Uralvagonzavod has finally turned its attention to its useless "barbecues" for tanks.

61 177 89
Uralvagonzavod has finally turned its attention to its useless "barbecues" for tanks.

In one of its reports, which was dedicated to Victory Day, the press service of Uralvagonzavod showed another train with tanks, sent to the Central Military District. The main feature of these vehicles was their modified "grills," significantly different from the useless designs used previously.

For years they have been doing things that are useless in practice


There's much talk these days about Uralvagonzavod actively implementing various improvements to its products based on recommendations from the military using them on the front lines. Allegedly, whenever operational issues are identified, the plant resolves them promptly. As quickly as the bureaucratic procedures associated with testing, patenting, and production standardization at this enormous corporation allow.



There are examples of this. Take, for example, the extremely poor standard (pre-war) installation of dynamic armor on tanks—this flaw was resolved in just six months, whereas in peacetime, the process could have taken five years. But there are also negative examples, the most striking of which is the completely useless factory-installed "barbecues" that the Tagil team spent over two years churning out on their tanks.

To understand what they are, just look at the photograph below. Essentially, they're simply a second roof over the turret with a very limited area of ​​coverage, supplemented by a scant anti-cumulative mesh on the sides (around the pillars that support the "grill") and explosive reactive armor elements on top.


A T-72B3M with a standard factory grill. Some batches were additionally equipped with rubber "bullets" and anti-HEAT nets, offering very limited protection. Photo source: Rostec

You don't need to be a military genius to understand the full "value" and "effectiveness" of such designs. It's clear to anyone: such a "grill" can only protect the roof of the turret from anti-tank munitions dropped from above and FPV attacks.drones in very limited areas. The tank's sides, rear, and roof remain completely vulnerable.

These "barbecues" would have been useful at the very beginning of a special military operation, when quadcopters adapted to drop shaped-charge munitions posed a major threat to tanks. Since 2023, with the widespread use of FPV drones on the battlefield, their usefulness has become irrelevant.

That is why, when tanks modernized in this way arrive at the front, tank crews and repairmen try to either immediately get rid of such "grills" or improve them by attaching more massive structures that cover the weakened areas of the vehicle as much as possible.

About the new "barbecues"


Finally, in the fifth year of the special military operation, Uralvagonzavod finally gave birth and churned out updated "barbecues," which can now be described as more or less high-quality and effective. Tanks with mounting bases were featured in the corporation's Victory Day celebration video.


T-72B3M (based on the T-72A) with a new grill. Source: screenshot from a UVZ video

Unfortunately, nothing more than racks, frames, and mounts for the Tucha smoke grenade launchers are visible there, as the "grills" on them will be installed in the field. However, we can appreciate the design of the future anti-drone "umbrella" (and it looks exactly like an umbrella)—its patent, number RU 2 850 928, is publicly available on the website of the Federal Institute of Industrial Property.

According to the patent, the new "grill" is designed as follows. A frame is mounted on pillars above the tank's turret, positioned so that the crew can still enter and exit the vehicle normally through hatches. At least four radial cantilever rods—essentially "spokes"—are attached around the perimeter of this frame, with freely hanging cables up to 50 mm thick attached to their ends.


1 — vehicle hull equipped with a hatch; 2 — superstructure, for a tank — a turret equipped with hatches; 3, 4 — false roof with protective elements; 5 — metal frame pillar mounted on the superstructure; 6 — frame held on pillars; 7 — rod-I with bracket-I; 8 — flexible elastic element-I; 9 — flexible durable guy-lines-I; 10 — contour along console parts of bracket-I; 11 — protective screens on chassis; 12 — rod-II with bracket-II; 13 — flexible elastic element-II; 14 — flexible durable guy-line-II; 15 — cable, freely hanging down to the level of the roof of the vehicle hull, secured to rod-I; 16 — rubber-fabric shields; 17 — screen chain. Source: RU 2 850 928

An anti-drone mesh is laid on this frame. And herein lies the key difference from older factory designs: the mesh must cover not only the turret roof but also provide all-round protection—from the frame level to the hull roof. In other words, it hangs around the perimeter, covering the turret from all sides, and also covers a significant portion of the tank's hull roof, which previously remained virtually bare.

The design of the booms themselves is particularly interesting. Those that extend beyond the vehicle's dimensions are not rigidly attached, but rather via flexible, elastic elements. Simply put, if the tank's "grill" gets caught on a tree, wall, shelter, or any other obstacle, the booms should deflect rather than break along with the entire structure.

The patent also specifically provides for a false roof with explosive reactive armor elements. It is installed in the mesh opening above the turret. Rubberized fabric shields can be attached around the perimeter of this false roof, further covering the gaps between the upper protection and the mesh.

To prevent the entire structure from becoming a disposable umbrella, the poles can be additionally connected to the frame with flexible, durable guy wires. Adjacent poles can be connected into groups with flexible ties, but no connection is made between individual groups. The idea is simple: if one part of the "grill" gets caught on something or is damaged, the load shouldn't pull the entire structure down with it. In other words, at least a minimum of durability is built in.

The patent also describes hull side protection. It proposes installing at least two additional booms on each side of the tank, also using flexible elastic elements. These booms are then used to attach flexible protective screens, extending from the hull at a distance sufficient to offset the detonation point of the shaped-charge warhead. In other words, if an FPV drone strikes the tank's side, it should detonate not directly on the tank's side screen, but on a distant obstacle.


3, 4 — false roof with protective elements; 16 — rubber-fabric shields; 17 — screen chain. Source: RU 2 850 928

The side skirts themselves can be made in the form of a chain with vertically attached strips of flexible, durable material—rubberized fabric or polyurethane. Another option is a chain with a longitudinal strip with mounting holes, to which vertical protective elements are attached.

In other words, this isn't just a simple "visor" over the turret, but an attempt to create a comprehensive passive anti-drone defense: from above, all around the turret, along the roof of the hull, and along the sides. This is especially true given that a tank isn't a museum exhibit, but a vehicle that drives through plantings, catches branches, navigates rubble, bumps into walls, sustains damage, and must remain at least partially operational afterward.

