Possible way to improve the fighting qualities of the tank

Classic single-tower layout tank, formed over 60 years ago, tested by the 6-year-old Second World War and subsequent wars, led to the creation of a modern combat vehicle, represented by domestic and foreign models.

Retaining the dimensions and weight characteristics of the predecessors, they dramatically increased the firepower, armor and speed. The study of the development of the design of tanks for the basic qualities shows its slowing down and a full stop. One of the significant reasons is the ever increasing insufficiency of the volume of the hull and the turret under the armor. It is known that the dimensions of the tank, especially its width, are strictly limited by the conditions of rail transport.

The booked volume is filled to the limit with mechanisms, aggregates. ammunition and fuel. The fight goes for every extra ammunition, for every extra liter of fuel. The tank was overgrown with various fire extinguishing systems, radiation and other types of protection, devices for overcoming water obstacles and self-digging. Many elements of observation, warning, protection are taken out and not protected. The developed design of the undercarriage does not allow a significant increase in the relief and ground-drawing maneuverability. The control system of turns of the car does not allow further increase of speed of movement on roads.

Increasing the destructive power of ammunition, the initial speed of their flight, increasing the resistance of armor without increasing its thickness and weight, increasing the power of the power plant without increasing its size and fuel consumption - all this is a reliable, but long-term path involving fundamental science, performing large and expensive research. Naturally, they must be connected with military doctrine and the concept of a tank as a combat vehicle. But you can choose a simpler and currently quite effective way to improve the fighting qualities of the tank. It is necessary to break the deadlock, which is created by adherence to the usual layout, when the tank has one monoblock case with two tracks and a limited length of the prop part of the propulsion unit that can withstand the favorable ratio between the gauge width.

A break from the deadlock can be found if you sacrifice one of the tank’s geometrical parameters - its length. Increasing the length of the hull will dramatically increase the amount of reserved space to accommodate an additional set of ammunition, fuel, increase the number of crew members.
When assessing the length of the tank is considered its length with a gun and body length. If you estimate the surface area of ​​the side silhouette of the tank, excluding from it the area of ​​the barrel, then this approach would be wrong. The modern six-meter tank gun, larger than 120 mm, is not a needle. The probability of damage is large enough. When turning the car, especially steep, the radius of the launching of the protruding parts will be determined by a muzzle cut. Determining the length of the tank only on the hull is the same as determining the length of the crocodile along the body, excluding its tail.

The table shows for comparison the length parameters of some heavy tanks.
Possible way to improve the fighting qualities of the tank

It should be noted that the total length of the T-72 tank when the gun is positioned forward or backward varies little. The standard four-axle railway platform has a platform length of 13,8 m, which provides both side and end loading and transportation of a tank with a hull of up to 11,0 meters in length. With such a length of the hull, the length of the track support part can be more than 8,0 m. In T-72 it is 4,28 m. The longer the length of the propulsion surface, the greater the width of the moat is overcome by the machine, but it deteriorates the steering and turning ability of the tracked vehicle having a monoblock body resting on two caterpillars.

The elimination of this drawback is possible in the case of an articulated body, each part of which has its own tracks. This scheme was developed by Nodwell in the early 50-s. Especially positive, it showed itself in amphibious vehicles, dramatically improving their ability to get out of the water on land.

The articulated system (it is also called a two-link or a pairing) was successfully implemented as an all-terrain transport with a tracked propulsor. Known Swedish car BV206 and domestic DT-10P Ishimbay plant. There were attempts to create a combat vehicle. These include the light Swedish tank UDEX XX20, which has not developed further prototypes.

Experienced articulated tank UDEX XX20 (Sweden). The main armament is the German 120-mm smoothbore gun in the removed installation

In the Armored Academy named after Malinovsky, work was carried out to substantiate the articulated tracked combat vehicle. But then the preparation of a scientific report did not matter.

All previously designed and built in the form of prototypes or serial articulated tracked vehicles were controlled at the bends in the kinematic manner. To obtain sufficient turning, the angle of rotation of one part of the two-cranks relative to the other reached 30 ° in each direction. And this circumstance complicates the communication of volumes of turned elements among themselves. All known structures have blind end walls facing the connecting device.

