The comparison will not only be against each other, although this is of course very important, but in general according to the typical combat situations in which a modern tank may find itself. To start the characteristics of both machines:
|
T-72B |
М1А2 "Abrams" |
|
Total information: Year of adoption: 1985-th. Length - 9530mm. Width - 3460mm. Height - 2226mm. Weight - 44,5t. Crew - Xnumx. Maximum speed - 60km / hr. Power reserve - 700km (with additional tanks). Clearance - 470mm. Habitability - seats with backs and stove. Power supply - 18,9.l./t. |
Total information: Year of adoption: 1994-th. Length - 9766mm. Width - 3653mm. Height - 2375mm. Weight - 62,1t. Crew - Xnumx. Maximum speed - 66km / hr. Power reserve - 460km. Clearance - 457mm. Habitability - seats with backs and stove. Power supply - 24,2.l./t. |
|
Armament: - 125mm / 51 smooth-bore gun launcher 2A46M + bipolar stabilizer 2E42-1 "Jasmine" + automatic loader I am on 22 shot. Artillery shells: BOPS¹ ZBM-44 - to defeat point armored targets. KS² ZBK-29M - to defeat armored targets. OFS³ ZOF-26 - to defeat manpower and areal "soft" targets. Guided missiles: Ur4 9М119 precision weapon for defeat point ground and air targets at a long distance. Total ammunition 45 artillery shells and guided missiles. - 7,62mm machine gun Fct paired with a gun. - 12,7mm machine gun NSWT in the cliff anti-aircraft installation above the commander's hatch.
|
Armament: - 120mm / 44 smooth-bore gun M256 + bipolar electro-hydraulic stabilizer. Artillery shells: BOPS М829А2 - to defeat point armored targets. КС M830 - to defeat armored targets. PEC5 М830А1 - to defeat hidden manpower. OS6 M1028 - to defeat manpower. Guided missiles are missing. Total ammunition 42 artillery shell. - 7,62mm machine gun M240 paired with a gun. - 7,62mm machine gun M240 in the installation above the loader hatch. - 12,7mm machine gun M2 in installation over the hatch commander.
|
|
Fire control system: usual 1A40-1 - tank digital ballistic computer TBV. - DVO7+ LD8 aim TPD-K1 gunner. Increase 8h. - iK9 aim TPN-3-49 gunner. Increase 5,5h. - combined sight-device DVO+iK1K13-49 gunner. Increase 8h by day and 5,5h at night. - combined instrument DVO+iKTKN-3М commander. Increase 5h by day and 4,2h at night. - 4 periscope instruments in the commander's cupola. - radio station P-173.
This system provides target detection and aimed shooting from the BOPS distance to a distance. 4km by day and 1,2km at night, other types of shells 5km by day and 1,2km at night. Launch missiles on 5km in the afternoon and before 1,2km at night from a place. |
Fire control system: Automated with input sensor system. - tank digital ballistic computer TBV. - combined DVO+ LD +Ti10 aim GPS[/B]gunner (the commander has a channel from him). Increase 9,5h by day and 9,8h at night. - DVOaim M920 gunner. Increase 8h. - combined DVO+Tiappliance CITV the commander. - 8 periscope instruments in the commander's cupola. - tank information and control system TIUS Fbcb2 the commander. - radio station SINCGARSthe commander.
This system provides target detection and sighting.13 shooting from a course of all types of shells at a distance of 5km in the afternoon and before 3km at night. |
|
Security: - hull forehead: combined armor + semi-active armor + Contact-1 NDZ. - the front of the tower: combined armor + semi-active armor + NDZ "Contact-1". - hull board: monolithic armor + rubber-fabric screen + Contact-1 NDZ. - turret: combined armor + NDZ "Contact-1" in front and solid armor in the back. - body feed: monolithic armor. - feed tower: monolithic armor. - upper part: combined armor + semi-active armor + NDZ "Contact-1" from the front to the middle and monolithic armor from the middle to the stern. - anti-nuclear protection GROOVE. - smoke screen, smoke grenade launchers 902B "Cloud". |
Security: - hull forehead: combined armor. - The forehead of the tower: combined armor. - hull board: spaced monolithic armor. - Board turret: combined armor in front and solid armor in the back. - body feed: monolithic armor. - feed tower: monolithic armor. - top: monolithic armor along the entire length. - anti-nuclear protection GROOVE. - smoke screen, smoke grenade launchers. |
|
Mobility: - multi-fuel diesel engine V12 B-46-1 power 840l.s - onboard mechanical 7 + 1-speed gearboxes OPF. - individual torsion suspension 6 road wheels on board. 3 supporting the rink. Caterpillar with RMSH. |
Mobility: - gas turbine engine AGT-1500 power 1500l.s - automatic, hydromechanical transmission X-1100-3B. - auxiliary power unit APU power 6,8l.s - individual torsion suspension 7 road wheels on board. Caterpillar with RMSH. |
The table shows that although our T-72B and older than the opponent for whole 9 years, its combat and technical characteristics are still at a high enough level and allow in some moments to argue with the American and even surpass it in some places. But first things first:
Firepower.