The patent also specifies that the upper and side protection bars can be foldable. This is also important, as excessively inflated dimensions have long been the bane of all such designs.

Final World


Ultimately, the new "grill" appears to be a much more sensible solution than previous factory-made designs. The old version was essentially a localized roof over the turret, leaving numerous vulnerable areas exposed. The new "umbrella," however, attempts to provide comprehensive protection for the tank: covering the turret all around, enclosing the hull roof, adding side skirts, and still maintaining the vehicle's combat capability.

Simply put, the Tagil residents have finally achieved what the frontline troops had already achieved a couple of years ago through trial and error, starting with monstrous "king-barbecues" and ending with "dreadlocks" and unraveled "hedgehog"-style cables. Why the factory didn't think of this before is probably a rhetorical question. Oh well, thanks for that, otherwise they could have spent another year on this topic.
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    25 May 2026 04: 21
    In defense of the old grill, it is in fact the basis for the new one, and was the basis for the total grilling "on the spot," so to speak.
    1. +2
      25 May 2026 06: 40
      Improving the grill?
      This is good.
      But it is important to remember that nets and screens are not the main part of the armored vehicle’s protection.
      This is the last line of defense. If dozens of drones are allowed to strike a tank during combat, no brazier will save it. It might not destroy the tank, but it will deprive it of the ability to fire accurately. And braziers, even powerful ATGMs, don't protect against other antitank weapons, such as armor-piercing rounds, but they do harm, impairing visibility and reducing the vehicle's maneuverability.
      In addition to barbecues and other defense methods such as active protection systems, electronic warfare requires means of effectively engaging drone crews and the drones themselves "on approach," as well as the correct tactics for employing these means. This means suppressing the enemy's fire system.
      1. +8
        25 May 2026 06: 42
        Quote: Alekseev
        We need means of effectively destroying drone crews and the drones themselves "on approach" and the correct tactics for using these means.

        It is impossible to argue, but this is definitely not the competence of UVZ.
        1. -3
          25 May 2026 08: 17
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          Definitely not the competence of UVZ.

          UVZ's expertise likely lies in fulfilling customer requirements. That is, the plant decides what to do, while the Ministry of Defense, through its competent bodies (GABTU, research institutes, etc.), determines the technical specifications.
          1. -1
            25 May 2026 11: 40
            with the mass use of FPV drones 10+ with cumulative RPGs against tanks and targeting already damaged areas where the DZ has worked
            Only the introduction of EDP (electro-dynamic protection) will save us
            Multiple-action ERA, 3-4 consecutive magnetic fields destroy the cumulative jet even from the Khrizantema ATGM with 1250 mm of penetration behind the ERA, even with a reserve
            and hang 100mm ceramics in front of the EZ in a circular additional armor
            + we still need to find a place in the T-90M, T-72B3, T-80BVM tanks for a large-volume 200 kW diesel generator
            and ideally install Arena-M and Afganit KAZ systems everywhere, plus robotic machine gun mounts from the T-14 with multi-bullet rounds against drones
            BUT (!) - this will be a completely different tank, not even the T-14 Armata
            1. -1
              28 May 2026 04: 06
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              with the mass use of FPV drones 10+ with cumulative RPGs against tanks and targeting already damaged areas where the DZ has worked
              Only the introduction of EDP (electro-dynamic protection) will save us
              Multiple-action ERA, 3-4 consecutive magnetic fields destroy the cumulative jet even from the Khrizantema ATGM with 1250 mm of penetration behind the ERA, even with a reserve
              and hang 100mm ceramics in front of the EZ in a circular additional armor
              + we still need to find a place in the T-90M, T-72B3, T-80BVM tanks for a large-volume 200 kW diesel generator
              and ideally install Arena-M and Afganit KAZ systems everywhere, plus robotic machine gun mounts from the T-14 with multi-bullet rounds against drones
              BUT (!) - this will be a completely different tank, not even the T-14 Armata


              They will soon start using impact cores.

              How will this set counter this threat?
              1. -1
                2 June 2026 12: 17
                The set is simple: Ceramics + DZ Relic + EDZ - then armor
                and instead of fiberglass + ceramics again
        2. 0
          29 May 2026 22: 11
          Well, I don't know. With the right approach, combining a shotgun, a video camera, and the brains of a 2010 smartphone is quick and inexpensive.
          1. -1
            2 June 2026 15: 42
            the 18mm cartridge is a bit weak,
            you need at least a 40mm VOG-25 but it only takes 3-4 seconds to platoon
            but an explosion is needed almost immediately, 2 meters from an armored fighting vehicle, infantry fighting vehicle, or tank
            Only the Arena and Afghanit KAZ systems remain, with the already established production of submunitions for them
      2. +5
        25 May 2026 07: 15
        If the state is unable to solve the problems with communications, then what kind of Kazakh government can we talk about?
    2. + 12
      25 May 2026 07: 33
      I'll add that in 2022-2024, the main attacks were carried out by various Javelins and Switchblades, which attacked from above. They also liked to drop grenades from drones into open hatches. So, the grill was quite resistant to those threats.
      The fact that the situation has changed, and we've been itching for over a year, that's true. It's a fluke.
  2. +4
    25 May 2026 04: 28
    I immediately thought of the Iron Kaput tank, which spent a week rolling down the highway. Everyone laughed then... Now everyone's covering up the vehicles completely...
    1. -1
      25 May 2026 09: 01
      I immediately remembered the Iron Kaput tank, which had been rolling down the track for a week.

