Army Recognition: Russian T-90M tank with a new type of anti-drone protection spotted

47
Army Recognition: Russian T-90M tank with a new type of anti-drone protection spotted

The Russian army has become a pioneer in terms of mass retrofitting of armored vehicles to counter enemy attacks drones, although the first “barbecues” appeared in the units of the Southern Military District before the start of the special operation as a means of protection against ATGM strikes in the upper hemisphere.

By now, lattice “birdhouses” have become a standard form of retrofitting armored vehicles. They have received a relatively established form, are produced on an industrial scale and are always included with equipment shipped to the army.



However, recently an image of a T-90M appeared on the Internet, which has a completely new type of anti-drone protection. Instead of the familiar “birdhouses” on tank, armor plates covering it are installed at a short distance from the tower. Also, the protective structure rises above the MTO.



The visor is probably counteracting droneswhile additional armor around critical areas such as the rear hull increases the tank's resistance to precision UAV attacks

- indicated in the publication Army Recognition.

A number of observers note that the new type of protection is a neatly made design and could be manufactured not as a local initiative, but at industrial facilities.
47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +22
    28 May 2024 08: 28
    Wow. Tank with wing laughing
    1. +16
      28 May 2024 08: 33
      This already looks like something better...
      1. 0
        28 May 2024 17: 54
        only the tower does not rotate 360 ​​degrees
        1. +1
          29 May 2024 08: 22
          This canopy is precisely welded to the turret to cover the stern.
    2. +11
      28 May 2024 08: 34
      This is to protect the engine from drones, a good solution by the way.
      1. +14
        28 May 2024 08: 45
        It already looks like a normal factory solution compared to the barbecue.
        the main thing is to be effective.
        1. -4
          28 May 2024 09: 12
          Quote: Nexcom
          It already looks like a normal factory solution compared to the barbecue.

          Yeah. These are not the nets that students now weave “to protect tanks”
          1. +3
            28 May 2024 09: 49
            Does not interfere with the commander’s view of the panorama or the operation of the machine gun
            1. 0
              29 May 2024 09: 17
              It turns out, after all, a homemade product in a front-line workshop. But still, well done - both beautiful and high quality.
  2. BAI
    +5
    28 May 2024 08: 34
    What to say? Industry - well done
  3. +2
    28 May 2024 08: 42
    At first glance, it looks rather weak compared to the “armored barn” (aka “tsar-barbecue”, aka “turtle tank”). The armored paradise pushes the cumulative jet much further and leaves almost no weak spots for FPV drones.
    1. +2
      28 May 2024 13: 39
      Well, except maybe from FPV, from an ATGM, in theory it won’t save you - the jet is more powerful there, but the ATGM is unlikely to accurately aim through the barn at the right place in the tank.....
  4. +1
    28 May 2024 08: 45
    what
    All this “body kit” will inevitably raise the question of the capabilities of the engine and chassis. And there it’s just a stone’s throw from the chassis...
  5. 0
    28 May 2024 08: 51
    The weight of the tank has of course increased.
  6. -10
    28 May 2024 08: 52
    From the military department of a Soviet university: in modern warfare, the life of a tank is 4 minutes. More than 30 years have passed, what tanks? Maybe you can tell me something else about the ships, about the ranks of the ships, how beautiful and formidable they can be in parades. This is all to say that 80% of the headlines should be about drones and electronic warfare. Does this tank have a swarm of integrated drones around it on the ground and in the air? What about electronic warfare? No ? Dosvidos, take this hat to the 1st channel to eprst (that snake).
    1. +1
      29 May 2024 02: 53
      Well, try to shove your electronic warfare equipment with drones into a hypothetical conflict between the Russian Federation and the United States for destruction by conventional weapons? Will not work. There will be hundreds of bombs and cruise missiles flying there from both sides. They will only remember about your drones during the clearing and catching of survivors!
      1. -1
        29 May 2024 10: 36
        It's not about what SHOULD be on the battlefield. It's a matter of priorities, and the priority now is electronic warfare, drones, counter-batteries and satellites. Talk to front-line soldiers, in answer to the question “what is needed?” the tanks will be in the 48th position. In the rear they are hitting Belgorod (every third family has evacuees) - also - electronic warfare, air defense, satellites, (AWACS would be regular). And here in WoT they play enough and let’s minus when criticizing tanks - this is a favorite toy, right?
        1. 0
          29 May 2024 16: 49
          Well, the West is now lulling us with drones and rebs, like this is how the war will be... Nah, unmanned aircraft need to be developed and reb too, but not to the detriment of the main strike weapons, and this is the Strategic Missile Forces, missiles, aviation, air defense-missile defense..
  7. +12
    28 May 2024 08: 52
    A search for a protection solution is underway. So far, only its passive component is visible. We need active self-adjusting electronic warfare that scans the frequencies of drones on approach and suppresses them without the participation of the crew.
    1. +6
      28 May 2024 08: 58
      There is already a concept for active protection against drones - I will publish it here soon if the article passes moderation.
    2. +2
      28 May 2024 09: 17
      We need active self-adjusting electronic warfare,