In order to hit and destroy the enemy, the tank must first detect it. In a tank crew, this task falls on the commander, who has the necessary instrumentation for this purpose. After detecting the target, the commander gives target designation to the gunner, who is already aiming and shooting. The commander at this time is busy searching for other targets. This principle is known as the hunter-shooter. There is also a mode of simultaneous search for a target by a tank commander and a gunner. The latter uses its sights for this purpose. During the day, both tanks are almost equal, although the advantage of the CITV-stabilized in two planes before the TKN-3M combined device of the T-72B tank is obvious. But still, both tanks can detect each other at any distance. Problems begin at night. The infrared channel of the command device TKN-3М provides the T-72B with the detection of a “tank” target at night at a distance of no more than 500m. The thermal imaging channel of the commander's CITV tank М1А2 will be able to detect our T-72B from a distance 3000м. At the same amount at night, the gunner "Abrams" sees through the combined GPS sight. Infrared active-passive night sight TPL-3-49 and sight-pointing device UR 1K13-49 gunner T-72B see in active mode a maximum of 1200-1300. This is 2,5 times more than the TKN-3М commander's device, which is at least strange (thus, the principle of "hunter-gunner" in the T-72B tank is very doubtful at night). However, this is all the same in 2-3 times less than M1A2 sees at night, which is very, very dangerous for T-72B. The Abrams commander also has a channel from the gunner’s GPS sight, can see through it and, if necessary, can fire a cannon instead of a gunner (for example, if that gun goes down). The commander of the T-72B is deprived of this opportunity. In addition, the Abrams commander sees the entire tactical situation and technical parameters on the FBCB2 TIUS color screen, which allows him to navigate better than the commander T-72B, which has only voice information from the P-173 radio station.
After the goal is found the task of the gunner accurately hit her. During the day due to the missile part of the T-72B has an advantage, but only at the greatest distances. KUV 9K120 "Svir" has a special high-precision laser guidance system through the 1K13-49 device and allows you to accurately get a guided missile almost into a loophole from a distance to 5000m. Moreover, even maneuvering the target will not save it from the guided missile it is targeting. This allows the T-72B to effectively fire at not only ground targets, but also airborne ones (military helicopters that are very dangerous for a tank, for example). Thus, the KUV 9K120 "Svir" T-72B performs the functions of an air defense tank in one. Abrams does not have such capabilities. At the same time, in the artillery part of the OMS T-72B, even in the daytime it is significantly inferior to the М1А2. Ballistic corrector11 of the TPD-K1 laser sight-rangefinder works out the correction for the type of ammunition and the distance to the target, measured by the laser rangefinder. After that, the digital ballistic computer calculates the correction for the flanking speed of the target and projects it into the eyepiece of the sight. In order for the TPD-K1 to work out the correction for the flank speed of the target, the gunner must manually enter it into the sight. Naturally, no one will do this in an intense battle. The option is useful only in a long-range shooting situation, when the target moves at a uniform speed and does not see the tank. Then the hitting accuracy will be significantly higher. Correction for atmospheric conditions in the T-72B is not being worked out. The aiming range of artillery shells is a rather vague thing, but the effective range of fire at point targets with artillery shells for the T-72B is approximately 2000-2500m. The automated control system "Abrams" is considered one of the best in the world and takes into account all possible data: type of ammunition, range, wind, pressure, charge and air temperature, barrel bore bending, its misalignment with the sight, etc. Effective firing range of about 2500-3000m. At night, the Abrams has full advantage as it sees two to three times farther than the T-72B. Accordingly, he will shoot effectively at night two to three times further. Guided missile weapons T-72B will not help here for obvious reasons.
After precise guidance has been reached, the actual firepower of the tank comes into play. Both tanks are equipped with similar in capabilities, but completely different in design guns. The Abrams is equipped with the German 120mm unitary-loading smooth-bore gun, which is manufactured in the US under license and is called the M256. The gun has a relatively short barrel length 44 caliber with quick-release pipe (liner), but at the same time quite thick walls and is designed for a very large internal pressure. The T-72B is equipped with a 125mm 2А46М smooth-bore cannon for separate-sleeve loading. This gun is designed for lower pressure compared to the M256, but it also has a larger caliber, a much longer barrel in the 51 caliber and a larger volume of charging chamber. As a result, the X-NUMXmm gun T-125B is almost a ton lighter than the 72mm gun MXNXX120, but at the same time it is not inferior and even slightly surpasses it in the muzzle energy: 1MJ in 2mm gun 93,16-X125M against 2MJ in XNMXMX True to the 125mm guns T-72B there are drawbacks. Due to its lighter design compared to the 120mm M256, the gun of a domestic tank is more susceptible to bending and vibration when fired, which naturally adversely affects the accuracy. In addition, the 2А46М has almost twice the smaller resource in 450 shots against 700 in the 120mm gun of an American tank. The latter, however, is not a big problem for a lined gun, where replacing the inner liner is a matter of several tens of minutes. The undoubted advantage of the 125mm gun T-72B in the presence of the automatic loader (AZ). This allows the gunner to select and charge the desired type of ammunition with one light touch of the button on the dashboard. AZ allows you to maintain the same rate of fire in 8 shots per minute, regardless of flow time, combat conditions, specific situation, etc. In the old manner, the Abrams cannon is charged manually by a loader, which, although it can charge it for some time at the same speed as the AZ of the T-72B, is otherwise a fault. At first, this greatly increased the size of the tower, which worsened its security and increased vulnerability. Because of the same gunner and the commander had to be placed together in the right side of the tower, having retracted one single hatch for two. When firing, the loader may become banal tired and can no longer load the gun so quickly. Wounding or poisoning the loader will generally leave a cannon without projectiles. In addition, at the moment when the projectile is in the hands of the loader, there is a sharp bump, getting into the tank or even simply turning the turret to the side can provoke the projectile falling out of his hands (such cases are not uncommon). What it can turn into, I think, there is no need to explain. Who knows, because of this, in the Abrams ammunition package there is still no high-explosive fragmentation projectile. T-72B is devoid of all these shortcomings. In addition, after the shot, the shot pan in the T-72B is ejected through the aft turret of the turret, which provides sufficient fresh air inside the tank. In Abrams everything stays inside.
