs. Check it out. I hit the hodovka on this Hyundai many times, drove more than 700 km, in the springs a couple of times the rubber inserts had to be changed, and then the springs themselves burst. What about torsion bars? And he though henna. BorisST000, you are not focusing on that at all! The MBT resource before overhaul is 64-14 thousand km, this is in addition to torsion bars, and the resource of caterpillar tracks - 16-8 thousand km - by the way, expensive vykomanganese steel. You greatly exaggerate about the infinity of the tracked chassis, although the wheels have their own drawbacks, especially when driving on rough terrain.
  6. understudy
    understudy 16 November 2012 09: 51
    This is better, not a tank. Bronik with a gun. It’s like in a joke ...
    Donkey asks the ensign
    - Who are you?
    - The officer!
    Ahhh, then I'm a horse!
  7. Tamerlan225
    Tamerlan225 16 November 2012 11: 00
    What are the cons ?????? Patency Like an armored personnel carrier. The speed will surely be higher than that of the tank, at least when cornering it will not stop ... If you protect the wheels, then the protection will be tank. And there’s something in it, I’m just not in excess for technology !!!
    1. Bronis
      Bronis 16 November 2012 13: 54
      Other things being equal, no. The specific ground pressure of a wheeled chassis is significantly higher than that of a crawler. If you reserve it as a tank, it will have no maneuverability and speed, the resource of wheels will tend to zero. The meaning is lost.
    2. evgenii67
      evgenii67 16 November 2012 17: 41
      well read article ??? speed in off-road conditions is not higher than that of tanks on a caterpillar track ...., and in general I think that this tank is good only for parades, asphalt does not spoil, but rubber is not necessary hi because why rubberize laughing
  8. Owl
    Owl 16 November 2012 11: 05
    These are "police" armored vehicles designed to fight the enemy armed with small arms from a distance excluding an aimed shot from an RPG.
  9. Slevinst
    Slevinst 16 November 2012 11: 09
    Quote: Tamerlan225

    What are the cons ?????? Patency Like an armored personnel carrier. The speed will surely be higher than that of the tank, at least when cornering it will not stop ... If you protect the wheels, then the protection will be tank. And there’s something in it, I’m just not in excess for technology !!!

    with the same success, you can just put a gun more powerful on an armored personnel carrier, I think wheeled tanks are not needed, they make no sense. a cannon of such a hummingbird can be completely replaced with an anti-tank missile and here’s a full-fledged combat unit rather than a mixture of a bulldog with a rhino
  10. Kars
    Kars 16 November 2012 11: 18
    Beginning in 1939, all world tank-building countries developed main battle tanks only on caterpillar tracks to ensure high cross-country ability.
    To verify the absurdity of the idea of ​​a “wheeled tank”, we compare the tactical, technical and economic characteristics of combat vehicle variants with various support and navigation systems (propulsion). The advantages and disadvantages of wheeled and tracked propulsion systems are known, but are not always correctly evaluated. Indeed, wheeled armored vehicles, having lower weight characteristics, can reach a maximum speed of 80-100 km / h on the highway (single vehicle speed). The development of the caterpillar mover of tanks and the installation of more powerful power plants somewhat smoothed out this difference. The maximum speed of tracked vehicles is almost close to wheeled and ranges from 60 to 70 km / h.
    At the same time, the tactical mobility of wheeled armored vehicles is inferior to the tactical mobility of tracked vehicles. In support of this, we give the opinion of the commander of the Airborne Forces, Colonel General V.A. Shamanova: “The combat units of the Airborne Forces should be only on tracks, because both the Afghan experience and the experience of three Caucasian campaigns have clearly shown that wheeled vehicles behave capriciously even in medium-rugged terrain. Of course, if you fight on highways, wheeled armored vehicles will give a serious head start to the tracks: it is faster and has a much larger resource. Only all the wars in which the paratroopers have been involved in the last 30 years have clearly shown: when the "wheels" drive off the highway to rough terrain, they immediately begin to have problems. "
    The mobility of wheeled armored vehicles in a typical theater of operations is 23-47%, and in the period of spring and autumn thaw is reduced in some cases to 5-11%. At the same time, for tracked armored vehicles, the probability of maintaining mobility is not lower than 48%.
    It all depends on the specific pressure on the ground. The smaller it is, the higher the possibility of movement on soft soils, that is, it directly depends on the area of ​​the supporting surface. When moving along a non-deformable (non-shape-changing) surface base, the efficiency of a wheeled propeller with a rigid wheel is very high. However, when switching from a hard wheel to a car tire, and especially from a hard concrete road to the ground, the wheel's efficiency decreases dramatically.
    When driving along a concrete road for deformation, i.e. tire shape change takes up to 5% of engine power, and the use of low pressure tires when driving on soils is accompanied by losses of up to 30% of power. Thus, the availability of terrain when performing tactical tasks for a tracked vehicle is much wider, which makes it possible to maneuver it on the battlefield.
    This article is more informative in the course, at least less illustrated.
  11. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 16 November 2012 11: 18
    Good means of developing a breakthrough when small garrisons armed with small arms, a small amount of heavy equipment and limited means of mining impede the advancing units. They will also be good in defense for firing from closed positions in the depth of 1,5-2 km from the line of contact, it is easy to maneuver and strengthen the defending group, due to mass use. The presence of a tank gun is a big plus, since the gun has a good range, and the shells can be inertial-corrected (like Krasnopol) and guided-missile.
    1. Kars
      Kars 16 November 2012 12: 05
      Quote: AK-74-1
      and shells can be inertial-correctable (like Krasnopol) and guided-missile.

