Military Review

Tank station of optical-electronic countermeasures TSHU-1-7М

42
In the past few years, Russian exhibitions began to appear on armored vehicles Tanksequipped with a complex of optoelectronic active protection "Blind-1" in its new configuration. External differences were the first to be noticed: several Shtory-1 modules disappeared from the tower of the updated tanks, which caused corresponding questions. As it soon became clear, the reason for the lack of electronic components was the modernization of the active protection system. During the upgrade of the complex, the composition of its equipment changed, and the characteristics either improved or remained at the same level.




The structure of the latest options "Curtains-1" instead of the station of optical-electronic countermeasures (SOEP) TSHU-1-7, used earlier, includes the station TSHU-1-7М. Under the additional letter in the title hides a large amount of work carried out by the developer of the system - the Special Design Bureau "Zenit" (Zelenograd). The production of the station was planned to begin at Zelenograd Production Association "Plant Stella". The TSHU-1-7М system was created several years ago, but then news only a narrow circle of specialists and persons interested in armored vehicles touched upon it. At the same time at various exhibitions SKB Zenit distributed an advertising booklet with a description of the new counter station. A few days ago, this booklet again "entered into circulation" after the publication in the blog of expert A. Khlopotov.

During the modernization, TSHU-1-7 station has undergone changes only of a technical nature. The principle of operation remains the same: when a laser illumination is detected, the station switches on infrared searchlights, which prevent the anti-tank ammunition from aiming at the tank. In addition, the complex "Blind-1" can hide a tank behind a smoke screen, but similar methods of protection are assigned to its other elements. As part of the updated SOEP, there are still two spotlights placed on the front of the tower. However, the number of other elements of the station compared with TSHU-1-7 significantly reduced.

In addition to two units with spotlights, the base station included two ITS-1-7 modulators (located in armored boxes on the side of the searchlights), two FTSHU-1-7 filters (next to the modulators) and the PTSU-1-7 control panel — only seven elements . After the upgrade, only three blocks remained in the TSEP-1-7М: two RTU-1-7М modules with built-in searchlights and modulators, as well as the PTShU-1-7 control panel. All the necessary equipment was assembled in the existing packages of the remaining modules. This alteration, above all, led to a decrease in station mass. Its three modules weigh a total of 72 kilograms (95,4 kg for SOES TSHU-1-7). In addition, the total length of the necessary cables was reduced four times and the number of connectors on the tank hull eight times. The last aspect of modernization significantly increased the reliability of the station.

The developers of SOEP TSHU-1-7М not only changed the layout of the system elements, but also improved the equipment. Thus, the operating voltage range has expanded from 26-28,5 volts to 18-32 B. In addition, the station availability time has been reduced by 20 times. Now, from switching on the station to switching to the current modulation mode, it takes only three seconds, after which the equipment can operate in combat mode. In the prospectus, it was noted that a significant reduction in readiness time in real combat conditions allows the station to be turned on only after exposure is detected, without unmasking itself with its own radiation from searchlights operating in standby mode.

After modernization, the station of optical-electronic countermeasures retained all the additional functions that were previously available. TSHU-1-7М can still highlight terrain and targets in the infrared range, providing observation of the situation and guidance weapons on purpose. During such work, a special backlight mode allows for about a third to reduce the visibility of the tank itself. According to official information, the upgraded TSHU-1-7М station has a greater efficiency on the 70% in comparison with the base model. The cost of the station at the same time remained the same.




By reducing the weight and reducing the number of blocks, the new station can be installed not only on heavy armored vehicles. In the advertising brochure, a photograph was given of the BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicle, on the tower of which there were two characteristic boxes with infrared searchlights. Also in the promotional materials it was stated that the SESE TSHU-1-7М was tested on several types of equipment: T-72, T-80 and T-90 tanks, as well as BMP-3 tanks. In all cases, as stated, the station showed all its capabilities to protect vehicles from various controlled anti-tank weapons.

An advertising brochure, published several years ago, claimed that the TSU-1-7М optical-electronic counter-station would go into series production in the 2010 year. There are no exact data on this score, as well as information on the number of armored vehicles equipped with the new station. Probably, the full-scale production of new stations did not start due to the termination of purchases of T-90 tanks equipped with the old TSHU-1-7. About the current state of the TSHU-1-7М project, it is only known that these stations are installed on demonstration samples of tanks participating in various exhibitions.


