Military Review

RPG-30 "Hook"

109
The Russian Defense Ministry has decided on the delivery time for the combat units of the new double-barreled anti-tank hand-held grenade launchers - the RPG-30 "Hook", created in the Basalt research and production association. In 2009, the new grenade launcher successfully passed a series of state tests, after which it was decided to supply these grenade launchers to the armament of the Russian army. Production of new RPGs in the troops will begin in November 2013 year. According to the newspaper "Izvestia", the military purchased 1000 grenade launchers. The amount of the contract for the supply of RPG-30 (was concluded at the end of 2012) amounted to 83 million rubles, which means the cost of each grenade launcher is 83 thousand rubles. The first thousand new RPGs will be transferred to the district warehouses of the Central and Southern military districts, from where grenade launchers will be transferred to brigades.


The RPG-30 "Hook" anti-tank grenade launcher (GRAU 7P53 index) is weapon single use, two-pipe. In a cylindrical container of larger diameter is 105-mm tandem cumulative anti-tank grenade PG-30. Below is a smaller container in which the target simulator is located. Its purpose is to activate, when approaching the target, the means of active defense of the enemy and ensuring conditions under which the main tandem ammunition can easily destroy the target.

The new Russian RPG-30 “Hook” grenade launcher surpasses its predecessor RPG-29 “Vampire” in compactness - slightly longer than the 1 meter, against the Vampire’s 2 meters. At the same time, the RPG-29 has proven itself quite well in present-day military conflicts, for example, in Syria, where it has already repeatedly demonstrated tremendous penetrating power. The RPG-22 and RPG-26 grenade launchers that are in service with the Russian army cost the budget about 30 thousand rubles each. A “hook” costs 2,5 twice as much, but this is a worthwhile waste of money.

RPG-30 "Hook"

The army notes that the transition to the new RPG-30 grenade launcher should not be accompanied by any difficulties for personnel. Of course, the new grenade launcher, due to the presence of 2-x barrels, requires a special grip and at first it may seem that it is inconvenient to hold it, but soldiers get used to this particular feature after a couple of lessons. The peculiarity of the grenade launcher is that the simulator in it is quite fragile, which means that the RPG-30 must be used quite cautiously, said an officer in the service of the missile-artillery armament of the Southern Military District.

According to Vitaly Moiseyev, the editor of the site "Courage-2004", the acquisition of the latest Russian grenade launcher is another step in the continuation of the eternal confrontation between defense and attack techniques. Russian armed forces must be prepared to fight any adversary that has outdated or, on the contrary, high-tech weapons. It is possible that in the very near future the number of countries that equip their armored vehicles with active protection complexes will multiply. In this regard, the presence of the Russian military of such a weapon as the RPG-30 "Hook" will be in place.

To the development of a new means of destruction tanks and enemy armored vehicles at the state-owned Bazalt research and production enterprise began in the mid-2000s. The latest RPG-30 "Hook" was developed to defeat all types of armed, as well as promising models of armored vehicles, as well as unarmored targets, enemy manpower and protected fortifications and firing points on the battlefield. This anti-tank weapon system is able to overcome all possible complexes of active protection (KAZ) of tanks and other armored vehicles that were developed by the beginning of the XNUMXst century in various countries of the world.


RPG-30 grenade launcher, of course, refers to the new means of dealing with the enemy's armored vehicles. Already for a long time it has been known to use a special type of armor against warheads with a shaped charge. This armor is called active-reactive and consists of exploding plates that form a common detonation chain. At the moment of impact of the projectile on the plate detonation occurs, which affects the cumulative jet of charge. At this point, the jet deviates from the position of the primary contact with the target's armor, which significantly reduces the effect of its impact.

The reciprocal step on the part of the attacker was the use of tandem rocket ammunition. The warhead of such projectiles consists of 2-x parts: the initial charge, which acts as a detonator plates reactive armor and the main charge, which is triggered after a specified period of time at a time when the target is already deprived of dynamic protection.

However, the designers found control and on tandem ammunition. The next step was the development of active protection systems. As an example of such systems, we can cite the well-known Russian Arena, the widely publicized Israeli Trophy system, as well as the promising American development FCLAS. These systems detect a shot approaching the tank and launch a projectile to meet with it, seeking to destroy or undermine the anti-tank ammunition with a shock or explosive impact. For these purposes, dense inert metal elements can be used, which at the time of the explosion scatter in the air like microshape. It is assumed that this kind of protection have a limited radius of destruction and can not harm their own troops located nearby.


The RPG-30 grenade launcher is equipped with 105-mm tandem ammunition, which is able to penetrate steel armor with a thickness more than 600-mm, which is behind the dynamic protection. The main distinguishing feature of the grenade launcher is the use of the 2 pipe, from which the shot is fired with a smaller-caliber rocket trap. This rocket trap is a part of a real rocket, which is ahead of the main warhead as it approaches the target. The essence of this idea is that the tank's active defense system destroys the missile simulator and cannot immediately hit the second, real threat. According to Russian experts, a known KAZ is able to destroy the second target in a minimum time interval, which is equal to 0,2-0,4 s. At the same time, the PG-30 grenade approaches the target in less time, which leaves all active protection complexes out of work.

The RPG-30 “Hook” grenade launcher was created using a bicoliber design, unique and innovative for hand-held anti-tank weapons, using a target simulator. Structurally, it is a 2-e parallel tubes of different diameters in which missiles are placed. The ends of both tubes are covered with petal rubber membranes, which collapse at the moment of the shot. The grenade launcher is equipped with a single aiming device and trigger mechanism. RPG-30 is equipped with a folding mechanical sight. Bringing a grenade launcher into a firing position is made by raising the scope of the sight upwards and raising the trigger mechanism.

In the larger container is the main 105-mm tandem cumulative reactive anti-tank grenade PG-30, which largely replicates the similar ammunition for the earlier version of the RPG-29 "Vampire" grenade launcher. This grenade launcher managed to prove itself well enough with the defeat of the Israeli Merkava tanks during the second Lebanon war, as well as with the American МХNUMXА1 Abrams and British Challenger 2 during the second Iraqi campaign. In a smaller container there is a missile-simulator of the target. It has an identical trajectory with the main grenade, as well as a radar signature. By means of active protection of a tank, it is defined as an attacking rocket grenade tank and triggers the system.