      Then cheaper to manage.
      Quote: AK-74-1
      small garrisons armed with small arms, a small amount of heavy equipment and limited means of mining. They will also be good in defense for firing from closed positions at a depth of 1,5-2 km from the line of contact, it’s easy to maneuver and strengthen the defending group, due to mass use.

      This implies the absence of sane artillery support by the enemy, the lightly armored self-propelled guns with a range of up to 2 km are a target. It is simpler and more reliable to bring a 152 mm towed howitzer or a mortar battery.

      Quote: AK-74-1
      small garrisons armed with small arms, a small amount of heavy equipment

      Now there are no longer 1941 infantry anti-tank systems above the roof from RPGs ending with the Cornets, Métis, Dragons - if the tank has a chance to withstand the hit, then it has almost no wheel.

      Africa of the late 80s is the only sane theater of war for a ... wheeled .. tank. The rest is anti-terror and convoy operations in its rear.
      1. AK-74-1
        AK-74-1 16 November 2012 12: 37
        You just confirmed my opinion. Africa of the end of the 80's, Europe of the middle of the 2010's all these are potential theaters for the use of wheeled vehicles. Good roads; rare terrorist with RPGs; Mostly small arms ranging from 5 to 15 mm, maybe someone will have rifles in 20 mm.
        Everything else is nuances. In Europe, there is no real army, the decay of people through the imposition of a gay ideology and the general legalization of drug addiction do all the dirty work better than Peony or Msta. You can drive a shusher in a pickup truck with a cliff or cord.
        1. Mr. Truth
          Mr. Truth 16 November 2012 13: 50
          Quote: AK-74-1
          In Europe, there is no real army, the decay of people through the imposition of a gay ideology and the general legalization of drug addiction do all the dirty work better than Peony or Msta. You can drive a shusher in a pickup truck with a cliff or cord.

          It's good that you are such a comrade. The "Mighty Holy NATO" is gone along with traditional family values ​​and social norms of behavior and social reproduction.
        2. Kars
          Kars 16 November 2012 13: 50
          Quote: AK-74-1
          In Europe, there is no real army, the decomposition of people through the imposition of gay ideology and the general legalization of drug addiction

          Well, why bother with a garden? BTR 80 with KPVT than a tank? DZ or KAZ shove it on and on.
          1. bask
            bask 16 November 2012 14: 50
            An BTR 80 with a KPVT is not a tank. A BTR-90 with a fitted triple can already be called a BMP. I think with the adoption of the BTR 90 at its base, I’ll definitely install 125mm, Octopus, It would be a wheeled tank no worse, , Centaur ,, or South Africa, Ruikata ,, ..., the Airborne Forces and Marines. Just need such vehicles ,, - tanks. ,, ..
            1. Kars
              Kars 16 November 2012 15: 15
              Quote: bask
              I think with the adoption of the armored personnel carrier 90 on its base, be sure to install 125mm ,, Octopus ,,

              Wheels fly off
              Quote: bask
              ,, ..., the Airborne Forces and Marines. Just need such vehicles ,, - tanks. ,, ..