If the characteristics of the guns differ slightly, the equipment of both tanks with ammunition and their capabilities differ quite significantly. The main type of ammunition for hitting targets of the type “tank” for both tanks are armored-piercing pierced sabots with a separating pan after the shot. The best of them for the 125mm gun 2А46 tank T-72B is considered to be ZBM-44 "Mango". This projectile has a tungsten core and is fired at an initial speed of 1715m / s, which provides it with a direct shot at the tank type 2120m. The equivalent armor penetration of this projectile is normally rated as 500-550mm homogeneous armor from a distance 2000m and around 600mm when fired at close range. This is enough to defeat the first modifications of the Abrams М1 and М1А1 to any place, but apparently not enough to defeat the М1А2 tank in the most powerfully protected frontal zones. М1А2 this projectile is hit in the board, in the stern and in the weakened frontal projection zones, which in М1А2 make up about 40% of the frontal projection. The 9M119 guided missile is a high-precision weapon used to hit point targets at maximum distances, including airborne ones. A missile pierces roughly 750mm armor regardless of distance. The 9М119 missile of the М1А2 tank is, in principle, possible in any place, but in the forehead it is not guaranteed. It is also very common in the ammunition of the T-72B tank cumulative shells such as ZBK-18M or ZBK-29M. The shells have armor penetration 550mm and 700mm respectively. The latter have a chance to hit the M1А2 including in the weakened zone of the frontal projection. It is worth noting that now there are more powerful domestic XPSUM caliber BOPS, which have better characteristics and can fight with frontal armor of almost any Western tanks. These include the ZBM-44M and the ZBM-48 "Lead". However, for 125mm guns 2А46М tank T-72B such ammunition is not available. It is necessary to replace the gun with more powerful models 125mm smoothbore guns 2А46М4, 2А46М5 or 2А82. The main ammunition for the 120mm guns М256 tank М1А2 is a fairly perfect 120mm BOPS М829А2. The shell has a depleted uranium core and a separating pallet. The 44's M256 caliber gun fires this projectile with an initial speed of 1630m / s. Direct shot range over 2000. Penetration around 700mm from a distance of 2000, which theoretically provides for the defeat of T-72B from any place. There is also a cumulative M830 projectile, but its characteristics roughly correspond to our old ZBK-18M. In the forehead with such a projectile T-72B does not break through anywhere. The defeat of this ammunition T-72B having a powerful anti-cumulative protection, is possible only in the stern and possibly in the board, but in the board is not guaranteed. In the US, there are more powerful projectiles such as M829А3, but their deliveries have just begun and they are intended primarily for more powerful 120mm guns with barrel lengths in 55 calibers. These guns are installed on the M1А2SEP tanks, the number of which, in service with the US Army, is even lower than that of the T-80U and T-90 / T-90А tanks in service with the Russian army. While the T-72B artillery unit is clearly inferior to the M1A2 in terms of "anti-tank" capabilities, in terms of its anti-personnel capabilities, as well as in destructive power, with the defeat of "soft", areal targets (typical, urban multi-storey building, bunker, the center for fire safety, etc.) T-72B has a significant advantage. High-explosive fragmentation projectiles of the type ZOF-26 possess simply gigantic destructive power. If necessary, T-72B can be used as an ACS and firing from closed positions using the side level. In this case, the damage from the fall of one projectile will be comparable to the ACS 2C1 "Carnation". The 9М119 rocket can accurately hit the embrasure or window from a distance of 5km. “Fragile grenades” of type М830А1 and М1028 of М1А2 tank are capable of striking the enemy's living force, the first of which is behind obstacles, but they are incapable of causing any significant damage.
General conclusion: Of course, due to much more modern electronics, perfect control system, powerful BOPS, the M1A2 "Abrams" tank has an advantage over the T-72B in most various situations of tank combat. The superiority of the Abrams is especially strong at night. The T-72B does not give an unambiguous advantage, even the presence of missiles, since it is not always possible to use missiles and not everywhere they are more profitable than classical artillery shells. But the advantage of M1A2 takes place only in classic tank battles like Prokhorovka. It seems that the developers of the vehicle, trying to ensure the superiority of the M1A2 over Soviet tanks, somehow forgot that the tank is not an ATGM and it must be able to fight a wide variety of targets on the battlefield, and not just tanks. М1А2 "Abrams" can only fight well against enemy tanks. The armament of the T-72B is incomparably more versatile and diverse. Need to hit an enemy tank? BOPS, UR and KS to choose from. It all depends on the distance. Need to hit a window from 5 kilometers or shoot down a helicopter? No question - URs are ready to do it with ease. Do you need to "blow up" a house or a bunker where the enemy has settled? Powerful OFS at service. Infantry fighting? The same OFSs and machine guns. For firing at helicopters, you can use an anti-aircraft gun with a 12,7mm NSVT machine gun. M1A2 has nothing of the kind. As artillery fire support, air defense, anti-personnel weapons, it is significantly inferior to the T-72B. Two machine guns on the Abrams turret are installed on conventional machines and are more intended for firing at ground targets. Although it is possible to shoot them at air targets, it is inconvenient and limited. This issue is more related to the active defense (protection) of the tank from enemy air attack. The armament of the T-72B is more profitable in the conditions in which both tanks still have to actually fight.
Security, survivability, crew survival.