Developers Sparok, obviously, it was not known that the rotation can be done both in kinematic and on-board method.
Increasing the length of the tank hull will cause an increase in the length of the caterpillar and its supporting surface. In an articulated car, the number of tracks will double, but the distance between the front support roller of the head and the rear support roller of the tail will be significant and will interfere with the turning of the machine onboard. This interference in an articulated machine is easily eliminated. In modern articulated machines, body rotation is controlled in two planes. In horizontal for change of the direction of movement and in vertical for improvement of relief passability. Using the ability to rotate the body in a vertical plane, you can shorten the length of the supporting part from the driver’s seat and thus facilitate the implementation of sharp turns. This technique is used on some wheeled and tracked vehicles with a monoblock body and an onboard steering system. In particular, the Panar M8 cannon armored vehicle and the Swedish tank Shyudad.

Combat wheeled vehicle "Panhard" М8 (France)

In an articulated tank, by connecting the front and rear of the hull with a hinged tunnel, you can communicate them, pass all communications and controls through it, and ensure their armor protection. An annular toroidal pneumatic seal will ensure the tightness of the hinge.

Thus obtained a significant additional amount of reserved space will allow the entire front part to take under the fighting compartment. In the tower of increased volume with a longitudinal armored partition in the left, along the way, the crew will be located, including the driver. In the right - the gun and its charging system with the current set of ammunition, in the back of the two-linkage will be located a stock of ammunition, a power plant, fuel tanks.

Chassis - track rollers, torsion bar suspension, tracked belts, tensioning devices, drive wheels interchangeable.

Armored articulated combat vehicle with separate crew accommodation and automatic ammunition feed
The numbers on the diagram denote: 1 - tower; 2 - crew quarters; 3 - current consumption; 4 - conveyor; 5 - ammunition stock; 6 - power unit; 7 - fuel tanks

Receiving additional moving articulated reserved volume makes it possible to:

- 1. Increased ammunition increased caliber 3 times.
- 2. Increase in power reserve with one refueling 3 times.
- 3. Increase the power of the power plant on existing engines 2 times.
- 4. Increased relief patency in overcoming the moat and threshold 1,5 times.
- 5. Increased soil-coupling permeability.
- 6. Increase the survivability of the chassis. The machine can move and be controlled even with the loss of three tracks. Move side step with complete loss of tracks.
- 7. Reducing the time for self-digging 10 times.
- 8. Reducing the time to prepare to overcome the water obstacle in 100 times.
- 9. Significant increase in safe highway speeds.
- 10. Conveniently controlled reversing.

All these and other not listed positive qualities can be obtained by design development using a significant number of ready-made assemblies and assemblies. The design of the machine fully fits into the existing technology and the state of the factories producing tanks.
At the beginning of 1999, the author made and tested a valid model in full size 1 / 7 in order to identify new driving characteristics of the articulated tracked chassis.

The members of the military-technical section at the cultural center of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, the department of tractors and amphibious machines and the department No.18 of the General Military Academy of the Armed Forces had a significant moral and organizational work to study the model.

According to the test results, it was revealed that the tunnel hull structure and the track of the articulated machine, which are extremely close to each other and connected by a spherical joint, provide sufficient steering when driving with the smallest turning radius to 16 m with the kinematic method of turning. Driving from the driver's seat, the change in the length of the support base with the Base / Track ratio = 40 to 4 values ​​allows turning with a radius of 1,8-6,0 m. This corresponds to the parameters of the short-base monoblock tracked vehicle, which is performed by the onboard method.

For an articulated tracked vehicle, which is, as a rule, a long-wheelbase, the ability to make turns in two ways saves it from a significant drawback - understeer on a large radius and low steer. Tests of the model showed the real possibility of the articulated tracked vehicle to perform the stepping (lag) movement. During the tests, the high survivability of the undercarriage, which provides movement and controllability in the event of a breakdown or loss of up to three tracks, was confirmed. The results of self-digging were unfinished for a number of reasons.

It is supposed to continue testing the model in order to create a full-size model of the sample with a sharp increase in the parameters of the combat tracked vehicle.