              What for? Against the tanks they need a Cornet, art support for a 120 mm self-propelled mortar - although they say they didn’t accept the Host because of the weak chassis.
              Quote: bask
              BTR 80 with KPVT not a tank

              Yes, and Ruikat by the way, too. But according to the stated goals
              Quote: AK-74-1
              Good roads; rare terrorist with RPGs; mainly small arms ranging from 5 to 15 mm

              1. bask
                bask 16 November 2012 16: 09
                They don’t fly away. The GAZ 5923 ,, Rostock ,, BTR-90 7 ton load ... The 2A 75 gun would fit just right. And it wouldn’t have been spent on the centaur ,,, but it wouldn’t have to be spent. Against the tanks, to destroy the brick walls in just right. 125mm 2A 75. And now they don’t have x .... they don’t have anything .And so, Octopus-SD, on the GC and BTR-90 on the wheel. The wheel speed over the track is obvious ..
                1. Kars
                  Kars 16 November 2012 16: 49
                  [quote = bask] Do not fly away. GAZ 5923 load capacity ,, Rostock ,, BTR-90 7 tons ... [/ quote]
                  And here is the carrying capacity? Recoil, moments of inertia, it will not fire without stopping. It will be necessary to cling to the dump. [Quote = bask]. Against the tanks, just to destroy the brick walls. 125mm [/ quote]
                  Against the tanks? Is this tired of living? And for destroying brick walls, you can use a howitzer rather than a tank gun. This is not to mention that just because of the lack of action on reinforced concrete and brick fortifications, a 152 mm gun was going to be put on the tank. [quote = bask] [quote = bask] Efficiency of the wheel drive over the track is obvious .. [/ quote]
                  It is not obvious at all, wars are usually not waged on the highway, and convoys do not drive 100 km per hour.
                  I got the link above
                  [quote] Assessing the operational mobility, it is necessary to consider the speed of the columns. And it depends not only on which propulsion device is installed on the machines, but also on the organization of the march itself, on the training of driver mechanics (drivers), on the external conditions in which this march takes place, and many other factors. With good visibility during the day on improved dirt roads, the speed of the convoy is 30-40 km / h, on paved roads - 40-50 km / h. When moving the column at night, the speed is limited to 20-25 km / h, while moving in conditions of blackout - up to 10 km / h. Thus, in these conditions, the advantages of a wheeled mover over a caterpillar are nullified [/ quote]
                  Pridetsa can be seen repeating, the article served as the inspiration for this.
                  Aksakalu sent in PM - silent for 5 days)))))
                  1. bask
                    bask 16 November 2012 17: 51
                    This is not a self-propelled gun, Geacint, 2A75 cannon with a return of only 700 mm. Compare the parameters of the Octopus SD and the APC Rostock 1. 18 tons, body length 7,070m, width, 3,152m, height 2,980. 2. ,, Rostock 22 tons, hull 8,200, width 3,100m, height, And, these are not my fantasies, these are promising projects for 2007, .. All these ,, tanks, or rather tank destroyers. They became relevant in Russia when The Ministry of Defense adopted the Brigade strategy of using armored vehicles. Having written it off from the amers ... ,, Light brigades, And the Airborne Forces and Marines, by definition, will remain such. Once again, this is a technique for them .... For combined arms brigades, tank and motorized rifle. We need an analogue, carrots, 4, and an armored personnel carrier and a puma. A MT-S intermediate medium has already been assembled MT-S 25 tons with a lifting capacity of 12 tons. Poles have already been created on its base 1997 BTP BWP-200 ...
                    1. Kars
                      Kars 16 November 2012 20: 34
                      Quote: bask
                      This is not a self-propelled gun, Geacint, 2A75 gun with a recoil of only 700 mm

                      And in tons, how much? Is it hard for you to learn the mat part?
                      Quote: bask
                      Compare the parameters ,, Octopus-SD ,, and BTR ,, Rostock

                      And you bring the parameters of the supporting surface that can understand.

                      I don’t even think about a shot on board, with its high center of gravity it will overturn. There will be no talk about stability, the second shot will blow after 40 seconds until the swing stops.
                      Quote: bask
                      ... ,, Light brigades ,, And the Airborne Forces and Marines, by definition, will remain so.

                      Why are they stuck with 25 tons when a conventional ATGM on a tripod will have the same ability to defeat?