In this area, the national tank school has always traditionally occupied a leading position, although American propaganda made every effort to create the myth about the invulnerability of Abrams-type tanks and, naturally, about the vulnerability of domestic-developed tanks. The propaganda statements that the author of these lines often come to hear, for example, on the Discovery Channel, sometimes reach the point of absurdity. For example, the assessment of the T-55 tank, which was the best in its time, is approximately the following: “they needed to be afraid only because there were a lot of them,” “Soviet hard worker T-55,” etc. And all this only on the grounds that the old Iraqi X-NUMX T-55s could not effectively counter the newest main battle tanks of the anti-Iraq coalition in 50-th year! And this despite the fact that they were on a priori immeasurably weaker side! Against the background of victories over the same old T-1991 and the first T-55M of many years ago, the Abrams is quite seriously considered the “most reliable”, “the most deadly” and so on, always with the prefix “the very-best”. But let's try to figure it out. For the beginnings, we will analyze the threats that are relevant to a modern tank in a modern battle. Kinetic ammunition against armored vehicles currently use, in fact, only the tanks themselves, and already almost extinct towed anti-tank guns. Also, BOPS are used in small-caliber automatic guns of infantry fighting vehicles, attack aircraft and helicopters, but these guns can hit a modern tank only in the most vulnerable places (in the roof, in the stern) and from a minimum distance. But the same tanks, self-propelled guns and anti-tank guns use cumulative projectiles and SD. Also missiles with a cumulative warhead shoot attack helicopters, attack aircraft. Cumulative ammunition today shooting all types of anti-tank missile systems, as well as RPG launchers. The number of the latter currently exceeds many times the number of tanks or attack aircraft with classical artillery guns. Based on this, the conclusion suggests itself that approximately 72% of modern anti-tank weapons have cumulative warhead. To the credit of the creators of T-72B, it should be said that they promptly made a correct assessment of these threats in modern combat and developed adequate means of protection for T-72B. Such means include the Kontakt-1 hinged dynamic protection complex, which greatly improves the protection of the tank against cumulative ammunition. Do not forget the designers and about sabot projectiles. Tank T-72B at one time was considered one of the most powerfully protected tanks in the world. This was achieved through the following technical solutions:
- Six-layer combined armor in the frontal part of the hull and turret of a very large thickness (the Soviet version of the English armor "Chobham"). It is a pack of heterogeneous materials. Including non-metallic.
- A special package of semi-active armor in the frontal part of the hull and turret designed to protect against cumulative ammunition. It is made in the form of plates that are shifted upon impact and break the cumulative jet or knock the BOPS core to the side.
- Rubber cloth side screens on the body that initiate the detonation of cumulative ammunition prior to his meeting with the main armor.
- Special shape of the body. The frontal parts of the hull are located at large angles of inclination, which increases the likelihood of ricochet of shells falling into them and increases the thickness of the armor normalized to normal. In addition, the armor located in a similar way simultaneously provides powerful protection to the front upper hemisphere of the tank making it invulnerable from small-caliber automatic aviation guns. The tower is relatively small and has a special shape. The vulnerable aft part is, as it were, covered by a powerfully protected front part within the course angles of ± 30º.
- Complex hinged dynamic protection "Contact-1" consisting of 227 containers designed to remove the damaging effects of the cumulative jet. They cover the entire forehead of the tank, the entire top half of the tower. The sides are covered with DZ elements to the middle of the MTO, i.e. almost completely.
The equivalent level of frontal projection of the tank is estimated to be approximately 550-600mm from kinetic ammunition and about 850mm-900mm from cumulative ammunition. Dimensions of the frontal armor of the tower (physical thickness) within 50-80cm. The weakened zone in the area of the gun mask is approximately 15% of the frontal projection of the tank. The side of the T-72B turret has an equivalent stability of the order of 450mm from kinetic and 650-700mm from cumulative ammunition. The hull board withstands hits from small-caliber automatic guns of infantry fighting vehicles and helicopters, as well as holds most common cumulative ammunition from RPGs. Vulnerable places are the hull and tower feeds, as well as the rear upper hemisphere. Protection of these zones is provided only from bullets of large-caliber machine guns. The entire tank ammunition is located under the polycom of the combat compartment in the AZ and in the shelving tanks. In the case of penetration of tank armor, which is most likely through the aft part of the turret or from an explosion under the bottom of the machine, the ammunition load can be detonated. In this case, the turret of the tank tears off, and the crew instantly dies. As for the crew, the commander and the gunner are in the best position. They each have their own hatches above their heads, through which they can quickly leave a wrecked tank. In the worst position, the driver. In some positions of the gun, he can not leave the car through his hatch, which is also clearly small. As an alternative exit route, an emergency hatch in the bottom of the hull or one of the two hatches in the tower can be used, but the mechanics need a considerable amount of time to leave the tank through them.