      Yes, that happened - we laughed...
      But today, in my opinion, you and I are no longer laughing - but some "responsible" people continue to do so...
      in their warm offices everything is always good...
  3. -17
    25 May 2026 05: 28
    It looks unconvincing. Five drones would be blown away by the nets. No, it seems the age of tanks on the battlefield has come to an end. Artillery is still relevant, and we can spend extra money on it if we don't want to lose production in the Urals.
    1. +7
      25 May 2026 05: 35
      Tanks have been "buried" for a long time, but no one has yet figured out what to replace them with. And drones could disappear as quickly as they appeared.
      1. + 10
        25 May 2026 07: 37
        Drones are here to stay; they will become smaller, faster, smarter, and will use different methods of movement...
        Drones do not yet replace humans on the battlefield, but they complement them.
        Skynet has already arrived.
        Robot dogs armed with machine guns and portable grenade launchers are already a thing of the past.
        1. -4
          25 May 2026 11: 17
          Attack drones will only grow in size and cost.
          1. +2
            25 May 2026 18: 50
            The SVO shows the opposite... Drones are getting smaller and cheaper, and becoming more deadly.
            Compare Bayraktar or Reaper from 2020 with Geranium from 2026...
            Mass production leads to lower costs and cheaper production
        2. +4
          25 May 2026 14: 58
          So there will be unmanned tanks, surrounded by robotic dogs with machine guns, shooting down drones. And their own drones will fly around them, shooting down other drones.
          1. -1
            2 June 2026 15: 51
            option, PPE from UAV
            use a cable fence for a soldier on 12 telescopic poles
            like a 4-meter hemisphere around a soldier with a cable net at a distance of 2 and 1 meter
            Moreover, tests of the cable net are already underway; it can withstand the detonation of up to 2 FPV drones and self-heals damaged cells up to 75%, and can actually withstand a third drone.
            This works when a soldier uses an assault suit like the FSB's Voin-KM.
        3. +3
          25 May 2026 15: 30
          Have you considered that somewhere, someone is going to a kindergarten, school, or university who will figure out how to quickly and effectively shut down all these drones? With the right organization, they can be combated today.
          1. 0
            25 May 2026 18: 45
            Is his name John Connor?)))
            It seems like your "proper organization" doesn't exist in any country in the world today... It's chaos everywhere)))) Nobody wants to work and organize "proper organization".
            Maybe "organizers" aren't enough? Maybe more are needed?
      2. -4
        25 May 2026 12: 05
        Hello, they didn't come up with anything) Baba Yaga destroys a dugout much more effectively than a tank, heavy FPVs with a thermobar collapse entrances, what are you talking about?
        1. +1
          25 May 2026 15: 08
          A tank can demolish a five-story building in a couple of minutes; it contains more explosives than twenty drones. A tank from a war that lasted half a century or more is simply no match for modern weaponry.
      3. -1
        25 May 2026 12: 17
        Quote: fiberboard
        And drones could disappear from the scene as quickly as they appeared.
        When a single tank rolls out, drone operators are already waiting in their established positions, what's surprising? The army has been driven into a stalemate with this "operation." What will happen if not forty "gamers" per tank, but forty tanks per "drone operator," with the enemy suppressed before the attack? Finally, what about new active defense systems that will begin to take out drones by shooting them down or burning them with electromagnetic pulses?
        The main problem is not the drones that are now frolicking not only against tanks, but also against our cities, but the lack of proper political will, which is the cause that has generated its consequences in this very strange military operation.
      4. +1
        28 May 2026 13: 51
        "Tanks have been "buried" for a long time, but they just haven't figured out what to replace them with yet." - They've already found something to use it with, there's no need for this blah-blah-blah. If these stinking, thieving rats weren't making bloody money off of this, they would have buried it long ago, just like with the "floating" infantry fighting vehicles, which no one needs and have proven their worthlessness in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Syria, and Ukraine! I don't need to remind you how long the debate about creating a tank-based infantry fighting vehicle has been going on, and still nothing, even with the KAZ. So much talk since the 60s!!! But there's no KAZ! And there never will be! Forget it like a bad dream. They'll just suck up what they have, these stinking, thieving rats!
    2. +2
      25 May 2026 05: 50
      Don't bury tanks. The age of tanks has passed, not of tanks, but of how to use them. Breakthrough MBTs no longer make sense. We need to move back to specialization. I believe the following tank types are needed: self-propelled guns, infantry tanks, escort tanks, and breakthrough tanks. Self-propelled guns will complement SPGs, which are lightly armored and fire indirectly like howitzers from the rear. Self-propelled guns will fire directly at LBS, ensuring the stability of the defense and quickly suppressing targets deep in enemy positions. Infantry tanks will provide support for motorized riflemen during offensives, counterattacks, and counteroffensives. Escort tanks will ensure the safety of artillery columns, missile troops, anti-aircraft gunners, and other types of weapons that may be exposed to attack while moving in the near rear. Well, the "breakthrough tanks" must be re-equipped in terms of strengthening their defense.
      1. -7
        25 May 2026 09: 16
        Unfortunately, that's all there is to it with tanks. With further improvements to drones and the addition of minimal automatic target recognition systems, as well as with the expansion of drone production volumes, all camouflage and passive defense options are no longer effective. Electronic warfare has no effect on autonomous drones, and automated systems allow for the simple deployment of thousands of drones, which will roam the LBS on their own, searching for suitable targets.
        1. +4
          25 May 2026 11: 49
          Quote: Elektronik2000
          Electronic warfare does not work on autonomous drones,