On the materials of the sites:
http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/
http://skb-zenit.ru/
http://zavodstella.ru/
Author:
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Akim
    Akim 21 June 2013 09: 47
    +1
    I wonder why increased efficiency? I understand that the author does not know this. but can someone have more information?
    Even changing the laser (instead of carbon monoxide) and increasing the range of received waves will not give such an increase. Of course, you can install sensors for receiving ultraviolet radiation (against the "Spike"), but it does not work well on a ground surface (Keop = max-1, Kc = 0,001) It is not realistic to put it on armored vehicles. At best, on armored boats (the water surface reflects ultraviolet waves well, due to the mirror effect). If Russian designers have done the impossible, then it should weigh more, not less.
    1. Professor
      Professor 21 June 2013 10: 47
      0
      Quote: Akim
      Of course, you can install sensors for receiving ultraviolet radiation (against "Spike"),

      I doubt very much the effectiveness of this method.
      In general, this device can only work on ATGMs of the second generation. Sager, Javelin, Spike does not use a laser to aim at the tank.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 21 June 2013 11: 25
        +5
        Quote: Professor
        In general, this device can only work on ATGMs of the second generation. Sager, Javelin, Spike does not use a laser to aim at the tank.


        This is known.

        Not every dushman will have missiles with automatic guidance. Nevertheless, these weapons will be massively used in the event of a major war, and then NOT all units will be armed, the old ones will continue to be used.

        "All" (relatively, of course) destroy active defense systems, this is their task. And this is a cheap device for mass use.
        Semi-active infrared guidance is more realistic to meet in the arsenal of all kinds of fighters there, and then rarely. Those. the complex is justified for local wars and in the event of a major war in the conduct of hostilities against a motley-armed enemy.

        And to say that if it doesn’t work against the javelin, then this is a bad complex ... well, probably then you need to fold and give up the pens, since without the javelin no one turns out onto the street.

        I am more confused by the bulkiness of narrowly targeted equipment installed on the tower. Its stable operation under continuous small-caliber shelling is doubtful, the service is hemorrhoidal, like everything installed on the tower (wrote a comment earlier below).
        This one is definitely embarrassing.

        And so - let it be better than not. Suddenly some random warrior without a javelin will turn up
        (joke).
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 June 2013 11: 36
          +2
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Not every dushman will have missiles with automatic guidance. Nevertheless, these weapons will be massively used in the event of a major war, and then not in the arsenal of all units, the old ones will continue to be used.

          The number of third-generation ATGMs has long exceeded the number of modern tanks. T-55 and Sager takes no problem.

          Quote: Aleks tv
          And to say that if it doesn’t work against the javelin, then this is a bad complex ... well, probably then you need to fold and give up the pens, since without the javelin no one turns out onto the street.

          I do not say whether he is good or bad. I argue that against the third-generation anti-tank systems it is useless. hi
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 21 June 2013 11: 51
            +2
            Quote: Professor
            I argue that against the third-generation anti-tank systems it is useless.


            Yes.
            hi
          2. Roman555
            Roman555 1 July 2013 19: 46
            0
            and with the installation on the MBT complex of the arena there are chances against

            ATGM 3 generations?
        2. Akim
          Akim 21 June 2013 11: 52
          +2
          Quote: Aleks tv
          And to say that if it doesn’t work against the javelin, then this is a bad complex ... well, probably then you need to fold and give up the pens, since without the javelin no one turns out onto the street.

          The old Shtora, like the Polish Obra, had a small spectral range. This problem was solved by installing zinc selenide. It should be in new Russian complexes. But this is not a 70% increase in efficiency as stated in the article.
      2. dustycat
        dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 02
        +4
        Javelin and Spike (judging by the videos on the internet) use a thermal imaging guidance system.
        It is enough to create a strong illumination of the receiver near the protected object in the zone of final homing and a miss in 90% of the shots is guaranteed.
        Of course, this protection and weakness have it, but for simple thermal imaging cameras or ATGMs with an IR tracer, this will work.
        Even if there is a 50% miss, it’s not bad.
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 June 2013 16: 10
          +1
          Quote: dustycat
          Javelin and Spike (judging by the videos on the internet) use a thermal imaging guidance system.

          By Spike, you are wrong:http://topwar.ru/9529-tank-umer-da-zdravstvuet-tank.html#comment-id-111550

          I had to deal with the use of thermal imagers. Their image cannot be converted in any way into the likeness of the one that we observe in the video. There is simply no spectral information. The video clearly shows the reflection of light taken by the CCD camera, for example, the color of the tank barrel. This is an 100% optical image.
          1. dustycat
            dustycat 21 June 2013 17: 01
            +1
            There are a lot of clips about spike. And not only daytime.
            If all the wars were day ...