                      This is in case if the airborne forces (I don’t understand who they need, someone thinks somewhere to land by parachute method) will have something heavier than 13 tons.
                      Quote: bask
                      The Ministry of Defense adopted the Brigadnoy strategy for the use of armored vehicles. Having written it off at Amers

                      bad business is not tricky.
                      1. bask
                        bask 16 November 2012 23: 38
                        Kars Skolko tons and what is the supporting surface. Let the specialists consider it. If you were planning to put a 125 mm gun, then everything was calculated. And approved in 25 tone, they needed maximum protection and fire support. Not on foot, with the same ATGMs running around the mountains. ! 3 tons will provide protection against PM no more ... Yes, Kars still has such a thing as, compact armor with a DZ without VV. Voteye put on such a durillo and it turns out excellent self-propelled guns to protect infantry
                      2. Kars
                        Kars 16 November 2012 23: 47
                        Quote: bask
                        How many tons and what is the supporting surface. Let the specialists consider this

                        And so vigorously began, characteristics, tsiferki. And here let specialists.
                        Quote: bask
                        If you were planning to put a 125 mm gun, then everything was calculated

                        WHO? WHERE? Calculated something?
                        Quote: bask
                        And they approved in 25 tone that they needed maximum protection and fire support

                        At 25 tons, they do not receive either one or the other.
                        Quote: bask
                        Not on foot landing, with the same ATGMs running in the mountains.

                        Well, of course, at 25 tons of shaitan arbe with bulletproof Katats reservation.
                        Quote: bask
                        ... Yes, Kars still has such a thing as, composite armor with a DZ without explosives

                        There is a concept, but no armor, and when it will be unknown
                        Quote: bask
                        Voteyo put on such a durillo and it turns out excellent self-propelled guns to protect infantry

                        It’s not fish or meat, you can buy T-90A for drop dead grandmothers. You won’t get rid of the road, RPG 7 can hardly stand it, fragments of 152 mm OFS and not hope,
                        Judging by the fact that the feathered sub-caliber projectile is the first in the list of shells for the 125-mm smoothbore gun 2A75, it is the main shell of the gun, and therefore its ballistics is close to the ballistics of the 125-mm smooth tank gun D-81. The articles do not indicate how to compensate for the recoil of the gun. For example, in the 2A-45M gun, the recoil length was increased from 340 mm to 970 mm and a powerful muzzle brake was introduced. Judging by the photos, there is no muzzle brake on the 2A75.

                        do you believe in miracles?
                      3. Kars
                        Kars 17 November 2012 00: 17
                        However, the Centaur armored vehicles were tested in combat conditions during a peacekeeping operation conducted in Somalia under the auspices of the United Nations. According to available information, at the end of 1992, eight wheeled tanks were sent to the African continent as part of a mixed armored company (in addition to the Centaurs, it included five more M-60A1 tanks).
                        Typical counterguerrilla operations were carried out in Somalia. The enemy was weakly armed and poorly trained. Nevertheless, it quickly became clear that the armor protection of the "centaurs" (as well as all other armored vehicles of this class) is clearly insufficient. She does not “hold” armor-piercing bullets of DShK machine guns, not to mention RPG-7 grenades.
                        During the assault on fortified firing positions in the city of Nasiria (Iraq, 2006), Italian forces used four Centaurs in conjunction with the Leopard tank. When driving along the narrow city streets, the "centaurs" could not overcome the impromptu barricades and other artificial obstacles. After a six-hour shootout, the Italian armored column retreated.
                        The experience of using the Centaur armored vehicles in Somalia and Iraq was carefully studied and analyzed by Western experts. It was the peacekeeping operation in Somalia that served as a starting point for revising the role and place of armored wheeled vehicles in modern armed conflicts

                        On the morning of May 16, 50 Lagunari Regiment * foot soldiers (* - auth - amphibious units of the Italian army) and the armored cavalry squadron Savoia Regiment attempted to storm the fortified enemy positions. The Italians moved through the narrow streets of the city in 8 armored personnel carriers, 4 Centauros and a specially trained Leopard tank - a barricade destroyer (a wide steel bucket was installed on it). The movement was complicated by the fact that Centauro was moving on wheels rather than crawlers, which made it difficult for him to move through barricades and other obstacles.

                        The Italians fired 5 il 6 Milan missiles to neutralize 4 enemy positions, but this did not help, and under enemy fire the movement stopped. One of the Centauro had two wheels damaged, and 2 VCC received about 8 hits from the RPG. Fortunately, their charges were designed to combat manpower and did not carry armored charges. After a 6 hour battle, the Italian column was forced to retreat. The military itself said that if they had more tanks and air support, the mission could have ended more successfully.