          It depends on what kind of electronic warfare it is. Other countermeasures are also being developed, for example.
          In 2025, Russian electronic warfare (EW) systems became a real nightmare for NATO equipment. The KRASUKHA-4 is not just a signal jammer, but a "smart chip killer" capable of turning millions of drones into useless plastic.
          This is the beginning, and with the experience of the Air Defense Forces, this topic is developing (not quickly, as it's still an R&D topic), but ways to counter drones have been identified. Yes, this is one approach to combating drones; there are others, but unfortunately, not immediately and not quickly. Well, we'll see... My opinion is that tanks will not die.
          1. -1
            25 May 2026 12: 16
            It's easily solved by shielding the drone's electronics with cling film. And imagine the size of this beauty; a drone guided by Starlink would be the first to destroy it.
            1. +5
              25 May 2026 13: 14
              First, read about the beauty, at least here (or better yet, in a more serious source) https://dzen.ru/a/aA1JZ80DSRxctiVo?ysclid=mpkyoy5dwb502168126
              Regarding the foil, put a piece of foil in the microwave and see the result.
              Well, in the end, the point of my post is not the beauty (it's just an example), but that UAVs are not the perfect weapon and countermeasures to them are in development, and tanks are not yesterday, everything is evolving.
              1. -1
                30 May 2026 00: 31
                What the hell is foil for? There's special paint for that, which reflects and dissipates microwave energy. Have you seen the size of the "Krasukha" system? And its range is limited to tens of meters; only electronic warfare systems can operate beyond that. Imagine a T-666 REBOTANK tank with a BMPT-based "Termite" and a laser tank—funny, right? They fight UAVs armed with Javelin or AGM-114 Hellfire missiles, or M982 Excalibur Block III drones—a projectile with intelligent warheads capable of "detecting, recognizing, and tracking target(s) in complex urban environments," without human intervention! Basically, launch it and forget about it. And remember how the war in Armenia ended? They had "Krasukha" systems there, too, and more! Bayraktars quickly destroyed them. And you forgot that drones aren't standing still either! And unlike your tanks, they're progressing much faster. And "The spear always beats the shield!" For the shield is the shield!
          2. +1
            26 May 2026 08: 27
            Just don't show this to your techie friends, or they'll laugh :) Modern radars have pulses of tens of megawatts, not 300 kW, and antenna arrays with apertures of hundreds of square meters, but they're practically safe not only for electronics but also for biological targets at distances of just a few hundred meters. Considering that field strength decreases with the square of the distance from the source, even damaging electronics at a distance of a few dozen kilometers would require pulses of many gigawatts and antenna arrays the size of a football field. The Zen article is complete nonsense: "spot focusing," "resonance effect," "new-generation hyperboloid antennas," "superconducting amplifiers based on yttrium-barium ceramics." I'll use the last one to show how propaganda is made for the illiterate. Just search for "Superconducting amplifiers based on yttrium-barium ceramics." Any results? We found out that such a technology does exist, but it's designed not for high-power microwave emitters, but for receivers of extremely weak microwave signals, allowing for a reduction in the internal noise level of receiving devices and achieving record sensitivity. This technology has no application for "baking" chips at 300 km, as is the case with all the "secret technologies" in the Zen article. The level of unprofessionalism in it is so extreme that the article clearly deserves the title "propaganda for suckers," if you'll excuse my French :)
            1. 0
              26 May 2026 12: 11
              Quote: Elektronik2000
              Modern radars have pulses of tens of megawatts, not 300 kW, and antenna arrays with an aperture of hundreds of square meters, but are practically safe not only for electronics but also for biological objects at a distance of several hundred meters.

              Are you talking about radar or electronic warfare? What they posted on Zen is of no importance, but "Krasnukha-4" is an electronic warfare system, and it's already in service and used by our army.
              A simple electromagnetic pulse device can be made from an old digital camera with a flash, with a few extras. This EMP can be powered by a regular AA battery, and when it's running, any electronic devices within a few meters of the pulse will be damaged.
              As for the electromagnetic gun itself, an electromagnetic gun mounted on a pickup truck has been tested in the US – the Epirus/GDLS Leonidas AGV project.
              The Leonid's main component is an active phased array antenna housed in a oscillating rectangular housing. It searches for aerial targets using radar or characteristic signals. A powerful microwave pulse is then sent in the target's direction.

              Depending on the signal strength, the range to the target, and its characteristics, electronics are suppressed or destroyed. Leonidas series systems can adjust the degree of impact on a target, up to and including its complete incapacitation. Furthermore, the presence of an active phased array (AESA) allows for simultaneous or minimally sequential attack on multiple targets.

              There was a publication about this on VO. Improving EMI systems is just a matter of time. Your French won't stop there.
              1. -1
                26 May 2026 13: 37
                As far as I know, "Krasnukha" is a contagious disease, but the "Krasukha-S4" is a genuine electronic warfare system with very real characteristics and has nothing in common with the nonsense on Zen that claims it can "burn out chips" on UAVs at ranges of up to 300 km. When someone cites a Zen article full of absolute nonsense as an argument, it's clear their knowledge in this area is zero.

                As for the Epirus project, it has more realistic data, and test videos suggest that its effective radiating power could indeed be sufficient to create critical levels of interference for radio-controlled drones at ranges of 1-2 km, provided they are detected and tracked by the active antenna array. At ranges of tens of meters, damage to electronics is possible. However, a fiber-optic drone approaching from the wrong direction and undetected earlier would reduce this wonder weapon to a pile of scrap metal in a matter of seconds.
                1. +2
                  26 May 2026 14: 43
                  Quote: Elektronik2000
                  As far as I know, rubella is a contagious disease.
                  I wasn't talking about a contagious disease; there was "Krasnukha-4," an electronic warfare system. Incidentally, there was also "Krasnukha-2," and "Krasnukha-4S" is a modification of the "Krasnukha-4" system. This is, "to be fair." Regarding the fiber-optic drone... We're talking about comprehensive defense; there are drones without fiber optics, and there are also prospects for developing electromagnetic cannons. It's up to you to think that "sadly, that's it for tanks." Personally, I don't think so.
                  Thank you for your attention, time will tell what will happen to the tanks.
        2. +3
          25 May 2026 11: 58
          There's no need to rush. Drone defenses are being worked on just as diligently as drones themselves. While defenses are lagging behind for now, that won't be forever.
        3. -1
          28 May 2026 14: 05
          What idiot downvotes this? Sound idea. I'd like to add: we already have 155mm drone shells! Equipped with advanced optics, and no brazier or APS can protect against such a shell! That's the vector for development. But alas, Russia doesn't have the steppers to produce processors, even though Bush Jr. came back in 2000 and offered Putin a stepper, but alas, the thieving rat refused, saying, "We're your 'Tsap-tsarap.'"
          1. 0
            29 May 2026 09: 12
            And the downvotes are mostly from computer tank gamers. For the sake of realism, the game's creators should have included drones for them, so they'd just roll out in their souped-up mega-wunderwaffes and be instantly kaput.
    3. +4
      25 May 2026 07: 35
      There are other threats besides drones. And the purpose of these grids isn't to make a tank invulnerable. It's to make the enemy waste 10-20-30 drones on a single tank.
      1. -2
        25 May 2026 14: 00
        The enemy wasted a 100kb shot from a Javelin without a second thought, so they'll always be willing to spend 30 drones at 1000 bucks each. That's not a lot for a tank.
        1. 0
          25 May 2026 20: 24
          It's not just a question of cost. The question is how many drones will be in a given area. If a tank group manages to occupy several hundred square kilometers before being destroyed, the cost of the drones will be of secondary importance.
          1. -1
            28 May 2026 14: 12
            The pipe dreams of an armchair expert. Tanks are gone, gone. UZV is refusing to produce the T-90M Proryv! They supposedly want to make a robotic version of the tank with AI, but they don't have AI-powered guns to fight drones! Ridiculous, right?
    4. +4
      25 May 2026 10: 44
      No, it looks like the age of tanks on the battlefield has come to an end.