            But in the dark and twilight is still thermal imaging guidance.
            If interested - try a cheap cell phone camera in the sun to see. Even after five to six layers of window glass, the stain will be very large.
            Cheap WCDs have a good sense of the thermal spectrum.
            And it is on this that the effectiveness of modulated "sapphire" floodlights is based.

            The point is not to bring down the laser backlight when you hover.
            The point is blinding the matrix when approaching the target.
            Instead of a clear outline of the goal - a spot.

            Why not?
            The cheapest civilian thermal imagers use the same matrix as for image formation.
            The "flaw" of CCD matrices is simply used in the form of their high sensitivity to IR radiation - in household cameras, to avoid this, matrices are coated with silver or aluminum, but a simple TV remote control easily reveals their indifference to IR.
            In single-chip thermal imagers, the IR image is simply subtracted from the visible image digitally.
          2. dustycat
            dustycat 21 June 2013 17: 12
            +1
            Pay attention to the lens of this guidance station - it is germanium, not glass (optical) and not quartz (optical thermal imaging).
            Thermal imaging guidance is used.
            And the picture - with spurious IR illumination of flat stones from the sun.
            They are not glass, but reflect like the sun.
            Actually, such a picture was given by the first experimental DCDs before they were guessed to be covered with gold, silver and finally just aluminum.
            1. Professor
              Professor 21 June 2013 20: 01
              +1
              Quote: dustycat
              Thermal imaging guidance is used.

              Yah? Wanted the Nobel Prize in Physics? Does thermal imaging allow you to see white spots on the turret of a tank? laughing
              1. dustycat
                dustycat 27 June 2013 21: 14
                0
                Sha professor!
                Do not rip out of context. Respect yourself.
                You understand everything and make out everything.
                A guidance station can also be thermal imaging.
                And judging by the image from the homing head - it uses a CCD matrix without aluminum coating.
                If you take a CCD matrix from a household camera and wash away aluminum spraying from it, you will get just such an image.
                Everything that can be seen is clearly visible plus everything that emits or reflects infrared radiation.
                Or stones only painted on top with lime ?!

                The war is round the clock.
                Weapons suitable only during the day no longer interests anyone.
                So keep the Nobel. This trifle does not interest me. ;-)
            2. atalef
              atalef 21 June 2013 20: 11
              +2
              Quote: dustycat
              on the lens of this guidance station - it is germanium, not glass
              They are not glass, but reflect like the sun.

              So a question, but germanium is not transparent like glass?
              One of my cameras.
              1. dustycat
                dustycat 27 June 2013 21: 05
                0
                For the optical range is not transparent.
                More similar to obsidian with aluminum tint.
                Quartz lenses are also used on thermal imagers. They are transparent.
              2. dustycat
                dustycat 27 June 2013 21: 34
                0
                Hmm ... Cool.
                The story of what lenses make Flir cropped.
                In general, it is more difficult to meet a Germanium lens on Flirs than a true Jew in Hezbollah.
                The price range is not the same.
              3. dustycat
                dustycat 27 June 2013 21: 44
                0
                Germanium lenses are placed on the pyrometers of this series.
                http://rosma.spb.ru/#catalog/pirometri/infrakrasnye_termometry_serii_minisight_m
                odeli_ms_msplus_i_mspro
        2. Akim
          Akim 21 June 2013 16: 39
          +1
          Quote: dustycat
          It is enough to create a strong illumination of the receiver near the protected object in the zone of final homing and a miss in 90% of the shots is guaranteed.

          To create
          To create a flare, the equipment must first detect it. It can’t shine all like a Christmas tree (albeit in invisible spectra). IR does not irradiate Javelin’s head, but Spike irradiates in the lower (violet) spectral range (due to the CCD matrix). There is opposition to both of them. Only in our KOEPs they are not.
          1. dustycat
            dustycat 21 June 2013 17: 29
            +7
            The lower range is IR, not UV (upper range) relative to the optical. UV comes from illiterate journalists. You don’t need to take physics to the philological faculty.

            Detection of the start of anti-tank systems is the task for the detection complex.
            It can be optical, thermal imaging, or sub-microwave.
            These complexes can even detect a shot from a 12,7 mm rifle with one shot and indicate the point of the shot along the path of the bullet.
            Developed back in the mid 1970s.