      By the way, yes, I wonder why it hasn’t been created yet, the idea seems to be on the surface
    3. +2
      28 May 2024 09: 18
      Electronic warfare is losing its relevance against drones right now, as autonomous target recognition systems appear on drones.
    4. +6
      28 May 2024 09: 51
      We need active self-adjusting electronic warfare that scans the frequencies of drones on approach and suppresses them without the participation of the crew.

      Drones change frequencies. Therefore, electronic warfare is effective “now”, but then it is no longer effective.
      Option 2 - Create a mini turret for the tank with automatic target acquisition.
    5. 0
      29 May 2024 08: 25
      Will not help. Drones can also operate in automatic mode, independently finding a target.
  8. +2
    28 May 2024 08: 57
    This radical option is very effective, only in a “lattice, not solid” design (you can’t see anything) + “Umbrella” on the barrel! - everyone forgets about umbrellas...
    1. -1
      28 May 2024 09: 13
      The next level of protection is to fill everything with concrete... And then they definitely won’t hit you...
      1. 0
        29 May 2024 10: 46
        This has already happened; at 34k they tested protection from concrete blocks.))
  9. -6
    28 May 2024 09: 01
    I think there is no need for any body kits or “barbecues”, we just need to ban drones as an inhumane type of weapon, because chemical weapons have been banned, which prevents us from banning drone weapons. . . hi
    1. +4
      28 May 2024 09: 53
      This is a utopia; at one time they tried to ban crossbows, pistols, anti-personnel mines, etc.
    2. +2
      28 May 2024 10: 26
      Quote: andrey martov
      just need to ban

      tanks with crew. You give disposable ground drones, without armor.
  10. +6
    28 May 2024 09: 02
    The path is clear, similar to the story. Tunic-Chainmail (mesh)-armor (sheets) Then again the Tunic and.. all over again.
  11. +2
    28 May 2024 09: 11
    I hope that experiments and our know-how will lead to the correct combined protection against drones.
  12. 0
    28 May 2024 09: 12
    Handsome! Our army is becoming stronger and more experienced every day! But when there is a massive blow, the West will tremble and will be guaranteed diarrhea for many years!
  13. -5
    28 May 2024 09: 14
    Any drone with a Molotov cocktail is guaranteed to burn any tank, armored personnel carrier, infantry fighting vehicle... Only powerful electronic warfare and the destruction of operators...
  14. +3
    28 May 2024 09: 36
    Logical.
    It’s interesting that in science fiction the idea of ​​separate, replaceable additional armor plates has existed for a long time
  15. +4
    28 May 2024 10: 02
    It is difficult to cover all vulnerable ones with grid plates at close range; electronic warfare is useless against autonomous...
    Theoretically, the solution needs to be either at the reservation level (problematic: new materials, cost, production), or at the level of individual air defense (your patrol swarm of fighter drones, fortunately there are no problems with autonomy - you can constantly keep 5 pieces in the air via a cable from the generator and the enemy reb is not scary, but at the same time there will be an external source of reconnaissance and surveillance and/or budget shooting on approach with something like an auto-guided anti-aircraft machine gun)
    But in fact - to reconsider the concept of using tanks and armored vehicles: armored mobile artillery is one thing, infantry support on LBS is another. Hanging everything possible on MBT and going for versatility is a loss in specialization and a significant increase in cost.
    If we consider it more specifically and down to earth (need to be here and now): equip the crews and subordinates with shotguns right now, while the directed radio frequency energy system is being implemented/installed. Burning electronics with pulses is cheap and practical: you don’t need any ammunition, you don’t need precise aiming, and protecting a budget(!) drone from EMI is very problematic...
  16. +2
    28 May 2024 10: 30
    Two solutions to the drone problem: grids (maximum in all directions) and additional armor plates (along the upper hemisphere). I propose to separate their use: grids - for self-propelled guns and MLRS; plates - for MBT, infantry fighting vehicles, BRDM. For the latter, leave the grilles only to protect the sides and stern from cumulative shells. For airborne armored vehicles, different options need to be considered.
  17. 0
    28 May 2024 10: 50
    Judging by the photo, the “anti-wing” at the rear will not allow firing from a cannon... about 45 degrees horizontally. But terrain conditions may not allow the entire tank hull to be deployed...
  18. +1
    28 May 2024 11: 01
    They can’t finish Arena-M or is it expensive?
    1. 0
      28 May 2024 18: 48
      And where have you seen KAZ, except at the parade and training ground?
  19. 0
    28 May 2024 11: 04
    And what prevented us from designing such a structure right away?! More efficient and more reliable. good drinks
  20. +4
    28 May 2024 11: 06
    image of the T-90M, which has a completely new type of anti-drone protection. Instead of the familiar “birdhouses” on the tank, armor plates covering it are installed at a short distance from the turret