      As soon as the soldier is armored like a tank and given a 125mm barrel, the age of tanks will be over. But not yet.
      1. +1
        25 May 2026 14: 29
        Quote: cast iron
        Not yet.
        It's as if, first they were trying to convince Russia that a strong navy wasn't necessary (we're supposedly a "land power"), now tanks are an "anachronism." So, guys on mopeds through the "kill zone," that's just it... Quadcopters, motorcycles, frontal assaults on endless villages, and a lone tank, a poor thing, hung with scrap metal, rolling out to shoot like a self-propelled gun. It's an "operation," but it's not the tanks or the tankers' fault. So, "Not yet."
      2. 0
        25 May 2026 15: 35
        cast iron The same nonsense you wrote was also applicable to naval battleships at the beginning of the last century. Only the "bagpipes" were larger and the armor thicker. But how comical a sailor would look in such gear! A compelling argument for not writing off battleships as scrap.
        No, guys, we all feel sorry for the tanks, but their time is up. Artillery and infantry fighting vehicles will live on for a while. The infantry fighting vehicles will deliver combat robotic dogs to the LBS, under the cover of artillery. You can't hide from progress under a tank grill.
        1. 0
          28 May 2026 05: 44
          Quote: MBRBS

          No, guys, we all feel sorry for the tanks, but their time is up. Artillery and infantry fighting vehicles will live on for a while. The infantry fighting vehicles will deliver combat robotic dogs to the LBS, under the cover of artillery. You can't hide from progress under a tank grill.


          What about tanks in the form of NRTK!?
          IN OUR AGE OF ALL KINDS OF UNMANNED AND UNMANNED AND CREWED VEHICLES!?
      3. -1
        28 May 2026 14: 31
        So, the "burrow" has been around for a long time, called the RPG and the Javelin, and now there are drones too. And then there's the 155mm drone shell, the 120mm drone shell for mortars, with advanced optics and AI. And robotic machines with AI instead of soldiers. That's what we have now, but what will happen tomorrow?!
    5. +1
      25 May 2026 16: 23
      I thought I'd get some negatives. I get it—it's just emotion. We all love tanks; they've been with us since childhood, so to speak (as toys). But progress is relentless. Once upon a time, aristocrats were sad to part with knightly armor and the knightly way of waging war. But then came the dastardly gun. Sailors were sad to part with sailing ships, then ironclads, then battleships. And so on.
      Alas, the vile drones and their operators (worse than snipers—you get the idea) have pushed aside the courageous and brave tank crews. I'm very sorry, no sarcasm intended.
      1. +2
        25 May 2026 18: 37
        Quote: MBRBS
        Once upon a time, aristocrats were sad to part with knightly armor and the knightly way of waging war. But then came the dastardly firearm.

        So, despite the "dastardly firearm," there's now a huge supply of body armor, helmets, and even assault shields. Yes, battleships have been supplanted by missile ships, but armor, as a survivability enhancer, hasn't disappeared from the navy.
        Regarding tanks, one can agree that it's impossible to indefinitely increase the caliber of a tank gun. The development of the T-95 (Object 195) demonstrated that the 152mm gun is the limit beyond which a tank weapon is unlikely to be practical. The 2A83 gun also had to be refined, and a new configuration for an unmanned turret was also developed. It's a shame the "component designers" messed up their "platform," which was foolish to try to build on an expensive, complex, and, most importantly, crude base that hadn't been tested by time, hadn't even been accepted into service, and hadn't been adopted by industry. However, the idea of ​​a "missile tank," like the IT-1, is still alive, where by eliminating the bulky and heavy gun, compact missiles and a rapid-fire 37-57mm gun could be used.
        Don't fall for the "uselessness of tanks" narrative. It's sad to imagine how, with NATO mobilized and actively modernizing tanks, we'll be left with nothing, with guys in iron-clad "loaves" and the new "miracle" of the Air Defense Forces, attack aircraft on motorcycles.
        It seems like this is the plan: empty the warehouses and arsenals, lay waste to our men, and, when the last nuclear trump card remains, accept a shameful ultimatum in the name of peace and humanism. It's unlikely that the bourgeois scum, who make billions on bloodshed, are ready to blow up the promised West, where they have everything.
        1. -2
          30 May 2026 02: 01
          Where is NATO actively modernizing its tanks? Britain has abandoned the 3-series, the US is driving around with old Abrams tanks, Germany too, only France and South Korea are producing a new tank and that's it. "We'll be left with nothing, with guys in iron-clad 'loaves' and the new 'miracle' of the Air Defense Forces, attack aircraft on motorcycles" - Which thieving rats should we thank for this, huh? And don't blame others, it's the rats' fault! Yes, the rats! The stinking ones. These are the ones who were planning to take Ukraine in three days, not the "compartment makers." The "compartment makers" negotiated for machine tools from Western countries because, alas, they don't have any of their own! And even now, they don't have any, not at all! Do you know why they don't have any? Because the rats don't know how to do anything anymore! They only know how to squeeze and divide things up, and how to transfer money abroad! It's easier for them to buy from China than to make their own. Because their own can take it away and divide it among their own. That's why the rats are sitting on all the resources instead of creating anything new. Because they don't live here. Where are Peskov's children, where is Shoigu, etc.? Why aren't they at war? Patrushev Jr. posed for a photo op in Wagner and that's it? And now he's in the State Duma. And you can die, Za them! As long as the rats are alive, nothing will happen! You'll fight with your bare butts. You wanted communism—here you go.
  4. +2
    25 May 2026 08: 21
    Why the plant didn't think of this before is probably a rhetorical question.