            There are also laser and optical systems for detecting optics.
            And any - glass, quartz, germanium.
            They even PSCs on cars guarded objects put - a thing a long time no secret, except for our MO.
            Convoys of all presidents drive with them (pay attention to cranks in security cars with cameras - these are not cameras, these are optical detectors).
            Even a camera with an open lens in the bushes, invisible through the foliage, the glare in the picture gives with the exact location, not only an optical sight.

            On our BMP and thermal imagers are only available in the UAE.
            Our ambush and mine fighters in Chechnya both have detected with a scruff of the eye - and they are.
            And in the thermal imager - an ambush or a mining place - it can be clearly seen day and night.
    2. Akim
      Akim 21 June 2013 11: 09
      +2
      Quote: Akim
      Even a laser change (instead of carbon monoxide)

      Read carbon dioxide correctly
      Quote: Professor
      Spike does not use a laser to aim at the tank.

      As for Spike. They use a thermal imaging seeker and the principle of jamming is identical to that of aircraft. Those. you can use a helium - selenium laser to interfere with it. But this is only in theory. Earth is not air - there are many factors. On the water surface, you can create protection against it using another type of laser (I don't know exactly which one, but you can). "Varta-2" with multi-channel protection will be installed against the Romanian "Spikes" on "Gyurza-M". But it is healthy (obviously not for a tank turret).
      1. Professor
        Professor 21 June 2013 11: 21
        +3
        Quote: Akim
        As for Spike. They uses a thermal imaging seeker

        Correctly say "and thermal imaging seeker", there is by default a CCD with an optical channel.
        1. Akim
          Akim 21 June 2013 11: 40
          +2
          Quote: Professor
          there by default there is a CCD with an optical channel.

          This is if you detail. In fact, the AGM-65 Maverick also has a CCD and an optical channel, but is considered a thermal imaging seeker. It is precisely the laser that produces ultraviolet light that affects the photocells of the CCD matrix. And protection from optics has been invented for a long time. But to speak openly - there is no protection for the tank from "Spike" today. Armor only (combo, + ERA / NERA) Although this is little consolation.
          1. Professor
            Professor 21 June 2013 11: 43
            +4
            Quote: Akim
            But to speak openly - there is no protection for the tank from "Spike" today. Armor only (combo, + ERA / NERA) Although this is little consolation.

            + KAZ
            1. Akim
              Akim 21 June 2013 11: 57
              +2
              Quote: Professor
              + KAZ

              I agree. I forgot. I just extrapolated to Ukraine. Our neighbors have "Spikes", but most of us have not even changed Contact-1 to Contact-5. Not like delivering KOEP and KAZ.
          2. dustycat
            dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 14
            0
            Ultraviolet has a much worse effect on matrixes of CDC than IR, and filtering from UV is easier.
            But IR is much more interesting and broadband.
            If only because IR penetrates deeper into the semiconductor, the CDC matrix penetrates and historically has a stronger effect on them.
            You can experiment with a camera in a mobile phone and with a TV remote control at your leisure.
        2. dustycat
          dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 09
          0
          All DCD arrays have an increased sensitivity to IR (radio amateurs check the remote controls from TVs using a digital camera or a camera in a mobile phone).
          So that target illumination by infrared radiation in the final section may well lead to a miss.
      2. dustycat
        dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 05
        0
        This is if the gas-discharge laser (or a steam one too) - the installation is healthy, and the solid-state machine is also preparing for battle faster, and the size is much smaller.
    3. dustycat
      dustycat 21 June 2013 15: 54
      +1
      The "sapphire" gas-discharge lasers were most likely replaced by LED lasers.
      1. Akim
        Akim 21 June 2013 16: 09
        +1
        Quote: dustycat
        "Sapphire" gas-discharge lasers were replaced by LED lasers

        LED (semiconductor) lasers are very low power. They are not enough to counter. Although they have a much wider range.
        1. dustycat
          dustycat 21 June 2013 17: 36
          0
          Well, maybe those that Rusnano does and are weak so far.
          They showed something like a Chinese factory of solid-state lasers.
          The maximum power of 2 GW per pulse produced on it is for laser microwelding.
          When working with a duty cycle of 1000 tin can burn for a couple of minutes.
  2. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 21 June 2013 10: 37
    +1
    The curtain is one of the devices that did not pass the test in combat conditions in bulk.

    The idea is not bad - to confuse the head with controlled ammunition on approaching the tank. Protects against missiles using a semi-automatic infrared guidance system.
    Those. the range of applications is quite small, but important. More justified for a large-scale war.