Let's move on to M1A2. American designers, we must pay tribute to them, put a lot of effort into making this tank as small and lightweight as possible. Indeed, "Abrams" turned out to be much smaller than earlier American tanks such as M48 / 60, T29, T34 and M103. At the same time, its dimensions are still very impressive. This is primarily due to the crew of four (with the loader) and the placement of the main part of the ammo in the aft niche of the tank. The length of the tank hull exceeds that of the T-72B by 1,5 meters, and the area of the main visual mass of the Abrams side projection due to the long turret is 72 times more than that of the T-XNUMXB. It is generally a non-trivial task to securely book such a "bus" and American designers did their best to solve it. Within the maximum possible mass, naturally. In principle, they did not come up with anything new. If the armor of heavy tanks of a similar mass in the first post-war years was more or less uniform in a circle, then in the era of today's super-powerful ammunition this option no longer works. The armor of the Abrams tank is, as it were, tied to three elements of the frontal part: the lower frontal plate and the cheekbones of the frontal part of the turret. Everything else either has a relatively low level of protection, or is completely left without protection. This protection principle is known in navy since the end of the 19th century and is called "all or nothing". According to this scheme, the vital parts of the ship (VHF) were covered with the thickest armor possible. Everything else remained practically unprotected. The thing is that, due to the overall dimensions and the density of the layout, the "ship" principle of booking for a tank is completely unacceptable. The tank has a relatively small size and dense layout, and therefore it has vital parts everywhere. That is, the penetration of armor almost anywhere in the tank is almost guaranteed to lead to its destruction or, at least, failure. As a result, the M1A2 Abrams tank, despite the powerful protection of the frontal projection from horizontally flying ammunition, cannot be called well protected. To reduce the mass of armor, the body of the tank has a powerful multi-layer "Chobham" armor, but only the lower front plate. The upper frontal sheet is located at a very steep angle to the vertical, but very thin. The advantage of this arrangement is that it weighs less. The downside is that the upper front hemisphere is not protected from aircraft ammunition. Unlike the T-72B tank in which only the stern is vulnerable to attacks from the air, the Abrams is absolutely permeable to them from bow to stern. The turret has composite armor for the frontal part and sides up to the aft niche. Weakened zones in the form of a thin VLD, a cannon mask and a huge "lure" in the form of a gap between the turret and the hull reach approximately 40% of the frontal part of the hull. The tank has no dynamic protection. The equivalent level of projectile resistance of the M1A2 frontal part is estimated at 770mm against kinetic ammunition. As for the anti-cumulative resistance, there is a lot of data on this subject that differ significantly from each other. The most likely value is ~ 850-900mm. In terms of protection against BOPS, the frontal armor of the M1A2 is significantly superior to the T-72B, although it is inferior to the latest domestic and some foreign main battle tanks. As already mentioned in the "firepower" section, either domestic BOPSs of the latest generation, which cannot be used in the old 125mm T-72B cannon, or tank and anti-tank guided missiles with a cumulative warhead can hit such armor. Such as KUVT 9K120 "Svir", 9K119 "Reflex", ATGM 9K135 "Kornet", 9K111 "Konkurs", etc.
By the way, judging by the man on the tower dressed in a protective suit, it can be assumed that it is not even M1A2, but the more sophisticated M1A2SEP whose armor is reinforced with inserts from uranium plates. The armor of the turret to the stern niche is equivalent to approximately 400mm. Everything else is welded from sheets of armor steel 125mm, 65mm, 60mm, 50mm, 45mm, 32,5mm, 30mm, 25mm, 20mm and 12,5mm thick. The hull board in the front part has an exploded monolithic reservation 65mm screen + 30mm case. In the MTO area, the armor board is somewhat weaker. The upper hemisphere of the tank is freely hit by the armor-piercing 25-30mm projectiles of aircraft cannons for the entire length of the tank. The side of the tank is affected from almost all grenade launchers, including the old RPG-7, but not guaranteed. Practically guaranteed to the stern of the side of the tower and the hull and in the very stern of the tower and hull. In addition, shelling of the Ukrainian Armed Forces gives good results.12 and the grilles of the engine air ducts from large-caliber machine guns up to the ignition of the power plant and the complete destruction of the tank. The very large length and height of the tank with a massive turret also contributes to this. Thus, in terms of the level of protection against infantry anti-tank weapons of close combat, the strikes of which in urban combat conditions fall precisely on the most vulnerable parts of the tank - the stern, sides, roof, the M1A2 tank is frankly weak. These vulnerabilities and their area in the M1A2 tank are immeasurably larger than that of the T-72B, the only really vulnerable spots of which are the narrow zone in the rear of the relatively small tower, the rear of the hull and the roof of the MTO. The chances of an M1A2 tank to survive in an intense urban battle with an experienced enemy are about the same as that of a 20-ton BMP i.e. practically close to zero. T-72B in this respect, although not an invulnerable ideal (such have not yet been invented), but, nevertheless, head and shoulders above the "Abrams". This is the price of an all-or-nothing booking scheme in an attempt to securely book at least the forehead of a 62,1-ton tank the size of a bus. The huge losses of the Abrams tanks in rather innocuous situations in Iraq forced the American military to look for a way out of this situation and still install dynamic protection on the latest Abrams models like the T-72B.