    I once wrote that the main problem in protecting the upper projection is hatches. The issue with the hatches was resolved and the protection began to look quite adequate.
    But in the future, you will still have to solve the issue in a more radical way - for example, change the layout and move the entrance to the tank to the stern, which will dramatically increase the top armor.
    In general, when discussing the protection of tanks against drones, everyone somehow forgets that, in fact, drones are just carriers of not very powerful anti-tank charges, the effectiveness of which is explained by the fact that they hit the weakest point.
    So, tanks will cope with drones one way or another, but with all other equipment the problems, of course, are much more serious, because there are weak points on all sides.
    1. 0
      28 May 2024 16: 27
      Completely wrong. Usually the FPV drone hits the tank from above in the MTO. The damaged tank is then finished off. Often by dumping into open hatches, which were left in this position by the escaping crew. Sometimes hitting a drone on its side will cause instant detonation. So it's not about the hatches.
      1. +1
        28 May 2024 19: 35
        Quote: Dmitry_Likhoded
        Usually the FPV drone hits the tank from above

        That’s exactly what I said – drones strike from above, since that’s where the armor is weakest. Actually, it is weak because it has always been the safest place. For the same reason, hatches are made from above. Once upon a time, there were also hatches on the side of the turret, but they were abandoned after tanks and anti-tank artillery mastered shooting from ambushes in the side projection.
        And while it’s still possible to book the MTO, you can’t put armor on the hatches. That's why tall anti-drone barbecues appeared. And the article under discussion shows how this issue can be solved in an industrial environment - barbecues have disappeared, quite neat additional screens have appeared that do not increase the size and do not interfere with fire control systems, machine guns, or active defense systems.

        Quote: Dmitry_Likhoded
        Sometimes hitting a drone on its side causes instant detonation

        If the board is holding a shot from an anti-tank missile system, then it is not afraid of drones, since they mainly carry charges from RPGs.
        In any case, it is easier to strengthen the sides - with additional armor, active armor, and screens.

        Back to the beginning. The drone is not a new weapon, but a new way to hit the least protected places with old weapons. Essentially, the same anti-tank systems that have learned to hit not a well-protected forehead, but a weakly armored roof. A sort of analogue of the Javelin for the poor, only ten times longer range and a hundred times cheaper.
        1. 0
          29 May 2024 07: 43
          You focused specifically on the hatches as a weak area of ​​the tank. And I’m writing to you that hatches have nothing to do with it at all. Braziers appeared as a means of protection against discharges from copters. Barbecues do not save you from FPV drones at all.
          There are a lot of badass videos that show exactly how a tank was hit by a FPV drone. Tanks do not carry ATGMs on board.
  21. +2
    28 May 2024 11: 41
    It seemed like a sinful thing that Abrams. Perhaps the heat does that. bully
  22. 0
    28 May 2024 19: 37
    All that remains is to supplement all this a little with drives for the “transformer” and it will be complete. I believe it is also not difficult to equip the outer perimeter of ships with anti-boat (anti-torpedo) lifting armor shields. Yes, the “beauty” will decrease, but the vitality will increase.