    As always, the question raises how justifiably the elements of dynamic armor were removed to install elements of the system? There is no answer yet.
    And what will be the future of the system when switching completely to thermal imagers - they will leave it?

    And the fact that the equipment on the roof of the tower has become less is good, fewer painters and less junk, modernization is a definite plus.
    1. Roll
      Roll 21 June 2013 11: 09
      +1
      wassat Just against thermal imagers, the system will be effective, only it should move more and change arbitrarily the power in conjunction with smoke.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 21 June 2013 11: 31
        +1
        Quote: Rolm
        Just against thermal imagers, the system will be effective,


        Is it possible to write in more detail?
        Himself had to serve only IR systems. Everything related to counteracting the imager is very interesting.

        Smoke, by the way, is like a drum on a thermal imager, only for this IT is waiting for him in the troops.
        1. Roll
          Roll 21 June 2013 12: 05
          +1
          wassat The effectiveness of this system for protection against thermal imagers from above, from drones and attacking ammunition in the next and mainly for armored cars. The drone sees from above in the thermal range. The curtain shines at the top of the UAV sees a large heat spot significantly larger than the armored car. According to the thermometer, the curtain operator sets the parameter of the thermal radiation of the spot, say + 30 degrees. If the spot still moves and changes the temperature in a given range, it is definitely difficult to see the armored car, and the smoke is complex against Optics, thus inexpensive and effective protection of easily armored vehicles. And for the tank it is ineffective, one shot from the cannon and the barrel will glow in the infrared range like a Christmas tree on snow.
          1. Akim
            Akim 21 June 2013 12: 21
            0
            Quote: Rolm
            The drone sees from above in the thermal range. The curtain shines at the top of the UAV sees a large heat spot significantly larger than the armored car.

            Very wise. Moreover, the COEC cannot illuminate at such angles. It is more rational to apply the Cape / Contrast camouflage net.
            The Poles also have a good massage. ( It is for information only).
            1. Roll
              Roll 21 June 2013 12: 47
              +1
              wassat And why can’t the COEC be illuminated at such angles if it is on the roof of an armored car and shines at the top? And you can install it as a flasher on a magnet. Of course, an armored car needs a very light version, but the battery is powerful now, there are no problems.
              1. dustycat
                dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 24
                +1
                And LEDs and LED lasers instead of gas discharges - and the power consumed is much less.
            2. dustycat
              dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 23
              0
              Quite the opposite.
              Instead of a clear outline of the target — which the ATGM can recognize and the silhouette of which was the initial guidance at the time of the shot — suddenly a minimum of three targets. If there are also several sources of infrared radiation modulated and creating a wandering or jitter (jitter) spot - even to convey accurately enough will not work.
            3. dustycat
              dustycat 21 June 2013 17: 43
              0
              Have you ever seen a night target on which "arrow" MANPADS are trained in target detection?
              Just a plywood box in which a simple incandescent lamp.
              Or just a plywood shield with the same lamp behind it.

              And what will your masket hide from the thermal imager if it "sees" a heating main a couple of kilometers away and at a depth of up to 3m, even under a layer of snow ?!
              Arabs from the UAE are not fools once a thermal imager is an obligatory option on BMPs and armored personnel carriers purchased from us.
              The Israelis also began to supply their Merkavs with thermal imagers for good reason.
          2. Professor
            Professor 21 June 2013 12: 30
            +2
            Quote: Rolm
            The drone sees from above in the thermal range.

            Most of the day he sees in the optical spectrum, at night in the thermal.

            The curtain shines at the top of the UAV sees a large heat spot significantly larger than the armored car.

            At the center of mass of this spot, and will direct, straight into the tower.
            1. Roll
              Roll 21 June 2013 12: 43
              0
              fellow For this, the spot moves and changes the temperature, there is no center, then the bonnet (tiger) glows in the armored car. As for the cape, when the armored car is parked, it does not light up, but when it moves and the Jewel’s crew launched a rocket, the machine gunner pressed a couple of toggle switches on top of the turrets, smoke grenades fly to the top, the curtain cuts in, and the crew leaves the armored car in a couple of seconds and runs off him, this is a great advantage of the armored car, little accent, the crew of the tank or BMP will not be able to leave the car so quickly.
              1. Argon
                Argon 21 June 2013 15: 07
                0
                Guys, what do you smoke? I also want it so much; he sticks out and looks not childish!
              2. dustycat
                dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 30
                +2
                The wound motor is always on, and the armor above the motor too.
                Yes, the crew will breathe, and the track from the wheels and tracks in the thermal imager (even a primitive industrial one) is visible from afar.
                If only there is no purge screen above the armor, but it is also a weak protection.
                Thermal imagers have a sensitivity of 0,001 degrees Celsius (cheap industrial).