The layout of an articulated tank (drawing from the magazine "Technology Youth"): 1 - 152-mm gun; 2 - automatic loader for 20 shots; 3 - the driver; 4 - the gunner; 5 - tank commander; 6 - loader (overload shots from the roller table in AZ); 7 - tower; 8 - drive wheel; 9 - track roller; 10 - swivel hitch; 11 - mechanized ammunition on 84 shot; 12 - diesel; 13 - generator; 14 - radiator; 15 - fuel tank

Unusual capabilities of an articulated tank: (left) using a gun barrel to supply air when moving under water; (top) gun as a boom crane

With the same dimensions as the T-72, the articulated tank has a much larger reserved volume, which gives it many new qualities
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    16 January 2013 15: 27
    Excessively complex tanks are irrational for a more or less long-term war, because tank losses are very high in modern combat, and this will be a serious burden on the economy of a warring country, but it is also technologically impossible to lag behind. The middle ground between simplicity and manufacturability must be respected. Complex tanks (possibly already without a crew) in a limited number are needed in special operations, and at the same time for testing technologies. It seems to me that our tank building, which is dictated by the experience of wars, is following such a rational path to the golden mean, and this will agree the best teacher ...
    1. +7
      16 January 2013 16: 07
      Very expensive, non-functional cars. Nafig need a giant ammo if a tank lives for a couple of minutes in battle? Excessive complexity, NO maneuverability, unsuitability for combat in the city and wooded-rugged and mountainous areas, poor maintainability .. Such solutions are relevant in conditions of isolation from bases and long distances. Arctic. But there is "Knight".
      1. +2
        16 January 2013 22: 10
        The article began for health and ended for peace. As I began to read, the thought appeared "right now, something cool will be told!", And then on you, blind 2 tanks with a tunnel, pass communications through it and all that, it remains only on this joint to draw a target with an invitation to "shoot here" .. ...
        1. +3
          16 January 2013 23: 36
          As a self-propelled gun on the front line with a firing range of 50 km. maybe it makes sense to exist.
          This does not take into account that it is better from this line-up to naturally a cross-country vehicle.
          And as a unit of the active battlefield, TOTAL Nonsense!
          The future in tank building (armored means of warfare), as in Aviation, belongs to "drones". hi
  2. +2
    16 January 2013 15: 31
    If I’m not mistaken, then there were articles about the articulated tank in the journal Technika i Armament, I don’t remember exactly which year. Perhaps the new BMP for the Arctic zone will also be articulated.
    1. +4
      16 January 2013 16: 23
      Quote: Karpv
      the new BMP for the Arctic zone will also be articulated.

      Rather, a conveyor.
  3. 0
    16 January 2013 15: 43
    IMHO, such a tank will have less reliability and mobility. And if the fighting compartment is back, and the engine room is forward and lower? Did the Israelis seem to have proved that with the front of the power plant and propulsion system, the survivability of the tank and the survival of the crew increase?
    But what can I say, we need to build and test, the benefit of money is now shaking enough from the girls from the Moscow Region :))
    1. +2
      16 January 2013 16: 06
      Quote: Egen
      with the front position of the power plant and propulsion, the survivability of the tank and crew survival increase?

      moot point.
  4. grizzlir
    16 January 2013 15: 44
    The idea of ​​an articulated combat vehicle is very interesting in itself. But spitting from such a lineup will be buried under a mountain of minuses. Cost, design complexity, increased fuel consumption, unmasking signs, reduced speed and maneuverability characteristics ..... This reminds me of multi-tower tanks of the early 20th century.
  5. +1
    16 January 2013 15: 55
    original, but not a new design. Maybe some of this will be used sometime. Not a fact, really. While steers the standard.
    1. +4
      16 January 2013 16: 17
      Quote: erased
      original but not new design

      back in 87 at school, writing out a foreign military review, I read such articles there.

      Further experiments did not go. And the modular options were understood, but now they have found application only in MRAAPA.

      give the armored train on the tracks.
      1. +13
        16 January 2013 16: 32
        Quote: vorobey
        give the armored train on the tracks.

        easy, here is the project
        1. 0
          16 January 2013 16: 59
          Project "Kapets Yankees!" They will die from one sight. And, apparently, from laughter.
          The launch shaft under Yars lacks wings. And also the periscope. And the author of the idea has information from a psychiatric hospital.
        2. +3
          16 January 2013 18: 50
          Are you and Sparrow drinking there together? What the fuck is that? I couldn’t even come up with a strong hangover!
        3. +1
          16 January 2013 22: 37
          It is with this example that the utopianity of this arrangement is visible. The target is good, nothing more.
  6. +2
    16 January 2013 16: 09
    too complex system IMHO.
  7. 8 company
    16 January 2013 16: 28
    The time of monsters has long passed, the optimal scheme has taken root in Russia: a 40-ton single-tower caterpillar tank.
    1. +1
      16 January 2013 16: 36
      Quote: Company 8
      The time of monsters is long gone