    These are the times.
    Bureaucracy is flourishing as never before.
    1. +3
      25 May 2026 08: 58
      Bureaucracy is flourishing as never before.

      namely: for the bureaucracy, the most important thing is reports, statements - on time, like: completed, done, etc.
  5. 0
    25 May 2026 08: 26
    The canvas must cover not only the roof of the turret, but also provide all-round protection - from the frame level to the roof of the hull. 


    Was it really that hard to get to this point?!

    Was it really necessary to lose so many people and equipment to understand basic things?!

    There must be protection all around!!!
  6. +7
    25 May 2026 08: 44
    Barbecue is a good thing, but active defense is needed—your own AI-powered drone corps. Launch them, and they fly around the tank, shooting down other tanks.
  7. +4
    25 May 2026 08: 46
    Didn't the factory think of this, or was the customer not interested? I think it's the latter.
    1. 0
      26 May 2026 13: 53
      You're headed in the right direction, but you've underestimated the scale. That's not how it's done. No amateurism will be tolerated in the Ministry of Defense. No one at the tank factory is inventing or proposing any fancy ideas. The technical specifications and requirements were formulated by the Ministry of Defense departments and passed down to the relevant or nearby affiliated institutions. In particular, Omsktransmash, which implemented exactly what was written in the specifications.
      1. -1
        28 May 2026 15: 32
        The T-95 was also made according to technical specifications. eh?!
        1. +1
          29 May 2026 09: 26
          Imagine, the tank's development began back in the USSR as part of the "Improvement-88" program. This program included both technical specifications and allocated funds. But when the program was shut down, the rest was left to amateur efforts, but at their own expense, and there was no talk of adopting it into service. Theoretically, the Ministry of Defense could have changed its mind at some point, but so far I don't recall any such precedents.
          1. -1
            30 May 2026 02: 12
            And what about Omsk's "Object 640"? It was also developed independently, without the Ministry of Defense's involvement.
            1. +1
              31 May 2026 17: 50
              And "Object 640" Omchan?

              RPK-16, MiG-35, and a bunch of other projects. These could be in development. For foreign customers, for individual agencies, even for the devil himself. But I don't recall a design bureau's own initiative being deployed to the army. Test flights, yes, did happen, but after that, silence. But it also happens that a design bureau tried to deliver its own project to the Ministry of Defense, which turned out to be unnecessary at the time, but then the Ministry of Defense received an order from above to ensure something similar was in service "yesterday." Then the Ministry of Defense digs out old files, searches for something suitable, and passes on its vision of the product to its subordinate design bureaus. So, no matter how you look at it, there will always be a technical specification from above, and if a product is delivered to the army, it's strictly in accordance with that specification, not the "fantasies" of engineers.
  8. +3
    25 May 2026 08: 56
    Uralvagonzavod has finally turned its attention to its useless "barbecues" for tanks.

    Today, it is worth thinking about whether we need so many tanks?
    I'm talking about the financial side of this war...
    As for barbecues, well, those who write the Technical Specifications in our Ministry of Defense apparently don't care about them equally - the main thing is that they exist...
    and so that no one would say that they are not on the tanks...
  9. +2
    25 May 2026 10: 07
    About the new "barbecues"

    Finally, in the fifth year of the special military operation, Uralvagonzavod finally gave birth and produced updated "barbecues" that can already be called more or less high-quality and effective.



    The author did not realize that UVZ does not invent the barbecues itself, but that someone else provides the technical specifications for them, and someone else allocates the budget.

    That is, in theory, the Russian Ministry of Defense should actively participate in this and include it in the Budget.
    How to stash additional armor kits and spare parts. In the required quantities.
    1. -2
      28 May 2026 15: 38
      And who makes the patents, huh? Isn't it UVZ! And then they collect the profits. Oh, they keep saying "EMO, EMO." It's a thief after another, driving him around, that's why they take five years to build.
  10. +1
    25 May 2026 10: 15
    Neither in the first nor in the second photo are the tanks permanently attached to the platform.
    After the photo, the tanks in the echelon are going to the final fastening, where the barbecue frames are - beforethey're sorting it outso that the equipment can pass within the specified railway dimensions.
    Spare parts and accessories, attachments, including a barbecue, are placed in a separate carriage.
    It doesn't seem to bother anyone that the tracks are already hanging off the car—at the limit of the railway's specified overall track dimensions, and high-voltage traction lines for the electric locomotive will also be running on top—but everyone wants to see the grill installed right from the factory.
  11. +1
    25 May 2026 12: 07
    Our bureaucracy is so slow! So slow! fool What needs to happen for this to change, if even 4 years of war have not taught us that we need to act faster! fool hi negative
    1. 0
      28 May 2026 15: 42
      There's no need to blame everything on bureaucracy, when one thief chases another and another thief chases another. When there are no thieves, then there will be no bureaucracy.
  12. +1
    25 May 2026 13: 16
    Nothing strange – someone is slapping badges on someone else's products, and UVZ is apparently simply pocketing defense procurement funds. Clearly, such a brazier is the product of effective managers. I think the vast majority of designers and normal executives wouldn't do something like this... Managers are just a product of the bourgeois model of society... There's no accountability for their actions, so they resort to ingenuity to the best of their ability.
  13. +1
    25 May 2026 14: 09
    What about the Arena system? It was developed back in the USSR. It was featured at exhibitions in the 00s. I remember a photo. A cylinder with holes for shells (specifically on the side surface, the surface where the cylinder rotates), mounted on the roof of an armored vehicle. Apparently, it could hold at least 20 shells. And yet, despite such incredible demand, it's so silent. It could intercept RPG shots and, I think, even artillery shells. In theory, it could certainly intercept drones.
    1. -2
      28 May 2026 15: 48
      This isn't Israel! There's no KAZ, and there won't be one, not at all! You'll forget about it like a bad dream. Because this has been going on since the 60s, and things are still the same.
  14. DO
    -1
    25 May 2026 14: 56
    Perhaps I shouldn't have published these details? After all, by reading this article, the enemy will have carefully developed effective measures to overcome the new "grill's" defenses, taking into account its design features.
  15. 0
    25 May 2026 15: 05
    Uralvagonzavod has finally turned its attention to its useless "barbecues" for tanks.