                But if a spot with a size of 3-4 silhouettes, but even dancing for half a silhouette, it’s already problematic to effectively hit automation.
                And for the second third shot, they may no longer give time.
              3. dustycat
                dustycat 21 June 2013 18: 24
                +1
                If the machine gunner was equipped with a Tigra thermal imager, he would not only notice the launch of the ATGM and the missile itself in the heat trace, he would notice the ATGM launch site long before the crew had time to hang up - if only there was an open position - why did Javelin have equivalent aiming systems - through the station’s sight launch and through the ammunition sight.
                Through the ammunition sight, you can shoot from the trench and from the trench without protruding.
                And even the place of mining or just an ambush day and night can be seen in the thermal imager from a safe distance.
                And if you still equip the Tiger with an optics detection system with a hint in the optical channel of the machine gun installation - then through optics you can even snip for 3-5 km and destroy from the same machine gun just by shooting at the lens flare from the optics.
            2. dustycat
              dustycat 27 June 2013 22: 12
              0
              The radiation of these spotlights is modulated.
              Like a military secret.
              But it is obvious that they at least wink.
              And the center of the spot may not be the center of the tower, but its edge.
              And already this gives a chance for a second and third shot with a remote fragmentation grenade.
              300m of green fragments mowed by fragments - it is enough to detect the optical system. For example, binoculars or a night vision device.
              Or to see where it flew into the thermal imager.
              Relatives to the calculation of ATGM our condolences.
          3. dustycat
            dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 19
            0
            For the barrel, ventilated screens have been invented for a long time.
            So the tank adds chances.
      2. dustycat
        dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 16
        0
        So fasten a bunch of heavy duty LED IR lasers anywhere and let them wink.
        And inexpensive and durable enough.
    2. Yemelya
      Yemelya 21 June 2013 19: 40
      +1
      Quote: Aleks tv
      The curtain is one of the devices that did not pass the test in combat conditions in bulk.


      During Desert Storm, some Iraqi T-72s were equipped with similar Chinese infrared searchlights. It is not known how effective they were, but ob. 188 was being finalized based on the results of "The Tempest ...", therefore, perhaps, the experiment was considered successful.
  3. Andrew 121
    Andrew 121 21 June 2013 10: 56
    +1
    To the Syrians our TSU could then again our Competition would not be so terrible.
  4. Roll
    Roll 21 June 2013 11: 06
    +1
    wassat Recently, amers and Indians conducted exercises with the use of javelins 19 rounds of 19 target defeats, and the Indians also fired. Therefore, we need a curtain. We also need a smaller and simplified version of the curtain to protect the roofs and hood of armored cars. An effective system against infrared rockets. And the ability to let armored cars smoke is only a plus.
    1. Professor
      Professor 21 June 2013 11: 23
      +2
      Quote: Rolm
      Therefore, we need a curtain.

      It is useless against Javelin, there is no irradiation of the tank.
      1. Akim
        Akim 21 June 2013 12: 02
        +1
        Quote: Professor
        against Javelin, there is no tank irradiation.

        The system does not catch laser irradiation of the tank directly (this has not happened for a long time). She catches a laser tracer that goes into the tail of a rocket.
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 June 2013 12: 26
          +2
          Quote: Akim
          She catches a laser tracer that goes into the tail of a rocket.

          There is no PU laser at all (even a laser rangefinder) and therefore there is nothing to catch. hi
          1. Akim
            Akim 21 June 2013 12: 58
            +1
            We ask forgiveness. I blurted out of ignorance. I looked about Javelin. Really. Neither "Shtora" nor "Wart" will be able to resist him. Although the methods of countering the IR head are more effective than for the "Spike". It is much easier to detect it with the same photocells.
            1. dustycat
              dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 39
              +1
              The curtain can blind the javelin, but at a short range - when the rocket is already near the target dovaryaet and at that moment the curtain is lucky to puff.
              When fired at the side, and when the target’s speed changes, it can come out if not a miss, then a strong decrease in the effectiveness of the defeat.
              But at this range, the PTKAZ should work out.

              Solid-state IR lasers versus thermal imagers are just that.
              It is not just that Israel is equipping its civil aircraft with them instead of "sapphire" gas-discharge lamps.
              1. Akim
                Akim 21 June 2013 17: 03
                +1
                Quote: dustycat
                It is not just that Israel is equipping its civil aircraft with them instead of "sapphire" gas-discharge lamps.