Being at a distance of a shot (sighting range 200 meters) to the enemy's armored object, the grenade thrower aims and makes a shot from the Hook RPG-30. At the moment of the shot, the propelling charges of both shells are triggered. In this case, the target simulator leaves the barrel first, after it, with a slight delay, the main ammunition PG-30 starts. Modern KAZ tanks, firing on a simulator projectile, are not able to react to the main anti-tank grenade following it. As a result, the main cumulative ammunition pierces the main layer of armor, affects the equipment and the crew inside the tank, causing a fire and exploding ammunition.

Performance characteristics RPG-30 "Hook":
Grenade launcher caliber - 105 mm;
Weight - 10,3 kg;
Length - 1135 mm;
Aiming range and direct shot - 200 m;
The thickness of the obstacles:
- the main armor after active and dynamic protection - 600 mm;
- reinforced concrete - mm 1500;
- brick - mm 2000;
- wood and earth - 3700 mm.

Information sources:
-http: //vpk.name/news/88923_rossiiskaya_armiya_poluchit_dvustvolnyii_granatomet_kryuk.html
-http: //weapon.at.ua/load/220-1-0-835
-http: //www.army-guide.com/eng/article/article_1311.html
-http: //eragun.org/new/grmet/russiagrm_33.html
Author:
109 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Professor
    Professor April 30 2013 08: 09 New
    -26
    For these purposes, dense inert metal elements can be used, which at the time of the explosion fly apart in the air like microsprays. It is assumed that these types of defenses have a limited radius of destruction and cannot harm their own troops located nearby.

    Metal elements are used but in all KAZ.

    According to Russian experts, well-known KAZs are able to destroy the second target in a minimum time interval, which is equal to 0,2-0,4 s. At the same time, the PG-30 grenade approaches the target in less time, which leaves all active protection systems out of work.

    1. We duplicate the KAZ interception system, since the radar and computer are already available.
    2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.
    3. Intercepted by double (tandem) ammunition.
    4. ...
    1. leon-iv
      leon-iv April 30 2013 08: 30 New
      25
      Prof is the answer to KAZ Trophy for Middle Eastern buyers. Change the algorithm on KAZ and change the RPG.
    2. Old_kapitan
      Old_kapitan April 30 2013 08: 36 New
      17
      We duplicate the KAZ interception system, since the radar and computer are already available.
      2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.

      And your smart computer can make out, is it a simulator, or a normal grenade?
      1. Professor
        Professor April 30 2013 08: 42 New
        -13
        Quote: leon-iv
        Prof is the answer to KAZ Trophy for Middle Eastern buyers. Change the algorithm on KAZ and change the RPG.

        Of course, where else has KAZ been adopted? Change the algorithm is two weeks of work of analysts and programmers, change RPG is a replacement of design and production line.

        Quote: Old_Kapitan
        We duplicate the KAZ interception system, since the radar and computer are already available.
        2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.

        And your smart computer can make out, is it a simulator, or a normal grenade?

        My smart computer will simply miss the first charge if the radar detects the next one coming. This is an option.
        1. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 30 2013 09: 23 New
          +9
          Change the algorithm is two weeks of work of analysts and programmers, change RPG is a replacement of design and production line.

          I would not say that for so long. The radar is determined by EPR, but most likely just any item. (Trophy did not study, give a reference to the algorithm)
          My smart computer will simply miss the first charge if the radar detects the next one coming. This is an option.

          And I just change the order of launch. This is an option.
          1. Professor
            Professor April 30 2013 09: 57 New
            -4
            The radar is determined by EPR, but most likely just any item. (Trophy did not study, give a reference to the algorithm)

            Not only EPR, but also speed. Does not respond to cobblestones.

            And I just change the order of launch. This is an option.

            Option. Then we will hit with a tandem charge.
            1. Argon
              Argon April 30 2013 21: 47 New
              +5
              I always liked optimistic people, however, I treat fatal optimists with great distrust and apprehension.
            2. cdrt
              cdrt 2 May 2013 13: 18 New
              +2
              At one time they wrote that a small charge is the heir to Atropus. If so, then KAZ will have many more problems
            3. Tylerdurden
              Tylerdurden 22 May 2013 18: 32 New
              +1
              Professor, how do you know from what grenade launcher you fly to the battlefield? From RPG 30 or maybe 29 or maybe even RPG 7, or maybe the cornet will fly? Or do you first ask the enemy what he will shoot, then your programmers will reprogram the system active defense for 2 weeks and into battle, or what? smile
        2. Old skeptic
          Old skeptic April 30 2013 14: 57 New
          +3
          A RPG changes the launch sequence .... First, a combat grenade, then a blank.
        3. Mairos
          Mairos April 30 2013 15: 56 New
          +8
          Heh .. And you know that often shooting comes from several RPGs, no computer can tell, these are two tandems from different pipes flying or a fake + tandem.
          Well, then, how many "shots" can KAZ make in battle? In any case, at launch from the 30th KAZ will spend 2 charges instead of one, at least. And after all, it’s not a fact that it will necessarily knock down a grenade. Again, probabilities.))
        4. ultra
          ultra 1 May 2013 00: 03 New
          +4
          Quote: Professor
          My smart computer will simply miss the first charge if the radar detects the next one coming.
          And if the first one is not an imitator? The detection system must identify with 100% accuracy, and the manufacturer claims that the radar and thermal signatures are identical! hi
        5. svp67
          svp67 1 May 2013 13: 15 New
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          RPG is a replacement for design and production line.
          It’s all just to put a switch that will change the order of launch of the "simulator-main projectile" poured the "main projectile-simulator", it's much easier
      2. Kars
        Kars April 30 2013 10: 45 New
        10
        KAZ radar is supposed to be able to identify the mass of an object by its dimensions, and decide first to repulse the blow of a larger object. There are also other options, but I won’t give any reason why Rafael will help.
        And Threat. Trophy is made with a large number of shortcomings. This is my IMHO.
        1. Argon
          Argon April 30 2013 21: 59 New
          +4
          Dear Kars, not one radar in the world can not recognize objects not by weight, not by color even by smell. It’s impossible to determine the flight altitude of the KAZ radar also (the actual) it doesn’t determine the (actual) radar. So, the EPR the object can not only be reduced but also increased, as actually described in the article.
    3. self-propelled
      self-propelled April 30 2013 08: 51 New
      10
      good day to you, professor hi
      I would like to ask, but how many targets (anti-tank missiles) can simultaneously detect, track and destroy modern KAZ?

