The shelling of the T-54/55 tank with cumulative shells from grenade launchers, missile systems and self-propelled guns
What can be done with a tank, which does not have combined armor and dynamic protection, an anti-tank grenade launcher? What about an anti-tank missile and cumulative shells of 100 and 152 mm caliber?
Answers to all these questions will be given to us by the Hungarian report on testing the T-54/55 tank by firing from several types of weapons, which included a whole arsenal of RPG-7, SPG-9, Fagot and Konkurs anti-tank systems, Rapira guns , as well as the “monster” in the face of the Akatsiya self-propelled artillery mount. But first things first. And first of all, you need to talk about the test conditions.
In order to avoid dangerous situations associated with the detonation of explosives and fires, inert training projectiles were placed in the tank's ammunition racks, and ordinary water was poured instead of fuel. At the same time, the rest of the working fluids were not replaced.
To simulate the impact of damaging factors on the crew, wooden simulators dressed in standard uniforms were installed in the places of the tankers.
All this made it possible to bring the experimental conditions as close as possible to real ones with the possibility of assessing the consequences of hitting ammunition on the vehicle.
RPG-7 anti-tank grenade launcher (PG-7V shot)
A hit from an RPG-7 on the lower frontal part of the hull on the left in the area of attachment for a mine trawl. The cumulative jet pierced the armor and interrupted the fuel line. If there was fuel, not water, a fire could start. However, the fire extinguishing system could have eliminated it. Injuries are generally assessed as light.
Hit from RPG-7 on the right external fuel tank in the area of the aft part of the tank hull. The cumulative jet pierced the tank and side armor plate, stopping in the engine's water radiator. The damage is light.
A hit from an RPG-7 on the right side of the turret near the loader. The cumulative jet, breaking through the armor, hooked the filter-ventilation unit, the mount of the coaxial machine gun and the gun breech. In general, the damage is not very serious, and the tank can be repaired fairly quickly, but the loader is very likely to be seriously injured if he was inside.
Hit from the RPG-7 in the tank track roller. The explosion of the projectile and the cumulative jet battered him well, crushing the tire. However, the jet did not reach the main side armor, so the car is generally intact.
Hit from RPG-7 in the aft part of the T-55 hull. The cumulative jet, breaking through the aft armor plate, broke through the cooling system fan, water radiator and right exhaust manifold. The damage was light, the tank could continue moving until the engine overheated..
SPG-9 easel grenade launcher (PG-9V shot)
Hit from the SPG-9 (shooting in the forehead of the tank) on the right fender liner in the fender area. The explosion tore off the fender liner and threw it a couple of tens of meters. The cumulative jet, which passed along the caterpillar, hit the rear fender liner and tore it off with about the same result. The tank was not damaged.
Hit from SPG-9 on the left side of the tower. The cumulative jet, having made holes in the armor, immediately exited it without causing any damage to the internal equipment. The oil tank may have been damaged, but this does not affect the combat capability of the tank.
Hit from SPG-9 on the left side of the tower. The cumulative jet pierced the armor, the tank radio station and partially touched the ammunition load. Fragments broke the infrared searchlight of the commander's observation device. If there were shots with combat equipment in the car, a fire and detonation could occur, followed by the destruction of the tank.
Anti-tank 100-mm gun MT-12 "Rapier" (UBK2 shot with a cumulative projectile)
Hit from the MT-12 cannon in the right frontal part of the T-55 turret. The cumulative jet pierced the tower almost through, stopping in the rear armor. The loader would have received very severe injuries. In the presence of live shots in the turret ammo rack, a detonation or fire could occur.
Hit from the MT-12 cannon in the upper frontal part of the hull to the right of the driver. The cumulative jet pierced the armor and hit the tank rack with fuel and shells. The fatal consequences of this need no comment.
Hit from the MT-12 cannon on the starboard side of the T-55 hull. Armor broken. In combat conditions, this, in principle, often ends in a fire or detonation of an ammunition rack.
Hit from the MT-12 cannon in the stern of the tower on the right. The cumulative jet pierced the tower almost through. At best, it could only kill the loader, and at worst, undermine or set fire to the turret ammunition rack.
Anti-tank missile system "Fagot"
Hit from the Fagot ATGM on the upper frontal part of the T-55 hull on the right side. The armor was pierced, the cumulative jet pierced the tank rack with shells and fuel. Consequences in the form of fire and detonation are guaranteed.
Hit from the ATGM "Fagot" in the commander's cupola on the right. The armor, of course, is pierced, and the commander is theoretically dead. They also write that, perhaps, the gunner would have been hooked.
Anti-tank missile system "Competition" (rocket 9M113)
Hit from the ATGM "Konkurs" in the area where the driver is located. The cumulative jet pierced the armor and stopped only in the tank engine in the stern. Most of the crew would have been fatally or seriously injured: the driver, gunner and commander.
Hit from the ATGM "Konkurs" in the upper frontal part of the hull to the right of the driver. The armor was pierced, the tank rack with ammunition and fuel, as well as the gun stabilizer. The consequences are also obvious: fire and detonation.
2S3 "Acacia" (3VBP2 shot with a 152-mm cumulative projectile)
A 152-mm cumulative projectile hit the right frontal part of the turret in the area of the coaxial machine gun embrasure. External damage to the tank is understandable without words, and this is given that the tower was torn off the shoulder strap. The cumulative jet pierced the frontal armor of the tower and stopped in its stern. The detonation of the turret ammunition rack with the subsequent destruction or burnout of the tank is ensured. But even if there is no ammo rack, the tank needs serious repairs after such a hit.
Hit of a 152-mm cumulative projectile in the upper frontal part of the hull. The armor was pierced, the cumulative jet hit the tank rack with ammunition and fuel. The consequences are clear.
Hit of a 152-mm cumulative projectile in the track roller. Oddly enough, the side armor was not pierced, but the external damage to the vehicle is quite noticeable. However, no serious damage was done. After a little overhaul, the machine may be ready to go back into service.
The test results - in particular when firing in the forehead - clearly showed that the steel armor of tanks, the relevance of which remained for 10-20 years after the Second World War, does not give any hope of protection even from outdated cumulative ammunition. All that can be counted on in this case is a “successful” collision with the projectile, when it is either unable to penetrate the armor due to an unsuccessful hit point, or the cumulative jet does not touch the crew and dangerous equipment of the vehicle. In general, pure chance with an incalculable chance of being embodied in reality.
And, since the talk about this information will still affect the special military operation in Ukraine, where a small number of T-54/55s were sent a couple of months ago, it is worth noting one thing. All these flaws of the machine are known to the military in full, so no one is in a hurry to use them for their intended purpose - you can’t trample on an enemy well-equipped with anti-tank weapons. Therefore, all that is limited to the activities of these "old men" at the front is the role of self-propelled artillery installations and bases for automatic guns.
The source of information:
Partial translation of a four part article series titled "Kísérleti lövészet T54-es harckocsikra 1989-ben, a "0" ponti gyakorlótéren" published in the Hungarian military's Haditechnika magazine, written by Colonel István Ocskay of the Hungarian MoD Defense Technology Research Center (ORCID : 0000-0003-0279-8215).
Information