However, if everything is quite sour with the armor of the M1А2, then the survival of the crew in the event of a tank defeat is better. Much of the ammunition from 36 shells is located in the aft niche of the turret and is separated from the BO by an armored partition. Above them there are special expelling panels, which, in the event of a detonation of shells, fly out and all the energy of the explosion goes up. Of course, the tank in this case can not be restored, but the crew has a chance to stay alive. To do this, two conditions must be met: at the time of the explosion, the partition must be closed and the explosion itself must be normal. If the shells detonate all at the same time (a kind of volumetric explosion), then no expelling panels would naturally not help the Abrams crew. The shots of unitary charging with a charge in a metal sleeve themselves explode worse than the charges in a combustible sleeve in T-72B. The advantage of this arrangement is that for adopting new and longer projectiles from an American tank, you only need to lengthen the feed niche, which is much simpler than redoing the T-72B automatic loader from a carousel just to a cassette-floor. The remaining 6 shells from the Abrams are in the fighting compartment along with the crew. It is necessary to blaze at least one and the situation will repeat that on the T-72B in case of fire ammunition:
However, even here the Abrams' ammunition protection is better - these shells are located in special armored containers, that is, they have local protection. To detonate them, it is necessary not only to pierce the tank, but to hit them directly. For greater reliability, at the beginning of the battle, American tankers must first of all use exactly those shells that are with them in the tank's BO. Additional ammunition for the T-72B tank, which does not fit in the AZ, is located in the so-called storage tanks. These are fuel tanks with recesses into which projectiles and charges are inserted. That is, the additional ammunition load of the T-72B tank is located in a shirt made of gasoline or diesel fuel! Naturally, there is no need to talk about any "local protection". Of the Abrams crew, the loader is in the best position - there is a lot of space and a hatch overhead. The commander is worse. There is also a hatch above your head, but in an emergency, the panic-stricken gunner, who sits in front and below, can prevent you from getting out. The driver-mechanic has the third place - although there is a separate hatch, it is inconvenient to get out through it - the turret and the cannon interfere with this, and the position of the driver reclining with "friends" in the form of fuel tanks on the sides does not contribute to this. The worst of all is the gunner. He sits deep below and does not have his own hatch over his head. I must get out through the commander's hatch, having previously released the latter, which may simply not be enough for the seconds that remain with the crew in the event of a fire. Nevertheless, it is worth recognizing that if in terms of protection the old T-72B is really even better than the more modern M1A2, then in terms of crew survival in the event of a vehicle being hit, our T-72B has already lagged behind by a whole generation. This is due to the ammunition in the fuel tanks hugging the crew. And it is for this, and not for poor armor, that domestic tanks are now being severely criticized. As for the T-72B itself, its crew, before the start of the battle, must provide for a system for filling the storage tanks with ordinary water. The result will be an approximate analogue of the BC containers with a liquid jacket used in the West German tank "Leopard-2". In case of damage to the rack tank, this water will simply spill out into the AZ, which can play a serious role in extinguishing the fire. And it is better to pour diesel fuel into other tanks for the duration of the battle, even if they are suspended, external. See below for a table comparing tank damage rates:
|
T-72B you can hit from: |
М1А2 "Abrams" you can hit from: |
|
[B]Frontal projection: - common BOPS type ZBM-44, М829А2, etc. except old. - Only ATGMs from the latest generation ATGMs such as 9K119 Reflex, 9K135 Cornet, 9K111 Contest. |
Frontal projection: - only BOPS of the latest generation of type ZBM-44М, ZBM-48, М829А2, М829А3, DM-53, etc. - common BOPS only in weak areas. - Only ATGMs from the latest generation ATGMs such as 9K119 Reflex, 9K135 Cornet, 9K111 Contest. |
|
Side view: - almost all types of BOPS. - Modern ATGM from ATGM 9K120 "Svir", 9K119 "Reflex". - Only the most modern RPG of the last generation. - limited 25-30mm automatic guns for infantry fighting vehicles and airplanes / helicopters. |
Side view: - almost all types of BOPS. - Practically all ATGMs from ATGM, except for the very first 60s. - almost all RPGs like RPG-7, LNG-9, RPG-18 "Fly", RPG-22 / 26, etc. except frankly old type "Faustpron-M". - limited 25-30mm automatic guns for infantry fighting vehicles and airplanes / helicopters. - limited 12,7mm machine guns DShK, NSV and 14,5mm machine guns CPV. |
|
Stern projection: - all types of BOPS. - all types of ATGM from ATGW. - All 25-30mm guns for infantry fighting vehicles and helicopters. - all types of RPGs.
|
Stern projection: - all types of BOPS. - all types of ATGM from ATGW. - all types of RPGs. - All 25-30mm guns for infantry fighting vehicles and helicopters. - 12,7mm machine guns DShK, NSV and 14,5mm machine guns KPVT. |
|
Upper front hemisphere: - common BOPS type ZBM-44, М829А2, etc. except old. - Only ATGMs from the latest generation ATGMs such as 9K119 Reflex, 9K135 Cornet, 9K111 Contest. - Only the latest generation RPG. - very limited 25-30mm guns for infantry fighting vehicles and airplanes / helicopters. |
Upper front hemisphere: - all types of BOPS. - all types of ATGM from ATGM. - all types of RPGs including old ones. - All 25-30mm guns for infantry fighting vehicles and airplanes / helicopters. - limited 12,7mm machine guns DShK and 14,5mm KPV. |
|
Upper rear hemisphere: - all types of BOPS. - all types of ATGM from ATGM. - all types of RPGs. - 25-30mm guns for infantry fighting vehicles and airplanes / helicopters. - limited 12,7mm machine guns DShK, NSV and 14,5mm KPV. |
Upper rear hemisphere: - all types of BOPS. - all types of ATGM from ATGM. - all types of RPGs. - 25-30mm guns for infantry fighting vehicles and airplanes / helicopters. - 12,7mm machine guns DShK, NSV and 14,5mm KPV. |
Mobility and maintainability.