                The laws of physics on earth, water and in the air are completely different. God forbid, if the problem has been resolved, but I still remember at the institute that there is no opposition to our CEPs for them. Perhaps there is other information (or seen tests) Theory is not a strong indicator. Self-esteem too.
                1. dustycat
                  dustycat 21 June 2013 17: 56
                  0
                  But scientists don’t know ...
                  Even for deep space exploration, physicists use the same textbook.
                  It’s just that an airplane against the background of cold air (and space) is more noticeable than a merkava against the background of a desert heated by the sun, because thermal imaging seekers appeared in MANPADS earlier than in ATGMs.

                  Is it very difficult to simply type "sapphire spotlight" in a search engine?
                  Most of the open sources on the Internet specifically on Israeli civil aviation. Well, also according to the description of the presidential boards.
                2. dustycat
                  dustycat 21 June 2013 19: 25
                  0
                  But this one - if they manage to put it in the GOS - makes it impossible to reserve a tank - as the reservation of ships lost its meaning in due time.
                  One hope will remain on missile defense.
                  The armor will again remain purely bulletproof and anti-shatter.

                  http://warfiles.ru/show-33302-radar-nauchili-snimat-hd-video.html
      2. Argon
        Argon 21 June 2013 15: 27
        0
        Let me disagree with you, since the rocket engine has a certain time robots, and the rocket itself still has to go along a certain trajectory (the Javelin hits the upper projections), the question of the distance to the target MBT becomes decisive (formation of a launch permit) How to solve the problem? DISTANCE! Which one is optical, radio, quantum? I think they chose the latter as the most noise-immune. Or am I wrong?
        1. Professor
          Professor 21 June 2013 15: 41
          +1
          The rocket engine is strangely turned in the direction opposite to the movement and radar is used to detect the rocket. There is no range finder as such on Javelin and Spike due to the lack of need - the GOS is closed on the target during the flight.
          1. Argon
            Argon 21 June 2013 16: 49
            0
            Yes, it is optical (the most inefficient) in the body of the PU channel. many analysts generally reject the possibility of using this system at ranges of less than 1 km for actively maneuvering targets in automatic mode (let go, forget) only semi-automatically (hold the mark until the rocket passes about three quarters of the trajectory) and the capture may not take place due to the effect on the body of the channel all of the same factors: smoke, dust suspension, fog. Issues and the need for cooling the GOOS raises questions.
  5. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 21 June 2013 13: 18
    +1
    And what "kulibin" instead of DZ elements installed this, albeit useful, although rather "dubious" thing
    1. Akim
      Akim 21 June 2013 13: 27
      +1
      Quote: sergey158-29
      the place of the DZ elements installed this, albeit useful, although rather "dubious" thing

      BOPS should still be hit, and the ATGM will hit for sure. Especially since it was directed against numerous NATO portable ATGMs. In its current form, it is definitely outdated. Better DZ.
      1. Argon
        Argon 21 June 2013 17: 04
        +1
        The question with the "Shtora" was initially very controversial, the Indians, who, by the way, co-financed the ROC on the T-90, abandoned it from the very beginning. In general, a review of promising anti-tank weapons shows that the time of half-measures like the Chinese system of suppressing a quantum pulse or "deceiving yourself with a curtain" has passed. KAZ and "Arena" or "Trophy" in principle are no longer relevant. Nadezhdy is provided by protection with the generation of an electric pulse, but everything is still secret there, nothing really is known. I hope that if the "Arena" is abandoned then it was worth it.
        1. Akim
          Akim 21 June 2013 17: 11
          +1
          Quote: Argon
          or "fool yourself with a curtain" is over, you need a KAZ


          Passive protection systems are also needed, but more advanced.
    2. dustycat
      dustycat 21 June 2013 16: 41
      0
      What is dubious?
      Israel does not doubt them - all their civilian sides have these "searchlights" - true against stingers and arrows, but still ...
      The principle of guidance - and counteraction - is almost the same.
  6. Akim
    Akim 21 June 2013 19: 17
    +1
    Quote: dustycat
    The lower range is IR, not UV (upper range) relative to the optical.