                        It is also very important to review and adjust the standard procedures for the course of action in certain conditions, especially in the event of an ambush. The standard picture - 10-15 militants armed with AK and RPGs ambushed a convoy of Italian troops in lightly armored vehicles. As a rule, Italians fired back from all types of weapons and left the firing zone at the highest possible speed, which, on the one hand, avoided losses, but at the same time allowed the enemy to hide without any harm to themselves, provoking him to new attacks.

                        Also, Italy should develop on its own or buy an inexpensive, well-protected, subsonic aircraft that can find and deliver accurate strikes against targets using quick-firing guns, missiles and bombs (meaning the analogue of the American gunship AC-130). Such slow aircraft with a small radius of action can for a long time barrage over the battlefield and carry out air-sniping missions (from the author - it is obvious that such aircraft can only be useful in conflicts of a low degree of intensity and to defeat an enemy devoid of an air defense system and armed only small arms / RPG
                      4. bask
                        bask 17 November 2012 09: 16
                        Then it’s better to restore the production, 152mm ,, Geocintov ,,, on the basis of today's best GM GM 123 ... And there is a blade and direct hit. And completely abandon the wheeled machinery ??? .. In the S. Caucasus I agree, that’s what it’s necessary to do. A tank of 60-70 tons on its base is a heavy armored personnel carrier. Everything. And the Airborne Forces and Marines need anyone, floating highly mobile wheeled armored vehicles ((((((Rapid deployment troops --- response (((.. .
                      5. Kars
                        Kars 17 November 2012 10: 10
                        Quote: bask
                        ,, 152mm ,, Geocintov ,,, based on the best for today GM GS 123

                        Enough of them to plow half of Europe, you can buy from us cheaply))))
                        Quote: bask
                        And completely abandon the wheeled vehicles ??? ..

                        Have I written this somewhere?
                        Quote: bask
                        And the Airborne Forces and Marines need anyone, floating highly mobile wheeled armored vehicles ((((((Rapid deployment troops --- response (((...

                        You wrote so much in one thing, it’s already becoming scary. The question is whether there is a need for the Airborne Forces or is it a remnant of the Cold War. Marines are better off landing from amphibious assault forces on which a normal tank can be transported. But this is all the confidentiality --- here the question is that it is not necessary to drive a tank on wheels.
  12. JonnyT
    JonnyT 16 November 2012 12: 07
    and can a wheeled tank swim? and what is his fuel consumption?

    In my opinion this is an economy class tank that's all
  13. hohryakov066
    hohryakov066 16 November 2012 12: 32
    Clear, clear and to the point! The article is correct, to the author +.
  14. na76
    na76 16 November 2012 12: 51
    my opinion is that howitzers and mortars, such as nonas on wheels, still have a future, and putting large-caliber guns on it is a dead end
  15. USNik
    USNik 16 November 2012 13: 02
    Since the days of the first British "canisters", the tank has always been tracked, and armored vehicles have been wheeled. The wording "wheeled tank" is not correct in principle; it would be more correct to call it a fire support vehicle. And in general, what can the same Centaur do that, for example, the BMP-3 cannot do !?
  16. Andy
    Andy 16 November 2012 13: 27
    For example, wheeled tanks should not be encountered in battle with tracked or artillery
    well, it remains only to ask the enemy not to use them ... lol
  17. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth 16 November 2012 13: 58
    The tank must be a tank. And not a cripple weighing 25 tons on wheels with the profile of a city truck.
    Such a machine does not live long. Protection is too weak for vehicles with heavy weapons, such should be in the second / third tier.
    The only wheeled vehicle with heavy weapons that can have perspective and use in combat is a self-propelled gun like the NONA. She can fire just out of the reach of anti-tank weapons. In rifle battalions, the number of vehicles in batteries should be increased from 6 to 9, and no wheeled tank is needed.
  18. Insurgent
    Insurgent 16 November 2012 14: 21
    Maybe there is an advantage on good roads, but on Russian off-road roads, it’s necessary to take it in its parts, the army must go where it is necessary and not where it is possible
  19. rennim
    rennim 16 November 2012 14: 26
    The idea of ​​installing a turret with a gun is not bad. But it’s better not to call such a design a tank ... Considering that the tactics of using tanks are not suitable for this object. I think that such vehicles are easier to qualify as self-propelled guns ... yes ... yes ... self-propelled guns. That is, a universal artillery gun (probably a howitzer gun) on a self-propelled chassis. Accordingly, the tactics of use should correspond to artillery units.
    Tracked vehicles are still better suited for an armored fist .... especially on a theater in Europe and Asia. Not for nothing is all the US equipment ... except for light armored vehicles and a Hammer on wheels ... And all the APCs on their tracks.
    1. Mr. Truth
      Mr. Truth 16 November 2012 19: 35
      Quote: rennim
      And all the APCs on their tracks.