Many in this section will not be able to write, but some points worth considering in detail. The mobility of the tank can be divided into two categories: operational and tactical. Tactical mobility, in turn, is again divided into two categories: urban and field. What is meant by these terms will be clear in the course of reading the text. Operational mobility is the ability to move a tank, including not under its own power over long distances as part of a large-scale movement of troops. The technical elements of the tank, which directly affect its operational mobility, are, first of all, its mass, dimensions and power reserve. There is no need for a long time to explain why T-72B in this discipline utterly surpasses the opponent. Its weight in 44,5 tons and dimensions make it easy to transport T-72B by land, by rail, in amphibious ships by sea and by a large number of military transport aircraft in service with the Russian army. With the tank "Abrams" all the more difficult. There are few types of military transport aircraft capable of raising it (and not all of them are American). Transportation is possible by sea or by rail. As well as on the ground on tank tractors. By tactical mobility is meant the actual driving characteristics of the tank itself. These include the maximum speed, the dynamics of acceleration to 30km / h, throughput, maneuverability, as well as ease and ease of operation. But as it was written above, tactical mobility is divided into two categories: urban, i.e. in industrial conditions (presence of roads, strong bridges, absence of dirt) and field (in complete off-road, in the forest, on the field, in the swamp, etc.). In the “urban” mobility “civilized” М1А2 “Abrams” is ahead of T-72B due to the following technical solutions: Automatic transmission with a hydro-volumetric turning mechanism, which makes it easy to control this tank even for a child. Of all the controls, only the steering wheel, gas and brake. Such a perfect transmission allows the Abrams tank to strictly follow any given curve (bending of the road for example). The powerful gas turbine engine accelerates the tank to 32km / h in 6с, and asphalt tracks with rubber pads provide excellent handling on hard surfaces at any speed, up to the maximum 66km / h. T-72B boast there is nothing special. The OPF is hopelessly outdated a long time ago. They provide several fixed turning radii, which naturally will not necessarily coincide with the bend radius of the road along which the tank is traveling. Even harder on the track. In order to slightly adjust the direction of movement of the tank at high speed (when overtaking for example), the driver must turn on the “neutral” in the corresponding OPF. This requires a great skill from the driver’s mechanic, since the slightest mistake and the tank will go into a skid without any opportunity to “catch” it. The situation is aggravated by the fact that T-72B on ordinary agricultural tracks is extremely prone to drift and demolition on hard surfaces (stone, asphalt, etc.). So, to develop on T-72B a maximum speed in 60km / h on a busy highway can only be a confident and experienced driver. But as soon as it is worth moving off the asphalt to the field, T-72B is transformed, and М1А2 immediately rents. His virtues on the highway in the dirt work against him and become his shortcomings. The agricultural caterpillar T-72B immediately finds, for which the hold and control of the tank is restored. Abrams rubber cushions begin to shamelessly glide over ice, snow and mud. There are no roads in the field, and therefore the lack of a T-72B transmission in the field almost ceases to be felt. Abrams' huge weight immediately "knits" him in a mud swamp. On cross it is worse than T-72B. Hydromechanical transmission is heated and takes precious power from the engine. Dust and sand are bad for the Abrams gas turbine engine. The speed on such a terrain at the "Abrams" greatly decreases, despite the intelligent automatic transmission. The speed of the T-72B in this situation is more dependent on the skill of the driver. Traveling through the village bridge will turn into a real nightmare for the crew of the Abrams. In general, it is a tank for dry rocky terrain. The USSR was armed with a tank of tons of 62. This is the EC-4. It was operated in the Far East with great difficulties (poor cross-country ability, the problem of passing through bridges, installation on a railway platform with an accuracy of 1, etc.) and very quickly the EC-4 turned into non-self-propelled firing points dug into the ground. The world's best tank 50 / 60-s T-10M (51,5t - in size with the "Challenger-2", but the shape is much better) was loved by the tank crew and special problems with the operation apparently did not deliver as stood in service order xnumx years. Mass ~ 50-55 tons, apparently, and there is the line on which the power ends and the problems begin. So what is better in tactical mobility? Abrams is better in the city, T-72B is better on the field. Since the comparative area of fields, forests, swamps and dirt on the globe is many times greater than that of asphalt roads and betonok, we can definitely say that T-72B is better.
On repair-suitability approximate parity. Yes, the power unit of the tank M1А2 "Abrams" is easily changed in the field in an hour or two, and this is his undoubted advantage. With the replacement of the engine T-72B will have to spend much longer. At the same time, where in the conditions of war to take a finished unit with a new engine? And if it is not found anywhere? Have to repair the old one. Malfunction of the T-72B with screwdrivers, wrenches, tools, operating instructions and non-print mechanic expressions can be fixed on the spot. How this problem will be solved by the crew of an American tank is a difficult question. Maybe they will do it themselves, or maybe they will call BREM and she (if she can come and if she can call her at all) will tow the tank to the factory.
Output.
Analyzing and comparing the above-described information, it will be convenient to create a summary table of various combat situations and award points on a 5-point system to each tank.
|
A counter tank battle during the day on an open flat terrain with the greatest possible distance 4-5km. |
T-72B - 5 points. M1A2 - 3 points. T-72B is better. |
|
Tank battle on moderately hilly terrain with medium distances 2-3km during the day. |
T-72B - 3 points. М1А2 - 5 points. M1A2 better. |
|
Tank battle on moderately hilly terrain with medium distances 1,5-2,5km at night. |
T-72B - 1 score. M1A2 - 4 points. M1A2 better. |
|
Tank battle with the conditions of rugged terrain, urban development from a maximum of 300-500 m day and night. |
T-72B - 4 points. М1А2 - 4 points. Parity. |
|
Fight in the city in conditions of high saturation of light portable anti-tank weapons. |
T-72B - 4 points. M1A2 - 2 points. T-72B is better. |
|
Infantry fire support and destruction of priority targets for infantry on the battlefield: enemy infantry, firing points, pillboxes, bunkers, dugouts, shelters, houses, enemy snipers, etc. |
T-72B - 5 points. M1A2 - 3 points. T-72B is better. |
|
The fight against enemy aircraft (defense from them) combat and transport helicopters and light low-speed reconnaissance and unmanned aircraft. |
T-72B - 5 points. M1A2 - 2 points. T-72B is better. |
|
Shooting from closed positions when using the tank as an ACS. |
T-72B - 5 points. M1A2 - 3 points. T-72B is better. |
|
The operational mobility of the tank. |
T-72B - 5 points. M1A2 - 3 points. T-72B is better. |
|
Tactical mobility of the tank. |
T-72B - 4 points. M1A2 - 3 points. T-72B is better. |
|
The survival of the crew with the defeat of the tank. |
T-72B - 2 points. М1А2 - 5 points. М1А2 - better. |
|
Total: |
T-72B - 43 points. М1А2 - 37 balls. |
In addition, any sample of armored military equipment is characterized by the so-called coefficient of military-technical level. In all the comparative articles that the author has had to see, even the newest T-90A tanks for some reason are inferior to the Western ones in terms of the military-technical level. However, it is not at all clear why, by what criteria the points are compared and scored. This information is “modestly” not published there. So we will try to determine this military-technical level independently, and we will do it with reinforced concrete logic: a tank drum with only daytime optics and a gun installed in a rotating turret is taken for 0. Everything. For all the other "ryushechki" is charged on 0,1.