      Quote: Professor
      2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it

      But where is the guarantee that the first simulator flies, and not two RPG grenades? How will KAZ determine?
      1. Professor
        Professor April 30 2013 09: 01 New
        -2
        Quote: self-propelled
        But where is the guarantee that the first simulator flies, and not two RPG grenades? How will KAZ determine?

        Let's immediately decide, these are my personal fantasies and I miss the word IMHO.
        The trajectory of the simulator and the main grenade coincide and the time between them is minimal and known. Firing with two real grenades in the same way is not yet possible.


        Quote: self-propelled
        I would like to ask, but how many targets (anti-tank missiles) can simultaneously detect, track and destroy modern KAZ?

        I do not know.
        1. Phoenix-D
          Phoenix-D April 30 2013 09: 15 New
          +2
          In Vetrovka, the detection and destruction of SIX simultaneously released targets from all viewing angles is declared. This, of course, provided that the computer sees them ...
          1. self-propelled
            self-propelled April 30 2013 09: 34 New
            +2
            Quote: Phoenix-D
            This, of course, provided that the computer sees them ...

            just about if he sees.
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov April 30 2013 09: 18 New
          16
          Quote: Professor
          Firing with two real grenades in the same way is not yet possible.

          Can. And for a long time
          1. Professor
            Professor April 30 2013 10: 00 New
            -7
            What you have in the picture is at the same time (and the existing KAZ will knock them down), but it is necessary one by one with a minimum delay in order to provoke the KAZ to the first grenade.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov April 30 2013 10: 02 New
              +8
              I am afraid that the simultaneous launch of three missiles will not withstand even the Romanian soldier. Consistently shoot them
          2. Nasty
            Nasty April 30 2013 10: 07 New
            +8
            Two logs, two soldiers, two granotomet ... suede jackets ... two wassat
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov April 30 2013 10: 09 New
              +6
              Three. This is a romanian grenade launcher AGI 3x40
              1. Nasty
                Nasty April 30 2013 10: 41 New
                +6
                Three grenades ... three suede jackets ... wai-wai wassat
              2. anomalocaris
                anomalocaris 1 May 2013 11: 05 New
                +2
                I have not seen such an aggregate yet. Dear Comrade Lopatov, if you can more detail about this device.
        3. leon-iv
          leon-iv April 30 2013 09: 27 New
          +4
          The trajectory of the simulator and the main grenade coincide and the time between them is minimal and known. Firing with two real grenades in the same way is not yet possible.

          Replace start time elementary
          1. Professor
            Professor April 30 2013 10: 01 New
            -11
            Replace start time elementary

            According to Russian experts, well-known KAZs are able to destroy the second target after a minimum time interval, which is 0,2-0,4 s.
            You can’t change much.
            1. Suvorov000
              Suvorov000 April 30 2013 11: 57 New
              +5
              I was always pleased with such mathematicians as you)))) if you can’t count it means it can’t be done)) you’ve always been caught on this, there are such concepts as ingenuity skill and practice. But you theorists do not understand this, so consider further))
            2. leon-iv
              leon-iv April 30 2013 13: 07 New
              +5
              You can’t change much.

              Choi then I can offer five options.
              including selection of goals and its disguise and imitation.
        4. StolzSS
          StolzSS April 30 2013 11: 30 New
          +4
          With a self-made installation with electric start, it is possible at least immediately with three RPG-7 mi)))
          Your fantasies about computers and their reconfiguration have one flaw, and you are not considering the option of using a laser to suppress optical sensors against tanks from the kaz, which will disorient the crew for a while, and then a grenade launcher attack will be applied ... the unaccounted flaw lies in the fact that we don’t know how the electronics will behave when the optical systems for observing the tank are damaged, how will the people in the crew react to the blinding of the gunner ??? Maybe they will start ticking from the tank and opening the hatches will block the protection system ??? In general, your optimism is premature net hatred. It is unclear how everything will turn out in real life)))
          1. Professor
            Professor April 30 2013 12: 01 New
            +2
            you do not consider the option in which a laser will be used against tanks with a kaz to suppress optical sensors, which will disorient the crew for a while,

            1. KAZ uses radar, not optical sensors
            2. The tank has already installed optical sensors that respond to laser irradiation and even allow the system to deploy the barrel in the direction of the radiation source.

            In general, your optimism is premature net hatred.

            I do not pretend to be more. I am sure that the real developers of KAZ are also not idle, who wants to lose an order worth $ 600'000 apiece?
            1. StolzSS
              StolzSS 1 May 2013 11: 51 New
              +1
              EEE dear, do you read inattentively or are you not familiar with the topic? What is the use of having your tank put the cannon on the laser source? The Chinese system will immediately burn out the optics? Or will your tank shoot with a radar ??? Did I draw your attention to the psychological factor of this scenario? For possible failures of the algorithms and those parts of the systems due to violations of adjacent guidance systems, or will you deny that modern guidance systems are highly interconnected in the tank ??? As I said in real life, it can all turn out very peculiarly because they did not wait ....
              1. Professor
                Professor 1 May 2013 14: 06 New
                +1
                Will the Chinese system burn out the optics right there?

                Why are you joking like that? Do you have any idea what kind of power a laser should be and how long it needs to be pointed at one point to burn optics? Blind can (also not a fact), but no more.

                As I said in real life, it can all turn out very peculiarly because they did not wait ....

