Why Western tanks lack automatic loading systems

Russian automatic loader tank The T-72 is almost three times faster than the loading American Abrams tank. However, if the autoloader of a Russian tank is jammed, the manual loading of American military equipment is faster.

The Soviet-Russian and Western schools of tank building preach diametrically opposed concepts and philosophies. One of the cardinal differences is the approach to loading a tank gun. In Soviet tanks, this operation has been managed by an automatic loader for more than half a century, while in Western counterparts, since the very first tanks, loading has been carried out with the help of a separate crew member called the loader. Of all the tanks that are in service with NATO countries, only the French tank Leclerc has an automatic loader system. Thanks to this technical solution, instead of four, the crew consists of only three people - the commander, gunner and driver. The presence of an automatic loader also made it possible to reduce the total mass of armor by seven tons, which led to an increase in maneuverability, a reduction in size, as well as the ability to direct the saved mass to increase armor protection and increase the rate of fire. Based on this, the question arises: why was the automatic loading system not implemented on the main Western tanks?

The first tank equipped with an automatic loading system was the French AMX-13 tank, developed shortly after the end of World War II. In this combat vehicle, automatic loading was carried out using a drum-type unit, driven by the recoil energy of the gun. A similar automatic drum loader was subsequently also used in several other models of military equipment, for example, in the Swedish Strv 103 tanks. In Soviet tanks, the first full-fledged automatic loader was implemented in the T-64, but before it, Soviet tank builders experimented with automation, for example, something similar was installed on the IS-7 tank, also known as the "Object 260", in which loading was carried out using a conveyor.

According to experts, the rate of fire of a tank with manual loading when using the first 10-12 unitary ammunition is almost the same as that of tanks equipped with automatic loading, but subsequently gradually decreases due to the fatigue of the crew member responsible for loading. Western engineers explain the absence of an automatic loader in their tanks by the greater safety of the crew, due to the placement of ammunition in an armored combat pack separated from the crew. An extra crew member contributes to facilitating and accelerating the loading of ammunition and maintenance of the combat vehicle. Manual loading also removes restrictions on the use of extended shots.

In the Soviet Union many years ago they came to the conclusion that the advantages of automatic loading are more important than the strengths of the loaders. Abroad, there is no consensus on this issue: some models of tanks retain manual loading, while others are equipped with automatics. Obviously, automatic loaders have firmly taken their place in the field of armored vehicles.

It is possible that in the future the number of projects with automatic loading will grow, however, manual loading should not be written off.

Comments

[Aerodrome]

Why Western tanks lack automatic loading systems

and where else can blacks use it?

[Revolver]

As someone once wrote on an English-language forum, "Will the autoloader really help if it breaks the track?" The loader is usually the largest and most beefy in the entire crew, and is used in all situations where brute physical strength is required.

[Victorovich]

And I didn’t notice something in the tutash video of the bugov-loaders, one of them is a bespectacled penny.
And this .. loading the harp alone will not pull.
I especially laughed when I looked at the Yaps - when their tank took off their shoes at demonstration performances and they hung out like ants in a crowd there, as a result, something didn’t work out without Bram.

[PROXOR]

Speaking of Western tanks and AZ. I don’t know if Japan should be considered Western, but TYPE90 and TYPE 10 are actually also with AZ. So Leclerc is not the only tank with AZ Western countries.

[Shurik70]

The presence of an automatic loader also made it possible to reduce the total mass of armor by seven tons.

Any connoisseurs?
How does an automatic loader reduce the mass of armor?

[PROXOR]

Reduction of reserved space. Not for nothing that NATO tanks are so healthy.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

As someone once wrote on an English-language forum, "Will the autoloader really help if it breaks the track?" The loader is usually the largest and most beefy in the entire crew, and is used in all situations where brute physical strength is required.

Bullshit. The caterpillar usually breaks when hitting a mine. At the same time, you won’t get off with one caterpillar, it will also destroy the skating rink. At the same time, the place of damage to the caterpillar is from below. Even if you spit on a broken ice rink, the tank must first be pulled back. Which cannot be done without an evacuation vehicle.
And will a "strong loader" help a lot here?
And in battle, if the tank was immobilized in the shelling zone, then the crew does not need to deal with repairs, but run until they finish it off.