|
Equipment |
T-72B |
М1А2 "Abrams" |
|
Semi-active armor |
+ |
- |
|
Dynamic protection DZ |
+ |
- |
|
Composite armor |
+ |
+ |
|
Thermal signature reduction technology |
- |
+ |
|
Gun stabilizer |
+ |
+ |
|
Sight stabilizer |
+ |
+ |
|
Commander Observation Device Stabilizer |
- |
+ |
|
Automatic loader AZ |
+ |
- |
|
Ejector barrel blower |
+ |
+ |
|
iК-devices |
+ |
+ |
|
Ti-devices |
- |
+ |
|
Automated MSA |
- |
+ |
|
Tank ballistic calculator TBV |
+ |
+ |
|
Tank information and control system TIUS |
- |
+ |
|
Laser warning system |
- |
+ |
|
Combat laser system |
- |
- |
|
ESD protection |
+ |
+ |
|
The complex of optical-electronic suppression COEP |
- |
- |
|
KAZT tank active protection complex |
- |
- |
|
System of electromagnetic protection from mines SEMZ |
+ |
- |
|
Automatic Transmission Automatic |
- |
+ |
|
Guided missile weapons URO |
+ |
- |
|
Color displays in crew crews |
- |
+ |
|
Auxiliary power plant APU |
- |
+ |
|
Local ammunition protection |
- |
+ |
|
Adjustable hydropneumatic suspension |
- |
- |
|
Automatic target tracking |
- |
- |
|
Anti-aircraft closed installation with a remote drive. |
- |
- |
|
The final military-technical level: |
1,2 |
1,7 |
The military-technical level coefficient М1А2 on 42% exceeds that of Т-72Б, but it is still far from perfect.
Based on all these calculations, we can summarize the following result:
T-72B “Even today, the car is still up to date.” One feels the enormous potential that once upon a time its founders laid down in this tank. Not for nothing T-72 in 70-80-th year of the last century was considered one of the best tanks in the world. Unlike the Abrams, the quite right desire of designers to make this tank a universal weapon, equally well adapted for fighting high-tech Western tanks, and for infantry fire support in all kinds of situations, using the tank as a universal infantry weapon suitable for to fight with virtually any ground, surface and air targets that will be within 2-5-10 kilometers from it. But time does not stand still and the day is short when the T-72B tank finally loses its advantages. Even today, it is very much inferior to modern machines in penetrating power of armor-piercing projectiles, the parameters of night vision, the perfection of the fire control system, command controllability and safety of the crew’s life in an emergency, although it still has where superiority. Modernization of the tank in the version of the T-72BM, which according to some data "brings the capabilities of the T-72 to the T-90," is in fact rather curtailed and incomplete. The upgraded T-72BM has received an updated SLA and gunner’s instruments. But about the commander (who theoretically should discover the target before gunner) almost forgot. COEP "Blind" on the tank is not installed. KAZT "Arena" on the tank is not installed. TiUs on the upgraded tank T-72BM is not installed. There is a problem with the new "long" BOPS. An automatic transmission with a hydro-volume transmission like on T-80U is not installed on a tank. In fact, this modernization pulled the mainly "anti-tank" capabilities of the T-72B to a more modern "all-weather" level. Nevertheless, T-72B in those conditions in which he really has to fight is still better than "Abrams".
М1А2 "Abrams" - a very controversial unit, if only because it is being used and fighting now in conditions completely different from those under which it was once designed. "Abrams" is a highly specialized offspring of Americans scared by the Soviet tank rink. And its firepower and defense has a pronounced "anti-tank" orientation, and it is in this respect that this tank is certainly good. Without a doubt, this is a modern and high-tech tank, which, although not the best in the world, will nevertheless be a dangerous adversary for any existing MBT today. The strength of МХNUMXА1 "Abrams" is manifested in this. In a tank duel, he will most likely overcome T-2B - he will have to admit. At the same time, in all other respects, the Abrams is either so-so or frankly bad. To fight with tanks of this type it makes no sense to use their own tanks, especially obsolete types. This will lead to unjustified losses. It is much more efficient to use aviation, RPG-equipped grenade launchers and low-profile anti-tank missile systems in a portable and mobile version. Here, against such weapons, the M72А1 “Abrams” tank, despite all its might, is likely to be almost powerless. But its main advantage is the high probability of the crew remaining alive after their Abrams shatters into pieces, and this is like no other, more expensive than any piece of iron. And in general, it’s not the tanks that are fighting, but the people in them.
Note:
- 1. BOPS - armor-piercing feathered sabot projectile. For the first time nominally as the main appeared in the ammunition of the Soviet tank T-62.
- 2. KS - cumulative projectile. Created during the 2 World War II.
- 3. OFS - high-explosive fragmentation projectile.
- 4. UR - guided missile.
- 5. POS - subcaliber cumulative fragmentation projectile. Allows you to hit the enemy's manpower behind the obstacles, but has a low destructive power.
- 6. OS - fragmentation projectile.
- 7. DVO - daytime optical device.
- 8. LD - laser rangefinder.
- 9. iK - night infrared device.
- 10. Ti - night thermal imaging device.
- 11. The ballistic corrector is a built-in mechanism that takes into account only the type and trajectory of the projectile depending on the distance.
- 12. APU - auxiliary power unit.
- 13. Here it is necessary to understand the difference between the target firing range and the effective firing range. In classical systems, this difference is very significant. The effective firing range is the distance at which a high percentage of hitting the target is ensured (on the order of 70-80%). The target range is the distance at which the tank control system of the tank allows for targeted shooting at all. At the same time, for guided missiles there is practically no difference between the sighting and effective firing range.