      IMHO it never came ...
  8. +2
    16 January 2013 16: 38
    It is better to engage in miniaturization with the preservation of combat qualities than an increase in size and increase in combat qualities.
  9. toguns
    16 January 2013 16: 47
    wassat the author of the article thinks stereotyped and narrowly, if I improve the quality of the tank, I would do something like a hovercraft or a tank with VTOL.
    1. bask
      16 January 2013 18: 43
      Quote: toguns
      the author of the article thinks stereotyped and narrowly, if I improve the quality of the tank, I would do something like a hovercraft or a tank with VTOL.

      Of course, what needs to be done and experienced. But the answer, as always, will be one ,,,, no money. This scheme is most suitable for self-propelled guns.
  10. -1
    16 January 2013 17: 23
    Some tanks are deploying a tower in the direction of an approaching projectile.
    I don’t understand why the tank shouldn’t attach such "hands" - a piece of armor plate on a retractable movable holder and not substitute this "shield" under an approaching projectile?
    It can be mounted on a ring near the base of the tower, etc. have circular access to anywhere in the tank.
    Neither communicative shells can penetrate any such protection - even if a cumulative stream burns a hole in the stove, it will be uselessly scattered about the main armor of the tank.
    And the "shield" can be changed as much as you like - one turned into a sieve - took the other and forward.

    By the way, with the help of the same "hands", a tanker can inspect inaccessible parts of the hull - the condition of the tracks of the rollers, etc.
    And it can even repair damaged tracks.
    1. +5
      16 January 2013 17: 44
      And also to attach legs. If the shells run out, you can beat off enemy vehicles
      The active protection system is lighter, more compact and more reliable than shields.
      1. 0
        16 January 2013 18: 14
        Not at all easier.
        She is more expensive.
        And that's it.
        The cost of consumables for dynamic protection is much more than the cost of a shield (which is easily repaired and even replaced by any substitutes).
        Well, one does not interfere with the other - one defense is good, two are better.

        By the way, with a shield you can also cover ... optics and other fragile external devices from close explosions, working machine guns, etc.
        And also to cover, in case of an unexpected attack, the hatches at the moment when they are open and people climb out or watch from them.
        The speed of reaction of automation can even save from a sniper, someone on the armor - and dynamic protection will not save.
        1. 0
          16 January 2013 18: 49
          Well, offer it! Develop a project, prepare drawings, justification, calculations. Send where you should and defend your idea. I’ll see a hand-held tank - I applaud mentally and admit that I was right. I can see the tank also with legs - I decide that I had to stop on two glasses.
          1. 0
            16 January 2013 19: 05
            I hope it comes to them - at least in the form of a joke.
            Information is such a thing - here someone will say, somewhere far away they will hear.
            1. 0
              16 January 2013 19: 21
              Information is not ... sorry - hiccups behind - it still needs to be found.
    2. +1
      16 January 2013 18: 54
      If this is a joke, then a standoff. And if thoughts are rumored, then designers still do not drink so much ...
      1. 0
        16 January 2013 19: 04
        They just have the inertia of thinking.
        Meanwhile, hands for robots - this is no longer something fantastic - and is used in industry.
        The Japanese are making a humanoid military robot - why?
        All that the tank needs to take from the robot is hands - everything else is superfluous.
        1. +1
          16 January 2013 19: 20
          Well then, soon a armored tank will appear in Ridge Nenka Ukraine. Type of new Bastion. And then we’ll celebrate with a vodka.
          1. 0
            16 January 2013 19: 22
            There is little hope for her - finances sing romances there.
            Although ... whoever does the first - that and slippers.
        2. 0
          16 January 2013 21: 01
          At our institute, we also had an "innovator". He wanted us to grill kebabs on strings.
    3. 0
      17 January 2013 07: 27
      And also, tanks will be able to say hello through their hands, or show a finger to enemies!
  11. stalker
    16 January 2013 17: 54
    it has all passed and forgotten like a nightmare.
    1. bask
      16 January 2013 18: 52
      Quote: s. 
      it is all passed and forgotten like a nightmare. [/ quote

      New times, new challenges of asymmetric wars. Russia has been operating a 40-link D-2 all-terrain vehicle for 30 years ... Its base could serve as an experimental platform for a two-link vehicle.
      1. +4
        16 January 2013 21: 11
        Quote: bask
        In Russia, a 40-link D-2 all-terrain vehicle has been in operation for 30 years ... Its base could serve as an experimental platform for a two-link vehicle.