    The larger the enterprise, the less agile it is. Yes
    The first barbecues were not for protection against drones, but to extend the range of Javelins.
    When they practically fell out of use, Uralvagonzavod didn't redesign their "mangals." And they became useless against FPVs. But then again, Javelins still exist. So they still serve some defensive function.
  16. -1
    25 May 2026 15: 46
    What is this article about? The article is a negative advertisement for UVZ products, for which the author could be sued by UVZ.
    The "grill" installed on any military equipment produced by UVZ is manufactured based on the customer's (MoD) technical specifications and undergoes military acceptance testing. All UVZ innovations created on UVZ's own initiative and not agreed upon with the MoD incur unreimbursable costs and result in criminal prosecution under the State Defense Order against UVZ management.
    If the author doesn't like the "barbecues" on the OBT, let him write his own MO aspirations, but he won't do it because he's embarrassed and the "jackets" might come after him...
  17. +2
    25 May 2026 16: 20
    The only thing left to do is to come up with something like the Archer self-propelled gun instead of tanks. wink
  18. +2
    25 May 2026 18: 23
    I've seen more than one video of a tank being destroyed by drones, even with various weapons. No matter how they cover it, they first take out the tracks, and then finish off the immobilized tank with a swarm of drones...
    1. 0
      25 May 2026 22: 29
      Uralvagonzavod works with metal, and they probably have pneumatic shot blasting machines for cleaning metal scale among their various machines. They should try installing one of them on a tank. It's a very simple design: a compressor, a receiver cylinder, a nozzle, and a shot hopper (a ton is a lot, almost 3 million cast iron pellets with a diameter of 4 mm). Compressed air, upon command from the operator (ideally, the detection system), accelerates the shot stream to speeds of 40-50 m/sec in the direction of an attacking drone (if the pressure is increased, the speed can be increased to 100 m/sec, which will significantly reduce the service life of the machine, but increase the service life of the tank and its crew). If, say, the machine fires 1 kg of shot per second (that's about 2800 cast iron balls flying in a wide cone), then an ordinary plastic drone will be guaranteed to be shot down at a safe distance from the tank. and that's all and that's enough. By the way, a tank can carry hundreds of kilograms of this shot.
  19. 0
    25 May 2026 23: 19
    Actually, if we speak in Russian, it’s not “patenting” (horrible!!!), but “patenting”...
  20. 0
    26 May 2026 17: 00
    Tanks fought for over 100 years. Now they're only for museums. Or they could be shipped off to Africa, where barefoot kids run around with AKMs, for cheap.
    And yes, by the start of WW2, some veteran generals couldn't even imagine fighting without cavalry or the perils of the Ilya Muromets bomber. The last three years have dramatically changed the concept of non-nuclear warfare. And nuclear weapons carriers also faced a proven, direct, and obvious threat from UAVs. The army doesn't just introduce a new branch of service for no reason. Mind you, there were only three of them.
    1. -2
      28 May 2026 15: 59
      There's no need for "Night Moth" tanks in Africa. It's too hot there during the day, and their engines overheat.
  21. 0
    28 May 2026 04: 54
    The design of the booms themselves is particularly interesting. Those that extend beyond the vehicle's dimensions are not rigidly attached, but rather via flexible, elastic elements. Simply put, if the tank's "grill" gets caught on a tree, wall, shelter, or any other obstacle, the booms should deflect rather than break along with the entire structure.


    Less than 5 years later, efficient managers and engineers reinvented the spring mount from the WWII era!

    Russia is doomed by the Jews and their followers to...
    ...
    ...
    Naturally, the success that the boys from UVZ are heading for! (And what did you think!?)
  22. +2
    28 May 2026 09: 17
    Have you tried shooting down drones?
    1. -1
      28 May 2026 16: 14
      They have no brains and their hands are growing out of the wrong place. They only know how to embezzle money and export it abroad. And you can die for their castles abroad, for their yachts, and for their children. You wanted communism—here you go.
  23. -2
    29 May 2026 18: 02
    The Uranium Toxic Plant has produced another gem in the form of a "patented barbecue"!!! THAT'S A GREAT IDEA FOR THE FOURTH YEAR OF NON-WAR! Elon Musk is nervously smoking on the sidelines. Rheinmetall is laughing heartily with their SKYNEX. It will be interesting to find out how many millions of dollars were stolen, and which of the president's cronies profited handsomely from it. Jokes aside. Seriously, guys, couldn't they have made a turret with a shotgun in four years? Use motion sensors that detect heat as radar, which makes UAVs highly visible, a microwave radar for locking on and determining the speed of an object, and a camera for the operator in case of a false alarm. And no need for AI, a quantum computer, or a nuclear reactor. They also need to make tank armor in the form of a "barbecue" with replaceable modules. MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE CHASSIS NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY REDESIGNED!!! SPLITTING IT INTO PARTS IS WHAT UVZ SHOULD PRIORITY CONSIDER!!! If a track is hit, the tank becomes IMMOBILE! THIS IS FATAL; NO BRAZIL WILL SAVE IT! AND THE TANK BECOME EASY PREY!!! The "Object 19" is an example of a separate track. We need to rethink the tank's role in combat and keep up with the times, focusing on innovation and the future. Gone are the days when tanks fought each other. Tanks are no longer "BREAKTHROUGH TANKS!" and no armor will restore that role. "The spear always beats the shield!" And turning breakthrough tanks into "Tortilla the Turtle" will lead to nothing. Therefore, tanks must be "re-armed" and their role on the battlefield must be changed. For example, by installing an M-46 cannon and giving them the ability to see fire along a ballistic trajectory, in other words, adding short-range self-propelled gun functionality. Then such tanks could lay heavy fire on enemy positions—for example, drone handlers, vehicles, or other targets—while the "Coalition" self-propelled guns would perform long-range precision sniper fire. Drone handlers (AI-powered robots) and tank-mounted infantry fighting vehicles (T-15) with the above-mentioned modifications, chassis, armor, and cannons/shotguns (against drones, infantry, and lightly armored vehicles) would operate at the front. And heavy infantry fighting vehicles with cannon-mortars (2A80) would be used to destroy pillboxes, dugouts, and five-story buildings. And I hope you will raise the point that drone troops should hit all units, starting with the infantry.
    1. 0
      31 May 2026 23: 23
      AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE CHASSIS NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY REDESIGNED!!! DIVIDED INTO PARTS - THAT'S WHAT UVZ SHOULD FOCUS ON FIRST AND FOREMOST!!! If a tank is hit by a track, it becomes IMMOBILE! This is FATAL.NO GRILL WILL SAVE YOU! AND THE TANK BECOME EASY PREY!!! As an example of a separate roller, we can take "Object 19"