                Here I absolutely agree with you. Only real combat experience will show what a particular model is worth.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 1 May 2013 16: 32 New
                  +1
                  Not only blinds, but also damages. Not only that, it can temporarily blind the operator. This topic has been around for many years, everything has been worked out.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 1 May 2013 16: 35 New
                    -1
                    The operator will be blinded, only the optics will not burn. Silenok is not enough.
                    1. Lopatov
                      Lopatov 1 May 2013 16: 40 New
                      +1
                      In principle, this does not matter much. Does it really matter how ATGMs are destroyed, with good optics, or with bad ones?
        5. Mairos
          Mairos April 30 2013 16: 03 New
          +7
          KAZ is not an AFAR fighter. )) What kind of devil escort? If there are shots from 50-100 meters and from different angles, it will be hard for KAZ. I’m not sure, but I think that some complex analyzing algorithms taking into account the EPR, the possible mass and dimensions of the grenade are nonsense. The wrong distance and the wrong time. The Iron Dome hardware has an order of magnitude more power and analysis time, and sometimes self-made "fools" of Arab origin skip.
          1. Argon
            Argon April 30 2013 22: 18 New
            +1
            Uh, dear Mairos, the matter is in a different range of wavelengths and other distances, in principle, a sphere with a diameter of 4 to 10 m is seen quite well: it distinguishes a fly from a bee, as well as from a flying pebble or dust suspension.
    4. Phoenix-D
      Phoenix-D April 30 2013 09: 12 New
      +9
      Is the Windbreaker or its analogs capable of firing with tandem ammunition?
      In addition, changing the algorithm will not help - at the moment of the explosion of the first container, a plasma cloud is formed, which gives enough for clogging the EMR radar, a cloud of the smallest (foil and dust including) metal fragments is formed, which make the radar work extremely unsatisfactory for the next few seconds. As a result, the flying main ammunition without any problems reaches the armor, with all the ensuing consequences.
      1. Professor
        Professor April 30 2013 10: 04 New
        +1
        Quote: Phoenix-D
        at the moment of the explosion of the first container, a cloud of plasma is formed, which gives enough for clogging the radar EMP, a cloud of tiny (metal foil and dust including) metal fragments is also formed, making the radar work extremely unsatisfactory for the next few seconds. As a result, the flying main ammunition without any problems reaches the armor, with all the ensuing consequences.

        Not certainly in that way. The radar will see both ammunition even before the first one is detonated, since the launch interval between them is minimal.
        I wonder, after starting the simulator, what happens to the aiming line? Does it go astray when the main grenade comes out?
        1. Suvorov000
          Suvorov000 April 30 2013 12: 01 New
          +2
          already tested and valid))) only on the conveyor has not yet been received
          1. Professor
            Professor April 30 2013 12: 04 New
            -5
            already tested and valid))) only on the conveyor has not yet been received

            At what KAZ is it tested? wink
        2. svp67
          svp67 1 May 2013 16: 42 New
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          Not certainly in that way. The radar will see both ammunition even before the first one is detonated, since the launch interval between them is minimal.
          which is extremely doubtful, most likely the system will consider them as one goal
    5. neri73-r
      neri73-r April 30 2013 10: 06 New
      +2
      Dreams, dreams ................... professor !!! This is the same as with the American SOI, on the cartoon it’s beautiful and good, but in life zilch ..........
      1. Professor
        Professor April 30 2013 10: 09 New
        0
        Who does not dream he remains with nothing.
        1. moskovtsev1964
          moskovtsev1964 1 May 2013 00: 56 New
          +1
          There are still problems with the Plant 7
      2. Yarbay
        Yarbay 1 May 2013 13: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: neri73-r
        Dreams, dreams ................... professor !!! This is the same as with the American SOI, on the cartoon it’s beautiful and good, but in life ...


        to whom you say this)))))))))))

        Decide today who you will be tomorrow)))))))))))))))))
    6. yanus
      yanus April 30 2013 10: 59 New
      +7
      Quote: Professor

      1. We duplicate the KAZ interception system, since the radar and computer are already available.

      If a cloud of debris occurs during the explosion, which interferes with radiolocation, then at least 10 radars. They simply will not see the next target.
      If the "cloud" is a fairy tale, then why another radar? Ultimately, the electronic component will cope - but the mechanics that direct the “firing element” towards the direction of fire and reload will become a “bottleneck”. You can not quickly increase the speed of mechanics at times.

      Quote: Professor

      2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.

      During production, it is enough to make minor changes so that 50% of the RPG-30s are made with the primary shooting of the simulator. On the rest, make the main shot of the main grenade primary, and then only the simulator. As a result, the interception algorithm went through the forest, working only in 50% of cases.

      Quote: Professor

      3. Intercepted by double (tandem) ammunition.

      The simulator and grenade will not fly at a constant interval. Any gap between starts will be floating, for example +/- 0.05sec. With such a delta, this is a delta in a distance of about 10 meters + the distance of 10 meters itself. You can’t bring this down with a dumb “tandem”.
      1. Professor
        Professor April 30 2013 11: 55 New
        -1
        Quote: yanus
        If a cloud of debris occurs during the explosion, which interferes with radiolocation, then at least 10 radars. They simply will not see the next target.

        the radar sees the next target before the first charge is detonated, so the time gap between them is minimal, otherwise even the existing KAZ will have time to recharge.
        Ultimately, the electronic component will cope - but the mechanics that direct the “firing element” towards the direction of fire and reload will become a “bottleneck”. You can not quickly increase the speed of mechanics at times.

        This is not about reloading, but about duplicating the interceptor. The first is fired, and the second is ready for use.

        Quote: yanus
        During production, it is enough to make minor changes so that 50% of the RPG-30s are made with the primary shooting of the simulator.

        The simulator has a cross-sectional area several times smaller than the main grenade. You can bet on this when classifying goals.

        Quote: yanus
        Dumb "tandem" is not to bring down.

        We make the interceptor something like a tank shell, where the charges explode in turn and the maximum time interval between the first and last is about 0.2 seconds.
        1. yanus
          yanus April 30 2013 13: 27 New
          +6
          Quote: Professor

          The simulator has a cross-sectional area several times smaller than the main grenade. You can bet on this when classifying goals.