      Tracked armored personnel carrier M-113 Gavin is no longer used by infantry, they are used by the support units of the Heavy Brigade Combat Group.
      As an infantry transport they use an FMTV truck.
      Or BTR Stryker in several teams. 70 percent of US Army formations are light infantry without armored vehicles.
      1. bask
        bask 16 November 2012 19: 48
        Mr Truth NONA ICS based on the BTR 90 has already been created. Wheeled armored vehicles will always need parts of a quick response. Airborne and Marines. They need both a 125mm anti-tank self-propelled guns and 120mm gun support systems for firing points at the leading edge. And ,, triad’s, with a tower, “Bakhcha,” from a 3M BMP. For the Russian army, each combat unit of armored vehicles must have maximum firepower and security ....
  20. dzvero
    dzvero 16 November 2012 16: 47
    there was already such an experiment - the Christie / BT tank. ended with the creation of the T-34 on a caterpillar track. another example from the same opera is all BA-type constructions. although successful BAs did take place, the course of the war showed that they were generally worse than even light tanks. their niche of combat use was too narrow.
    wheeled tanks in modern conditions are really only suitable for counterterrorist operations, and even then against the enemy who does not have the means.
    And yet - if Suvorov-Rezun had the opportunity to read this article at one time, then he probably would have written that Stalin intended by BT-shkami to capture not only Europe, but also South Africa and Angola :)
  21. Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 16 November 2012 17: 38
    In my opinion, only self-propelled guns can be wheeled, and a tank in the classical sense cannot be wheeled either.
  22. Setrac
    Setrac 16 November 2012 21: 26
    It is unclear what the argument is about, there is NONA, which is put on all types of chassis, there is an octopus, but no one calls them tanks, it’s more like a PTSAU, to shoot from behind cover and die, and the BTR-80A will have time to destroy several such under-tanks, and in light of the advent of 100mm guided missile ammunition for melon, the need for such anti-tank weapons disappears.
  23. smprofi
    smprofi 16 November 2012 23: 48
    and what will happen if you "knock" on this door with something "heavy"?

    by the way ... the case is probably not much more powerful ...
  24. not good
    not good 17 November 2012 00: 50
    Import wheeled tank is very good for tasks to replenish the intermediary's wallet wassat
  25. Odessa16
    Odessa16 17 November 2012 14: 49
    Wheeled armored vehicles have 3 promising areas, IMHO is an armored personnel carrier, a wheeled self-propelled gun (wheeled tank) and an ATGM combat vehicle (like the above-mentioned BRDM). Moreover, the second is good for raiding actions (from ambushes, shelters, etc.) and strengthening the MBT, so to speak - "one more barrel".
    But the last car is a very important element of anti-tank defense. With its cheapness (they can be mass-produced in automobile factories in larger quantities than tanks and faster), they can be armed with ATGMs and camouflaged behind every pebble. If we were to take up this particular area, and not save money on the Centaurs, combat forces would come out. Indeed, such a machine with a crew of 2-3 people can shell tanks, armored vehicles and firing points from 5-6 km, that is, when they themselves can not open fire. And if they shoot ATGMs themselves - well, the crew will be able to take away 1-2 missiles by placing smoke curtains. And if it does, the loss of $ 100-200 thousand is not big, not $ 4-6 million per tank.
  26. cesar65
    cesar65 17 November 2012 21: 21
    in the 1990, another version of this weapon, the 2С23 NONA-SVK, began to enter service.

    CAO 2С23 was created on the chassis of a wheeled armored personnel carrier BTR-80. For this, the standard turret of the base machine was replaced by a new one with an improved 2A60 gun. The BTR’s larger body made it possible to increase the ammunition load to 30 rounds. In addition, when firing from stationary firing positions, a special device is mounted on the starboard side of the machine to supply shells from the ground.