      Yes, even look at the photo in the article (and compare it with the photo of earlier T-72s - I'm attaching it):
      - guide the front rollers and pieces of tracks sticking out forward covered with armor and dynamic protection
      - sides with caterpillars covered as far down as possible with dynamic protection
      - extended (increased) the rubber-metal bulwark downwards (I'm sure they also updated the rubber composition) and increased the overhang over the rear part of the track
      - instead of some of the tanks fenders DZ blocks are also placed on the shelves.
      this is only for the caterpillar.
      All this is +mass+mass, and this is a new, more powerful engine and chassis components.
      For some reason you forget to take this work into account.
      .
      You're also forgetting to consider what batch these vehicles are from—to cover the same tracks and the entire hull, they install new side panels with ERA and spaced armor, which are not attached during rail transport. Photo.
      You would like it to be like a hedgehog (photo), but for such conversions, roughly speaking, the staff of the Russian Armed Forces was expanded and repair regiments were introduced.
      1. 0
        5 June 2026 03: 29
        Video about "Mangals":
        https://vkvideo.ru/video-87392196_456239393?t=
        [media=https://vkvideo.ru/video-87392196_456239393?t=]

        I don't argue that "Mangals" provide some protection against drones, BUT they're not a panacea and don't solve the fundamental problem with drones. And no matter how much anyone wants them, drones will now be involved in every conflict. This is an undeniable fact. Tanks currently serve as "infantry carriers" and "stationary guns," so their role on the battlefield needs to be radically changed. Currently, the most vulnerable point of a tank with "Mangal" (T-80 Hedgehog) is its chassis. Two dozen drones will leave the tank without tracks. What needs to be done to avoid this without turning the tank into an immobile fortress? Make it so the tank can move without tracks (and not just drive straighter)! And even if two or three wheels are knocked out, the tank must remain mobile.
        "all this +mass+mass, and this is a new, more powerful engine and chassis components." "The T-80 was designed with room for extra armor; it can carry over 70 tons, unlike the T-90 and T-72. YES, they need a redesigned chassis and more powerful engines. That's a question for UVZ: what the hell did they do?!

        Now the question is: What's stopping UVZ from equipping its tanks not only with Mangals, but also with tap-in defense systems like the KAZ, ZAK-30 Citadel, or Kupol-25 (or a shotgun with buckshot)? And let me remind you that UVZ developed the 2S38 Derivatsiya-PVO!
        The era of 120-155mm drone projectiles and drone missiles is upon us. How will you defend against them? Just a reminder! "Mangals" won't protect against Javelins!
        1. 0
          5 June 2026 22: 22
          https://vkvideo.ru/video-87392196_456239393?t=
          These are the exact spots at 11 sec. (fenders) where the dz. was strengthened, at 23 sec. - there's a grill + dz + burdocks there for a long time, at 25 sec. - chains or a grate have been hanging for a long time (depending on the decision on the spot), all the damage is approximately 23. There are tons of videos there, and they are gradually being posted or old ones are repeated - to stir the minds of those who weren't in the know or didn't follow.
          Barbecues provide some protection from drones, BUT they are not a panacea and do not solve the main problem with drones.
          So I didn't claim that Panacea's braziers need support during the battle or that the battlefield needs to be cleared before the battle. there shouldn't be only one tank.
          .
          To withstand nine drones is roughly three crews and 20 minutes of attacks—targeting the drones' control signals and firing back with drones. To counteract them, you need three crews ready to target before the attack, three FPV drone crews, and a relay crew. You need to prepare for combat; it won't be over in 20 minutes.
        2. 0
          5 June 2026 22: 39
          What's stopping UVZ from equipping its tanks not only with Mangals, but also with tapa protection systems: KAZ, ZAK-30 Citadel, or Kupol-25 (or a shotgun with buckshot)?
          The same thing that prevents you from putting a tank and a couple of support robots behind each soldier. Money.
          You are proposing to make a multi-turret tank with radars and air defense, roughly speaking - a sea vessel of decent class.
          I would like to remind you that it was UVZ that developed the 2S38 "Derivatsiya-PVO"!
          Are there any shells for it? I think we should wait for mass-produced chips for programmable shells. That's 2028.
          The era of 120-155mm drone projectiles and drone missiles is upon us. How will you defend against them?
          It's not coming, it's been going on, I think, for a couple of years now. We need to defend ourselves comprehensively now: barbecues + home defense + support from other branches of the military + tactics.
          1. 0
            10 June 2026 02: 04
            Quote: Disant
            a seagoing ship of decent class

            The Abrams X with a 30mm cannon against drones is a real ship.
            Quote: Disant
            Are there any shells for it? I think we should wait for mass-produced chips for programmable shells. That's 2028.

            You haven't heard of AHEAD projectiles, have you? I think they're used in the ZAK-30. A spring from a pair of underwear and a magnet—that's the whole secret of AHEAD. And no quantum processors are needed.
  24. 0
    15 June 2026 10: 02
    Initially, the "mangals" were intended to protect against Javelin-type ATGMs; the FPV appeared after them, and a revision of the design was required.