          There is already a processor and a radar smoke. It’s one thing to determine the speed and direction in order to make a decision, and to calculate the interception point / time, and it’s quite another thing to build a 3d model of the target. They have the same EPR ..
          It's not that I consider KAZ to be something non-working. At the moment, it can be quite effective. The problem is in the prospects. RPG-30 is the first swallow, and cheap.
          The main plug, in my opinion, is the radar. The fact is that a grenade can be practically without metal, only a metal "funnel" is needed. This can already complicate the "capture" of the target at low cost grenades.
          The second point, a grenade is always irradiated with a nose radar. This means that the shape of the radome can be optimized to reflect radar signals to the side. Mini F-117))) Given the minimum ESR grenades, even such a clumsy mini-stealth will create serious problems for interception.
          The third moment and the discharge is "more expensive". The radar is clearly not working in the meter range. Most likely millimeter. Here the same “miracle paint” will work wonderfully, which was smeared on f117, and now on f22. Moreover, the requirements for it are much less. There are no such temperatures and flight times as a fighter, there is no need for durability, etc. It’s a little expensive for an RPG will come out, but for ATGM it will be quite real.
          1. Professor
            Professor April 30 2013 13: 55 New
            -4
            They have the same EPR ..

            How are the same? Both fly into the forehead of the radar, one diameter is several times smaller than the other, therefore, the EPR is different. request

            It may be a little expensive for RPGs, but for ATGMs it will be quite real.

            When ATGM also ceases to use flaps and an engine (it will become like an inert projectile) then it will be possible to talk about stealth technology. Whatever the KAZ was, it was only a temporary solution before the tanks finally retired. The ratio of its value to efficiency has long gone beyond reasonable limits and it still exists solely due to the inertness of thinking.
            1. yanus
              yanus April 30 2013 14: 24 New
              +4
              Quote: Professor

              How are the same? Both fly into the forehead of the radar, one diameter is several times smaller than the other, therefore, the EPR is different. request
              If the cross-sectional area of ​​the object and the EPR are equivalent for you, then I won’t even argue ... Look for the "corner reflectors" in Yandex. The device is primitive, and the EPR is just hellish.

              Quote: Professor
              When ATGM also ceases to use flaps and an engine (it will become like an inert projectile) then it will be possible to talk about stealth technology.

              That is, F22 nefiga nor stealth? he seems to have engines, flaps too.

              Quote: Professor
              Whatever the KAZ was, only a temporary solution before the final retirement of tanks. The ratio of its value to efficiency has long gone beyond reasonable limits and it still exists solely due to the inertness of thinking.

              Tanks will be in service for a long time, just do not have to assign unusual tasks and requirements to them.
              1. Professor
                Professor April 30 2013 15: 18 New
                -4
                If for you the cross-sectional area of ​​the object and the EPR are equivalent things, then I will not even argue ...

                Things are not equal, but interconnected.

                Look for something in Yandex "corner reflectors." The device is primitive, and the EPR is just hellish.

                Imagine grenades in the form of a corner reflector.
                laughing
                That is, F22 nefiga nor stealth? he seems to have engines, flaps too.

                He is known subtleAnd not invisible. wink

                Tanks will be in service for a long time, just do not have to assign unusual tasks and requirements to them.

                Long, as well as armored trains and battleships. However, my opinion on this issue is that of a minority. Wait and see. hi
                1. yanus
                  yanus April 30 2013 18: 41 New
                  +4
                  [quote = РїСЂРѕС „ессор]
                  Things are not equal, but interconnected.
                  [Quote]
                  Have you seen the F117 photo in front? There’s a section - mother is not cool. However, when irradiated "in the face" he has a minimum EPR. But when irradiated "in the ass" with the same cross section, the EPR is maximum for this aircraft. Here is such a riddle))

                  [quote = РїСЂРѕС „ессор]
                  Imagine grenades in the form of a corner reflector.
                  laughing
                  [/ Quote]
                  Put the corner reflector in a plastic cowl and voila - everything flies wonderful))

                  [quote = РїСЂРѕС „ессор]
                  He is known subtleAnd not invisible. wink
                  [Quote]
                  Given the minimum initial EPR for ATGMs and RPGs, improvements using the stealth technology make the missile invisible to millimeter-wave radars.

                  [quote = РїСЂРѕС „ессор]
                  Long, as well as armored trains and battleships. However, my opinion on this issue is that of a minority. Wait and see. hi[/ Quote]
                  Tanks simply lost the right to the first strike of aviation. Nevertheless, they are the second wave.
            2. old rocket man
              old rocket man April 30 2013 22: 47 New
              +3
              Quote: Professor
              How are the same? Both fly into the forehead of the radar, one diameter is several times smaller than the other, therefore, the EPR is different.

              No, the professor, therefore, not one has a funnel under the cowl, but the other has a corner reflector — they evened, increased, decreased, in general, “what are you doing?”
            3. Metlik
              Metlik 1 May 2013 14: 56 New
              0
              [quote = РїСЂРѕС „ессор]
              [quote] No matter how KAZ was there, only a temporary solution before the final retirement of tanks. The ratio of its value to efficiency has long gone beyond reasonable limits and it still exists solely due to inertia of thinking.
              A moot point. In the complex air defense, tank, anti-personnel means - the tank may well be effective.
            4. Metlik
              Metlik 1 May 2013 15: 00 New
              0
              [quote = РїСЂРѕС „ессор]

              [quote] No matter how KAZ was there, only a temporary solution before the final retirement of tanks. The ratio of its value to efficiency has long gone beyond reasonable limits and it still exists solely due to inertia of thinking.
              request
              A moot point. In combination with air defense and anti-personnel means, the tank is quite effective.
            5. Metlik
              Metlik 1 May 2013 15: 02 New
              +2
              Quote: Professor
              Whatever the KAZ was, only a temporary solution before the final retirement of tanks. The ratio of its value to efficiency has long gone beyond reasonable limits and it still exists solely due to the inertness of thinking.


              A moot point. In combination with air defense and infantry, the tank is quite effective.
    7. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev April 30 2013 12: 39 New
      +1
      And it is possible and even simpler to design the expansion of fragments from KAZ, with a wider base of the cone, so that if it were triggered by a false target, the striking elements would destroy the main ammunition flying behind it. Judging by the declared time intervals (<0,2 sec), the distance between the ammunition should be small.

      pysy, grenade flight speed 120 m / s, in 0,1 sec. 12 meters .. hmm .. T.E. the dangerous radius of destruction (30 m) either already falls under the possibility of destroying both ammunition, or should be increased by 1,5 times. Cambodia are two big differences.
    8. Old skeptic
      Old skeptic April 30 2013 14: 52 New
      +5
      Quote: Professor
      1. We duplicate the KAZ interception system, since the radar and computer are already available. 2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it. 3. Intercepted with double (tandem) ammunition. 4. ...