    An 7,62-mm PKT machine gun with remote control from the sight of the commander of the machine was installed as an additional weapon on the roof of the tower. Two portable Igla anti-aircraft missile systems, four machine guns, fifteen hand grenades and signal flares are also being transported in the CAO. Outside on the tower are fixed grenade launchers for setting smoke screens.

    Using the chassis of an armored personnel carrier allowed to increase the mobility of the new "NONA". So, the maximum speed on the highway increased to 80 km / h, and the range - up to 600 km. In addition, the wheeled chassis is more reliable, especially when moving troops under its own power over long distances, which is typical for Russian open spaces. The placement of SAO on the chassis of a regular combat vehicle of the ground forces facilitated maintenance and repair, training personnel, and also reduced operating costs

    "The New Ground Artillery Gun."

    The capabilities of the SAO allow it to be used not only to defeat manpower and destroy enemy defenses, but also to fight tanks, for which various ammunition are included in the ammunition.

    First of all, these are special high-explosive artillery shells with ready-to-use rifles in the leading belt; such shells can be fired at a range of up to 8,7 km, and their low initial velocity (367 m / s) allows firing with a large steepness of the trajectory. The fragmentation effect of such shells approaches the efficiency of conventional 152-mm high-explosive fragmentation shells of domestic and foreign howitzers.

    An important characteristic of the weapon of direct support of troops on the battlefield is its shortest firing range: for a projectile it is 1,7 km, and for a mine - 400 m. Therefore, ordinary 120-mm mortar shells — high-explosive, illuminating, smoke and incendiary. Sighting range of a high-explosive fragmentation mine - 7,1 km. Since during operations behind enemy lines it is not always possible to count on timely delivery of ammunition, the self-propelled gun provides for the possibility of using 120-mm high-explosive fragmentation mines from mortars of armies of other countries. This allows you to support your troops from firing positions in infantry fighting formations.

    In addition to shells and mines, active rocket shells are included in the SAO ammunition. They have a special jet engine, which allows you to increase the firing range to 13 km.

    Recent developments by domestic designers have allowed the creation of guided (self-guided and trajectory-corrected) artillery shells that are aimed at the target with a laser target, attack it in the most unprotected place, from above, and hit the tank with a probability of 0,8-0,9. Such shells called "Kitolov-2" can be used in CJSC "NONA". The firing range of the Kitolova is up to 9 km.

    To combat armored vehicles can be used not only high-precision ammunition, but also conventional shaped-charge shells. The relatively high initial velocity of such a projectile (560 m / s) provides him with high accuracy of firing at armored targets at ranges up to 1000 m, and the ability to penetrate more than 600 mm of steel armor allows, if necessary, to fight with the main tanks of the enemy.
  27. alex86
    alex86 17 November 2012 21: 39
    Yes, do not call heavy wheeled armored vehicles a tank - and the whole discussion will go to another area, where the discussion will be more correct in essence.
  28. Dikremnij
    Dikremnij 18 November 2012 02: 12
    In the Soviet Union, a similar one (wheeled tank) was also developed on the basis of the BTR-70, called Zhalo-S 2S14. But at the end of military tests, it turned out that new tanks were adopted by the NATO bloc, the armor of which the gun of this machine could not cope with.
    I believe that it is possible to design a vehicle based on the BTR-80 armored combat vehicle with a 125mm cannon in an uninhabited tower. Conduct all kinds of tests. After that, release 30 pieces (battalion) and drive "medium" motorized rifle brigades (on BTR-80) in all military districts in brigade exercises. After that, conduct a detailed analysis of whether such a vehicle is needed for weapons.
    And about the Airborne Forces and the Marines, then they and the Octopus 2S25 is enough.
    1. commbatant
      commbatant April 23 2015 00: 34
      BTR-70 and -80 base is weak, we need a specially created wheelbase under the T-72 tank turret (which is not measured)
    2. The comment was deleted.
  29. commbatant
    commbatant April 23 2015 00: 31
    So I think in the mountains and sands of the former Soviet Central Asia, wheeled tanks are suitable for reconnaissance as wheeled reconnaissance vehicles with heavy weapons or simply exported to our frostbitten allies around the world (they are probably cheaper to maintain) ....
  30. Aviktory10
    Aviktory10 22 February 2022 15: 31
    Uv NOT lovers of "wheeled tanks", remember that development is in a spiral: almost 100 years ago,
    the creation of wheeled-tracked tanks of the Red Army BT-2, BT-5 and BT-7, everything repeats .... laughing laughing