[begemot20091]

Really? but how they put shoes on a skidder without an evacuation machine at logging sites, trumpeters on gas pipelines, bulldozers ... and there is only one tractor driver, and the frost is under 45. I don’t understand a damn thing

[TIR]

Complete nonsense about armored curtains at Abrams. If there were high-explosive fragmentation shells in the BC, these armored curtains would be knocked out immediately along with the knockout panels. You just need to strengthen the hull in our MBTs. Especially the board

[Boniface]

For tank 1, the caterpillar weighs 1600 kg (T-72, T-64) for the DT-75 tractor (swamp vehicle) - 785 kg (+/-) error

But the difference is almost 3 times

[begemot20091]

no need for a wiki. I can read myself. for me, as a young boy, the students pulled the caterpillar upstairs with crowbars. I first sat on a trelevochnik. broke the track - and did not even know that the sloth should be released, use the repair finger ... etc. the girls pulled the goose with crowbars and I "docked" the caterpillar. so men can do it much easier by releasing the sloth, and there are a lot of ways to pull the caterpillar with an asterisk. one problem if the tank was left under fire.

[PROXOR]

Nuance. Abrashka does not carry land mines. They are generally not, as such, in the ammunition load of Western tanks.

[svp67]

It is possible that in the future the number of projects with automatic loading will grow, however, manual loading should not be written off.

Mechanisms to facilitate the loading of tanks will increasingly be installed on tanks with an increase in the caliber of guns installed in them, and hence an increase in the mass and geometric dimensions of artillery shots.
And yet ..., NATO loaders show the maximum loading speed on all videos with the lightest of the shells - BOPS, as soon as the loader begins to operate with heavier shells, the loading speed begins to drop sharply
And of course, it’s high time for our tank builders to switch to crazy AZs. Which will help solve a lot of issues, both in terms of the type of projectiles used, and in terms of reload speed, and the security of the crew can be raised

[PROXOR]

It’s better to finish the layout of Almaty. There the crew sits far behind the wall from ammunition and fuel.

[IVZ]

When developing our tanks, the designers had to solve the problem of minimizing the amount of reserved space (AZ allows this) to reduce the weight of the tank while meeting the level of protection and firepower to international standards. The problem is in a vast territory with not always developed transport infrastructure. Plus the lag in technology: engines, transmissions, control systems. Well, material consumption, which allows to reduce the cost of the product, plus a decrease in size, partly leveling the advantage of the OMS of Western tanks. I think recent events are boosting work to overcome the technological gap.

[TIR]

Soviet tank building after the Second World War was ahead of the Western one by a decade. In terms of armor and weapons, we did not need to conduct R&D for several years. Behind him was a huge experience, plus there were samples of German guns and tanks. It was the tank destroyer that we could do better than Abrams, but the designers were given tasks that contradicted each other. And even on a modern technological base, two opposites cannot be simultaneously performed in one machine. They could put a gun like the German 8,8dm, but then with such a caliber HE shells would be weak. You can make a super-protected tank, but then the mass cannot be entered into the terms of reference. So I had to create tanks with compromise solutions. Hence the term OBT. A good help to increase all indicators was given by AZ

[svoroponov]

Before real battles, the Americans secretly remove or simply do not equip their tanks with high-explosive fragmentation and other ammunition, except for armor-piercing shells if they are used on the offensive. This was told by a former crew member of Abrams. And why they are trying to quietly get rid of other types of ammunition before an offensive, this is a matter of insurance for military personnel. This is the question of why our tanks tear off the tower when the ammunition load is blown up, but they don’t.
As soon as they complete the ammunition racks with types of shells (Iraq showed) like ours, the same thing happens with their towers when they are defeated. An explosion inside and the tower strive to fly. Well, and one more thing, they are also trying to show videos with the separation of towers from their tanks with the help of military censorship and a ban on publication without its approval, not to be shown anywhere.
This creates the desired picture of the reliability of their tanks.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: svoroponov

An explosion inside and the tower strive to fly.

and if the tower didn’t fly away: they sit, drink “fife o clock” ... and they don’t care ...