      And we pass on board the usual "Vampire" wink

      Or we can put another tank analogue of the Broadsword

      And the tank does not move, then we will rename it to the bunker.
    9. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith April 30 2013 17: 23 New
      +4
      Shalom Professor! Well, do you really think that several research institutes are sitting, I think they think then, during the tests, they check for 2 years and then you came and broke them off? do you really think they didn’t calculate it?

      About “Cornet” and “Vampire” I also think there was a lot of bragging, yes we roll them, yes our tanks are fast, and the planes are nimble. And you know how many were burned in the end in 2006.
      1. Professor
        Professor April 30 2013 21: 35 New
        +2
        You think that several research institutes are sitting, I think they think then they test it for 2 years and then you come and break it off? do you really think they didn’t calculate it?

        They never met the expression: "During the battle it turned out that ...", "As a result of studying the experience of combat use, it turned out that ..."?

        Quote: Lord of the Sith
        . And you know how many were burned in the end in 2006.

        Enlighten, maybe I’ll learn something new. hi
        1. ZhuDkiyDrugg
          ZhuDkiyDrugg 1 May 2013 10: 26 New
          +1
          [quote = Lord of the Sith]. And you know how many got burned in the end in 2006. [/ quote]
          Enlighten, maybe I’ll learn something new. hi[/ Quote]
          Here read http://clubs.ya.ru/4611686018427437926/replies.xml?item_no=1818
          1. Professor
            Professor 1 May 2013 10: 53 New
            0
            What I wrote there I read in the original source at http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/history/2nd-lebanon-war/acv-losses/
            I would like to read something new.
            The video on your link is generally left-handed with a thread of various events including for the 1990s. request
    10. svp67
      svp67 1 May 2013 13: 13 New
      0
      Quote: Professor
      Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.

      But baking sheets instead of RPG30 uses two RPGs7 ... then how?
      1. Professor
        Professor 1 May 2013 15: 22 New
        +1
        A radar detects a double shot, then the algorithm turns on, otherwise KAZ works normally.
    11. Black Colonel
      Black Colonel 24 May 2013 15: 28 New
      0
      Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.... and skip the Vampire. Picture! wassat
    12. seller trucks
      seller trucks 24 May 2013 15: 37 New
      0
      Quote: Professor
      1. We duplicate the KAZ interception system, since the radar and computer are already available.
      2. Change the interception algorithm - ignore the "simulator" and intercept the next one after it.
      3. Intercepted by double (tandem) ammunition.



      here in Syria would arrange a check, on real targets, I remember in the Lebanon war the RPGs and ATGMs against the "Merkava" perfectly recommended.
    13. Matroskin 18
      Matroskin 18 23 July 2014 12: 33 New
      0
      Prof is the answer to KAZ Trophy for Middle Eastern buyers. Change the algorithm on KAZ and change the RPG.

      Easily, by the principle: at first the ammunition flies, and then the trap!
      And the sequence of the shot will be changed by the switch on the RPG.
      And for a reliable defeat in one tank, make 2 shots from an RPG-30 in different modes!
      So now think about countermeasures!
  2. Denis_SF
    Denis_SF April 30 2013 08: 53 New
    +4
    All is well, the main thing is that his bearded men against our Arena should not be used. And as experience from previous wars and conflicts shows (when the Czechs had what we had just heard about in the troops), the odds are great.
    1. Ascetic
      Ascetic April 30 2013 13: 29 New
      +6
      Quote: Denis_SF
      All is well, the main thing is that his bearded men against our Arena should not be used.


      If this "Arena" we had in Chechnya. because the complex was developed, but alas, for reasons well-known to the troops, he did not enter. There is a book - a memoir of Sergei Pavlovich the Invincible called "Weapons of two eras". I highly recommend reading it.
      Sergey Pavlovich tells about the history of the creation of KAZ in very detail and intelligibly even for readers who are far from technology.
      It all started with an individual missile defense for the tank. The complex was called the Arena, since it provided almost circular protection. A radar was installed on the tower, fixing the approach of shells and missiles. Information was transmitted to the onboard computer, which in a split second calculated the target and issued a command to intercept. An element was fired in the direction of the enemy shell, which exploded in the immediate vicinity of it. Hundreds of “bullets” flew out of the element, they literally tore a rocket or artillery shell. It would seem that everything is very simple. But only the Russian genius could solve the "simplest" problem.

      The Americans spent more than 20 years, but did not do anything similar. As a result, they simply stole the drawings of the active tank defense complex through their agents.
      The tests of the first KAZ took place at a tank training ground in Kubinka. The author of these lines happened to be a witness. On the T-80, equipped with an "Arena", they hit from all types of ATGMs, various grenade launchers, anti-tank guns. Even from a Mi-24 helicopter they fired a powerful missile created in the same KBM. The tank remained invulnerable. Calculations showed: not only tanks, but also light armored vehicles, even simple cars, can be equipped with the KAZ system. Alas, neither armored vehicles nor vehicles were equipped with such complexes. But this is, as they say, another story.

      Sergey Ptichkin

      Sergei Pavlovich Invincible was born in 1921 in a working class family. He graduated from Moscow State Technical University. Bauman. From 1945 to 1989 he worked in the engineering design bureau (Kolomna), having gone from engineer to general designer of missile systems of the Ground Forces. Under his leadership, various types of anti-tank missile systems, all types of portable anti-aircraft missile systems, tactical missiles "Tochka", "Oka" were created, the Iskander project was launched. Sergei Invincible - a member of various academies, laureate of the highest prizes of the USSR, Hero of Socialist Labor. Honorary Citizen of Kolomna.