        There is another similar all-terrain vehicle, and the same with a fighting compartment, for transportation of mother-in-law
  12. +1
    16 January 2013 18: 30
    We use mainly the internal combustion engine of the so-called classic circuit to drive our cars. Why? After all, there are many original, bold, innovative systems? Many of them have proven that they surpass the classic ICE in certain parameters. Some are even used somewhere ...
    The question is that the classical scheme is elaborated in detail. It contains all the flaws that threaten the new project with a complete collapse. Rivet a lot of these cars - and you get a stable, predictable motorcade. Make an innovative system - and you may suddenly find yourself in the hands of a pile of scrap metal worth billions ... and in the case of military equipment - the price to your country.
    Innovative, bold, extraordinary solutions are needed. As models and experimental samples. But seriously, something like this should be dealt with only if such systems promise a qualitative breakthrough (as the appearance of tanks itself once), or at times that the MOST parameters of the classical scheme are exceeded. This nonsense is just funny, no more ...
  13. 0
    16 January 2013 18: 39
    Nothing to do with the Muir and Merileys tank wink ! I.V. Stalin.
  14. 0
    16 January 2013 20: 44
    The idea is interesting even if it’s unusual. The scheme of articulated conveyors is not new, but it is not widespread. The number of cars can be counted on the fingers. There is one reason - complexity. I don’t know what kind of D-30 you’re talking about - I only know the two-track tracked all-terrain vehicle DT-10 "Vityaz".
    A little aware of how Vityaz was developed and how many problems designers faced when they developed a rotary hitch. This is the most capricious and vulnerable place, the real Achilles heel of these machines. If anyone is interested, you can google a lot of information on problems with its operation. Personally, I see no way to provide adequate armor protection for this unit without reducing the mobility of such an articulated tank. We have already written above that such a machine turns out to be very highly specialized - in urban conditions it has nothing to do! If only to assume that in some alternative In the future there will be a need for tanks capable of fighting in the swampy tundra with a long separation from the rear, then yes, it will be possible to return to the idea. While this design seems to me absolutely redundant.
  15. 0
    16 January 2013 20: 52
    The author expressed his opinion. Everything! There is no scientific justification. And the author does not claim to be. Any of the users of this resource can write a similar article. For example, possible development paths for fighters. A couple of paragraphs about carbon fiber components and some crap about weapons. Or on free topics ... There is nothing to discuss.
  16. 0
    16 January 2013 21: 18
    Only one "pilot" should be left in the tank, in case of emergency situations (if the onboard computer or communication dies or something jammed). The rest of the crew is on the escort car, further away. One is easier to book and the vacant seat is rational to use. And stay with the classic scheme.
    1. Ammane
      18 January 2013 23: 12
      That's right, because on a ground attack aircraft one pilot somehow manages to fly at great speed and shoot, then why sacrifice three people when destroying a tank? And so you can reduce the weight of the tank or increase the reservation while maintaining weight.
  17. ivinyukhin
    17 January 2013 00: 35
  18. +1
    17 January 2013 01: 24
    Two tanks are better than one articulated.
    All "superfluous" just should be placed outside. Inside there is only what will allow the damaged tank to leave the battlefield - the crew, the engine and the propulsion unit .. The rest is thrown off like a lizard's tail and is easily replaced in the field.
  19. vedruss
    17 January 2013 10: 28
    A good topic for the conveyor, maybe even with light weapons and the installation of ATGMs.
    we have such places in the country where necessary. BUT in a small amount.
    but as a full-fledged heavy combat vehicle will not work.
    the future is for drones, autonomous or remotely controlled.
    While we wait, we train at Word of Tanks ..))
    Aircraft - training in Wartander.
  20. 0
    17 January 2013 13: 03
    Has anyone heard about WWII tanks during WWII? one without a crew and the second tank controlled it

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"