[IVZ]

The tower is torn off by the ignition of propellant charges. Detonation of explosives in OF or cumulus. projectiles - a very rare phenomenon and its consequences look, as a rule, more impressive.

[TIR]

You are not right. Charges do not explode. They are on fire. And they burn at a very high temperature. When they burn, characteristic smoke and fire comes out of the hatches. Most of the time, they ignite first. If conscious, there will be a few seconds of time to leave the car. When the charges flare up to full, then HE shells explode from the high temperature. Now, from their undermining, not only the tower flies, but also the hull is torn to shreds like paper. The nephew was on fire in the self-propelled guns near Kiev. We managed to crawl away while the charges were burning. Then an explosion, shell shock, a plane, Moscow, a hospital. Burnt badly

[Demon]

The charges burn in an open space with a large release of heat; an explosion occurs in a closed space. At the training ground, he disposed of unused charges, sometimes they experimented with boxes and other improvised items. So, at a closed box, the lid was torn off, if you turn the lid down, then it was either torn to pieces or flew away, depending on the state of the box.

[Luto Kris]

You are right, but a little more clarification is needed. The closed space for the charge under normal conditions inside the tank is only the breech itself after locking, and the tank itself becomes a closed space only when a certain number of AZ charges are ignited. When the charges are burning in the AZ itself, a gradual but increasing ignition of all the charges occurs, as a result of which, not immediately, but the pressure increases and knocks out the hatches. If there is enough HE in the ammo rack, then with the turret flying off. So, in the first minutes after the ignition of the AZ, the crew still has the opportunity to get out of the tank. But if an HE shell hits, then of course there are no chances anymore, except sometimes except for the driver.

[Bodipancher]

Now the Britons are still stuffing explosives into the Challengers for a self-destruct mechanism. The crew will be very comfortable)

[sergej_84]

The Soviet-Russian and Western schools of tank building preach diametrically opposed concepts and philosophies

Already after this phrase, it is clear that the authors will continue to "revenge the blizzard." And indeed - "sweep".

The first tank equipped with an automatic loading system was the French AMX-13 tank, developed shortly after the end of World War II.

The first tank equipped with an automatic loading system was the American T22E1 tank, the development of which began as early as 1942.

In reality, there are no "diametrically opposed concepts"; there is a principle of expediency in each specific case. For example, when creating the Leopard-2KW III, the Germans decided that it was advisable to equip it with an automatic loader.

[Victorovich]

The level of this material is a report by a 6th grade student, made with the help of a brother from college.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

It is necessary to proceed from the following points:
First, the experience of the USSR in the use of tanks is many times greater than the experience of the United States.
Secondly, the video and photos of turrets torn off as a result of an explosion of ammunition can and do impress especially sensitive persons, but we should not forget that in order for the propellant charges to ignite, and even more so, the detonation of explosives in shells, something must occur in the reserved space that will exceed crew survival rate. And the dead, forgive my cynicism, it doesn't matter if the tower is demolished later or not. In addition, the removal of ammunition from the habitable space in the same Abrams only helps if the ammunition has already been used. Undermining the ammunition in the compartment directly located on the turret of the tank is no different from a direct hit of the AB in the tank.

[Foul skeptic]

we should not forget that in order for propellant charges to ignite, and even more so for detonation of explosives in shells, something must occur in the reserved space that will many times exceed the level of crew survival.

no

the removal in the same Abrams of ammunition for habitable space helps only if the ammunition has already been used

no

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Your "no" has long collapsed below the plinth. Especially after the breakthrough of the Maginot line became a revelation for you.
Have you ever seen a tank live? Outside, inside, not from the couch.

[Foul skeptic]

Your "no" has long collapsed below the plinth.

Well of course

Especially after the breakthrough of the Maginot line became a revelation for you.

You understand that anyone in the history of correspondence will be able to get acquainted with the content of our conversation that "Hitler, following the results of the Finnish campaign, did not want to spit on the Maginot line on the French border, and therefore did not bypass it, but broke through" (namely, this is how you were question asked)

Have you ever seen a tank live? Outside, inside, not from the couch.

Saw

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Well of course

So you can't argue with the facts.