    Think of the rainbow. The simplest definition of optical boundaries.
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 27 June 2013 22: 20
      0
      The simplest one is the radiation frequency and wavelength.
      Therefore, IR is the lowest in frequency, lower than visible, and the longest wavelength optical.
      Well damn physics.
      It is not necessary to repeat nonsense after dropouts from the club of golden youth of the philological faculty of Moscow State University and MGIMO.
      1. Professor
        Professor 27 June 2013 22: 49
        +1
        Quote: dustycat
        The simplest one is the radiation frequency and wavelength.
        Therefore, IR is the lowest in frequency, lower than visible, and the longest wavelength optical.
        Well damn physics.
        It is not necessary to repeat nonsense after dropouts from the club of golden youth of the philological faculty of Moscow State University and MGIMO.

        I see you are a BIG specialist. wassat Grabbed the terms and throw them left and right. Teach you how the frequency, speed, propagation length of an electromagnetic wave is related? wink
        1. dustycat
          dustycat 27 June 2013 23: 21
          0
          And also explain why in the rainbow red is the farthest from the light source.
          If time is not a pity to spend on those who just went through physics at school - go ahead.


          I studied her darling. Therefore, purely for me, you can not bathe.
          It is useful to know it to electricians, electronics engineers and cybernetics.
          And he passed the exam on both principles of thermodynamics, but did not buy.

          Sha, professor, I get so many questions that I’m not in Israel. I was tired of explaining that my genes are not the same. In my pedigree, only Moldavians, Ukrainians, Tatars and Marys. Cool down. Be objective.
          1. Professor
            Professor 28 June 2013 09: 37
            +2
            Quote: dustycat
            Sha, professor

            No need to be rude ...

            Quote: dustycat
            I studied her darling. Therefore, purely for me, you can not bathe.

            Studied and studied not quite the same.

            Quote: dustycat
            The simplest one is the radiation frequency and wavelength.

            Either in frequency or in wavelength, since the values ​​are dependent on each other through the speed of wave propagation. Forgot? wink



            1. dustycat
              dustycat 29 June 2013 16: 24
              0
              IR is the lowest in frequency, below the visible, and the longest wavelength optical.

              Thank you for confirming.

              Well, and what is what I set out contrary to what you have quoted?
              Lower frequency - longer wave.
  7. Yemelya
    Yemelya 21 June 2013 19: 52
    +1
    An advertising brochure, published several years ago, claimed that the TSU-1-7М optical-electronic counter-station would go into series production in the 2010 year. There are no exact data on this score, as well as information on the number of armored vehicles equipped with the new station. Probably, the full-scale production of new stations did not start due to the termination of purchases of T-90 tanks equipped with the old TSHU-1-7. About the current state of the TSHU-1-7М project, it is only known that these stations are installed on demonstration samples of tanks participating in various exhibitions.


    On Azerbaijani T-90S installed (at least, there are no modulator boxes).
  8. Alekseev
    Alekseev 21 June 2013 20: 00
    +1
    The impression is that some respected members of the forum (including myself) do not clearly understand the principle of operation of the Curtain, and do not know exactly its performance characteristics (which, naturally, they must be secret).
    It seems that, according to the "primer", upon detection of laser irradiation of an armored object, smoke grenades should be fired, a smoke screen (curtain) impenetrable for the laser should be placed. The searchlights create IR thermal illumination, capable of interfering with the guidance of an ATGM in a command way, along a "tracer" (lamp) in the rocket tail, like the Cobra on the T-64B, T-80B or thermal seeker.
    Question: with the command (or with the help of the GOS), the operator of the ATGM does not irradiate the target, in the old systems it only keeps the aiming mark, in the new ones, "fired and forgot", how does the Shtora find ATGM with such control systems on approach. There seems to be no radar?
    Or does the crew use it for prophylaxis, placing smoke curtains and making flares when there is a threat of defeat?
    1. dustycat
      dustycat 27 June 2013 22: 37
      0
      Since, judging by the video cited by the professor, the GOS uses a CCD matrix without suppressed sensitivity to infrared radiation, any IR illuminator will illuminate it until it dazzles as it approaches the target. Not only sapphire Spotlight Spotlights. And even a halogen car headlight. You don’t even need to modulate much.
      So even for prevention will do. Although very unmasking.
      But to attach a sub-microwave radar to it, which is also used for KAZ, for detecting at a distance of 0,5 km (and the Javelins and Spikes have closer guidance difficulties).
      In addition, there are complexes for detecting passive optical systems. Also suitable for detecting flying Javelins and Spikes.

      There are many options.
      As the song says - We have such devices! But we won’t tell you about them! ;-)
  9. mirag2
    mirag2 22 June 2013 18: 25
    0
    Ha! I did practice at this enterprise. For work +++.