      On the basis of KAZ "Arena", he also developed KAZ for silos of the Strategic Missile Forces (project "Mozyr")
      During the tests in the late 1980s, the low-altitude non-nuclear interception of an ICBM combat unit simulator launched from the Plesetsk training range was first carried out
      This development did not contradict the 1972 ABM Treaty Funding was discontinued in August 1991.
      According to data from open sources, work on the creation of KAZ has been resumed.
      link
  3. 11 black
    11 black April 30 2013 09: 30 New
    +1
    Well what can I say - ALL GENIUS SIMPLY !!! So, the council found an inaccessible previously active defense - well, we are waiting for the response of the tankmen ...
  4. Nasty
    Nasty April 30 2013 09: 53 New
    +2
    We put a laser range finder. The leader shell is detonated 3-4 meters to the target, blinding the tank. Following is the main charge - the final solution ... of the issue
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 30 2013 09: 59 New
      +2
      At the price of a laser rangefinder, you can buy a low-power directional EW station. Which will suppress the radar of the active protection complex.
  5. Nasty
    Nasty April 30 2013 10: 05 New
    +1
    And if the KAZ sensor is not a radar, but, say, an infrared camera?
    It must be suppressed by smoke or flash.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 30 2013 10: 13 New
      0
      As far as I read, ultraviolet sensors are used to detect rocket torches.

      And they, like infrared, cannot be beaten with ordinary smoke. Special aerosols are required there, mixed with synthetic fibers.
      1. Nasty
        Nasty April 30 2013 10: 17 New
        +1
        Fibers are for Chubais. Nana would have him cut into nanofibers ...
        Can you make the second shell armored?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov April 30 2013 10: 28 New
          +2
          Quote: Nadyt
          Can you make the second shell armored?

          It makes no sense. The rocket will begin to tumble ironically, which means that the cumulative charge will not fulfill its function.

          The only possible solution from simple ones is to charge a charge outside the active protection complex with the formation of an impact core. There are methods of protection against it, but you can damage the chassis and immobilize the tank.
          1. Nasty
            Nasty April 30 2013 10: 39 New
            +1
            Lightweight ceramic armor. I read that her minus - that she can not withstand more than 1-2 consecutive hits, is cracking. But in this case, there will be only one missile strike. Must withstand
            1. yanus
              yanus April 30 2013 11: 04 New
              +1
              Quote: Nadyt
              Lightweight ceramic armor. I read that her minus - that she can not withstand more than 1-2 consecutive hits, is cracking. But in this case, there will be only one missile strike. Must withstand

              What does ceramics have to do with it? She is against bullets and small-caliber shells ...
              1. Nasty
                Nasty April 30 2013 11: 06 New
                0
                but what will the second charge be gouging: fragments or a burst of sub-caliber shells?
  6. Nasty
    Nasty April 30 2013 10: 20 New
    +2
    A la commando
    1. Srgsoap
      Srgsoap April 30 2013 19: 08 New
      +2
      This is a flamethrower M202A1 FLASH
  7. datur
    datur April 30 2013 12: 26 New
    0
    [quote = Kars] KAZ radar in theory can identify the mass of an object by dimensions, and decide first to reflect the blow of a larger object. There are also other options, but I will not voice why Rafael will help.
    And Threat. The trophy is made with a large number of shortcomings. This is my IMHO. - but agree everything is cheaper !!! wink
  8. _KM_
    _KM_ April 30 2013 13: 05 New
    -5
    Curious RPG, however, there is some kind of dampness in it.
    1. sniper
      sniper April 30 2013 13: 33 New
      +3
      Quote: _KM_
      however, there is some dampness in it.

      There is no limit to perfection .... Following your logic, the question should be followed by any proposal from developers: "Is it better to?"
      -Well maybe ...
      -That go and do, and this is nafig ...
    2. Dmitry_2013
      Dmitry_2013 April 30 2013 15: 11 New
      +1
      _KM_ SU Today, 13:05

      Curious RPG, however, there is some kind of dampness in it.

      Do not specify which one?
    3. Argon
      Argon April 30 2013 22: 25 New
      -1
      My friend, I fully share your opinion on the execution, but you must admit that the idea is effective and simple to genius.
  9. rereture
    rereture April 30 2013 13: 24 New
    0
    Looks awesome)
  10. Tolik.
    Tolik. 975 April 30 2013 14: 38 New
    0
    Quote: Professor
    if the radar detects the next

    doubtful ... a split second ... let me know what kind of radar and computer are?
  11. _KM_
    _KM_ April 30 2013 14: 49 New
    0
    Quote: sniper
    There is no limit to perfection .


    Designers have a proverb - the design should be simple and clean as a child’s tear. Further thought to develop?
  12. Vasilisk
    Vasilisk April 30 2013 16: 37 New
    0
    Some years ago I read somewhere about the concept of a new RPG with 2 missiles, where the 1st missile blinded the radar with an EM pulse for the duration of the 2nd approach.
    1. Argon
      Argon April 30 2013 22: 34 New
      -1
      It doesn’t blind and destroys and is far from EMR, but this is a talk about ATGM, we will postpone it for now. The EMR is “sharp” and it doesn’t disassemble accessories. At this stage, we consider the means of “loud popping door”.
  13. ed1968
    ed1968 April 30 2013 17: 41 New
    0
    wishing that the NATO "fish" were well caught on such a hook wink
  14. Totalanigila
    Totalanigila April 30 2013 18: 04 New
    +1
    In the description, it is said that the singatura of 2 missiles are the same, i.e. they are the same for the radar. And to change the order of the shot, you do not need to involve the programmer department for 2 weeks, this is one line of code.
    1. old rocket man
      old rocket man April 30 2013 23: 21 New
      +1
      Quote: TotalAnigila
      And to change the order of the shot, you do not need to involve the programmer department for 2 weeks, this is one line of code.