Saw

Except at the parade. But then again, what are your words worth? The void is behind them, anonymous.

[Foul skeptic]

So you can't argue with the facts.

You didn't. After all, in addition to the sources that I have already cited, I can add new ones for each of your encroachments. And the most different. For example, such

Except at the parade.

You are being extremely stupid.

But then again, what are your words worth?

And yours, a "tank specialist", who until recently told me about the role of tanks (using the Tiger as an example) and, as always, wiped himself off after a documentary refutation of your nonsense.

The void is behind them, anonymous.

It is normal when a person does not have a painful perception of his own person in order to show diplomas, photographs, etc., as you do. Here is the opposite deviation.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

You didn't. After all, in addition to the sources that I have already cited, I can add new ones for each of your encroachments. And the most different. For example, such

Yes, calm down already. No one denies that the Germans made the main blow bypassing.
But to deny the breakthrough of the Maginot Line is idiocy.

And yours, a "tank specialist", who until recently told me about the role of tanks (using the Tiger as an example) and, as always, wiped himself off after a documentary refutation of your nonsense.

Are you having another bout of fantasy?

It is normal when a person does not have a painful perception of his own person in order to show diplomas, photographs, etc., as you do. Here is the opposite deviation.

I heard one expression, very accurate in my opinion. It's called the empty biography syndrome. This is when a person lived according to his mind, acted rationally according to his own understanding, and so on, in short, life was a success.
But now maturity has passed, old age is already looming, but there is nothing to remember something like that.
And a certain discomfort begins in a person. Especially when his peers, or even younger, whom he previously considered fools and losers, still have something to remember and tell.
This is where a painful reaction begins in such a character. He opens an account on some military or near-military site and behaves like a bath list. Thus, comforting your CHSV.

[Foul skeptic]

Yes, calm down already.

That is, the fact that it was you who decided to recall the conversation about the Maginot line in this topic, you have already forgotten. Well, okay, it happens.

Nobody denies...

Ah, no longer denied. Oh well. How does the initial statement fit in with "does not deny" - "After which he did not care about the Maginot line"? If it didn’t matter, then no one would bother with the complication of logistics, the tank corps would not pass through the Ardennes, they would not worsen their position by attacking Belgium, and so on.

But also to deny the breakthrough of the Maginot line

Because to call a breakthrough of a fortified line 1) restrictive actions in the form of showing activity and readiness for an assault to keep 500 French troops in the operational area attached to reinforce the garrisons and 000) attacks during Operation Tiger and Bear, including from the rear (as this was done by the 2th corps), those single casemates of the Maginot line, where, after the order of the French command to abandon (surrender) the fortifications, the remnants of the garrisons (16/1 of the number left to DESTROY the casemate artillery and other materiel) decided not to obey, .. This is to sign a misunderstanding of 3) terminology and 1) history. Exactly the same as telling that the merit in the "breakthrough" lies with the "aht-aht".

Are you having another bout of fantasy?

You decided to abandon your words, where you do not agree that the Tiger is primarily a means of anti-tank weapons - "Declaring that the "Tiger" was created primarily as an anti-tank weapon is already beyond reason."? And an answer to you in the form of excerpts from Merkblat 47a / 29, from Guderian's work "Achtung Panzer", from "Manual for combat and combat employment of smaller unit" with the words of Kesselring and Simon, etc. did not have? Oh well.

I heard one expression, very accurate in my opinion.

When you wrote everything that follows, did you look in the mirror? Because this is in full accordance with what I wrote about the painful perception of your own person. With all these, but look at my diploma, but look, I'm near the helicopter, but here is a link to my stories and the like. What is this if not an attempt at self-compensation.

[begemot20091]

That's for sure. there are such divan ponds

[Foul skeptic]

It's good when such self-critical ones come across among them.

[Lisman]

The text is nothing ... The question is posed why? No answer given! Why they wrote it is not clear.

[Ezekiel 25-17]

With the transition of the Western school of tank building to the 4th generation MBT, their designers will also use an automatic loader.

[Dart]

I wonder if it’s possible to put a minus on the article .... two paragraphs about nothing on a topic that has been covered hundreds of times.

[Berg berg]

Because they have a cheap loading black man.