      So it’s true, but any programmer will tell you that it’s easier to write a new program than to fix someone else’s, and this is not more than two weeks, but more.
      And then you need to change or reflash the ROMs on all control units, factory specialists do this, and this is also not one week, and then it all needs to be tested, there are plenty of hemorrhoids
  15. kind
    kind April 30 2013 18: 36 New
    +1
    Finally adopted. Since the 90s, the tits have crumpled, need or not.
  16. Rainger
    Rainger April 30 2013 20: 45 New
    +1
    Gee and why it’s breaking the brains of the tank, the first sniper fires at him the entire KAZ from the B-94, and then the tank is methodically sawed with the help of RPG-7 or RPG-30 ....
    1. Argon
      Argon April 30 2013 22: 32 New
      +2
      Yeah, and the tank turns on the spot, smells daisies, and substitutes everything in the world until this whole team gathers, shoots itself.
  17. Apollo
    Apollo April 30 2013 21: 40 New
    +1
    RPG-30 and RPG-32

    1. Raven1972
      Raven1972 1 May 2013 00: 37 New
      +1
      Apollo welcome you, thanks for the great movie !!!!! hi good
  18. old rocket man
    old rocket man April 30 2013 23: 06 New
    +5
    A pointless argument, and started his professor, in an effort to bawl all Russian.
    Everything can be done, if there is desire and money, the only question is that you can’t increase the cost endlessly, as soon as the cost of anti-tank ammunition becomes comparable to the cost of the tank (and this goes) it will lose its relevance, just as the tank cannot be made at the cost of the frigate.
    The best anti-tank weapon is another tank, and the most expensive thing in the world = war negative
    1. Professor
      Professor 1 May 2013 07: 34 New
      -2
      Quote: old rocket
      A pointless argument, and started his professor, in an effort to bawl all Russian. [/ B] negative

      A pointless argument? So do not participate in it. And do not fantasize about my goal of "screaming everything Russian."
      As far as I remember, Russian tanks do not have vaccinated immunity against the ammunition under discussion, and in Jordan a plant was built for their production. And there that day is not far off how they can appear in the Caucasus. IMHO discussion of countermeasures is the time.
      1. Old skeptic
        Old skeptic 1 May 2013 12: 38 New
        +3
        Infantry, the best defense against grenade launchers and inappropriately reinvent the wheel.

        Competent organization of the battle, the brains of the commander and you will be healthy.
      2. old rocket man
        old rocket man 1 May 2013 19: 20 New
        +2
        Quote: Professor
        A pointless argument? So do not participate in it. And do not fantasize about my goal of "screaming everything Russian."


        The pointlessness of the argument is that you began to fantasize about supposedly easy ways to neutralize a new grenade launcher, and without your bile, everyone understands that there is no absolute weapon and no foreseeable future.
        And ABOUT YOUR OVERVIEW FOR ALL RUSSIANS I WILL SAY - DO NOT PREFER AN IDIOT, FROM YOU WILL BE MIRD FOR MILESTONITY
        1. Professor
          Professor 1 May 2013 21: 12 New
          -1
          Quote: old rocket
          And ABOUT YOUR OVERVIEW FOR ALL RUSSIANS I WILL SAY - DO NOT PREFER AN IDIOT, FROM YOU WILL BE MIRD FOR MILESTONITY

          Young man, add me to the blacklist and business. hi
          1. old rocket man
            old rocket man 2 May 2013 23: 21 New
            +2
            Quote: Professor
            Young man, add me to the blacklist and business.

            a lot of honor, yes I’ll be even older than you, nedokormysh, I do not hide my address, nor name, nor age, unlike you zhi elected
  19. ABV
    ABV 1 May 2013 00: 40 New
    +2
    Wonderful! the confrontation between the shell and the armor continues!
    We look further!
  20. Jeber
    Jeber 1 May 2013 01: 06 New
    0
    What is heard about the new KAZ "Afghanistan"?
  21. Zomanus
    Zomanus 1 May 2013 03: 31 New
    0
    In any case, the combat use will put everything in its place. Personally, I would put on an EMP grenade. This will be a real topic for the sophisticated stuffing of military equipment.
  22. bublic82009
    bublic82009 1 May 2013 22: 20 New
    0
    But what's the point in this grenade launcher? it costs 83 thousand and RPG-29 30 thousand. that is, two can certainly stop the tank. and it makes sense to have it so far if the bulk do not yet have new protection in droves.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 2 May 2013 16: 36 New
      0
      Meaning? Well, let's figure it out, now KDZ can withstand tandem shots, but here it’s almost triple. KAZ is now multi-charged and no matter how hard you fight with 2 RPG-29, it will have time to recharge (reload it I figuratively said) the interval is only 0,2-0,4 seconds.
      Of course, it’s strange that 2 RPG-26s are cheaper than one RPG-30, but we are guaranteed to hit the target (if we don’t miss, of course).
  23. skif1804
    skif1804 3 May 2013 19: 09 New
    0
    I think the argument is that it is better to RPG-30 or the Israeli KAZ very soon to be resolved in practice. Unfortunately, they will fight in the Middle East more than once. Only in spite of all the technical power of the Israel Defense Forces, I really would not want to be in the place of the Merkava tankers.
  24. yurayurayura
    yurayurayura 5 May 2013 16: 31 New
    0
    I did not understand the essence of the dispute. I didn’t shoot such a thing, and thank God, but as I understood from the words of the RPG30 developers from open sources, that KAZ destroying the first flying “grenade” blinds itself with explosion products and beyond this cloud of radar, KAZ simply does not see a real danger.
    Based on the foregoing, thanks to our leadership for the receipt of new equipment in the troops.
  25. Hauptam
    Hauptam 10 June 2013 22: 52 New
    0
    More good and quality products. The price-effectiveness ratio is SUPER, And if the first ammunition is made thermobaric, so that the whole DZ is demolished ?! Although it’s probably not possible, it will be difficult to guess the time of the explosion (the approach of the main charge).
  26. fox14
    fox14 30 October 2013 23: 33 New
    0
    In Chechnya, militants used an interesting method of sniper war borrowed from the Russian army. A sniper with an all-round screw cutter was approaching the distance of the optimal shot (150-200m), a second sniper with an SVD from 500-600 m was distracting by harassing shooting. Vintorez perfectly and silently completed the task and retreated whenever possible, (usually always) and everyone tore for SVD. That left due to the distance. The method of counteraction was found, I will not describe. So with RPG 30 hook, the antidote will be found. By the way, it already exists. At the moment, Kaz has only Merkava Mark 4. The war with Israel is hardly foreseen in the near. years, then it is not in demand. If only to push into Syria
    .