Military Review

Modernization of MBT with the aim of increasing their combat effectiveness in urban environments

39



The newest OBT Challenger 2 has a significant number of improvements regarding survivability, including lattice armor in the rear part


The traditional field of action of the main combat tanks (MBT) - an open area, and although it is still relevant, however, recent operations have shown that tanks are a powerful tool in the conduct of hostilities in the city. The article discusses international developments whose purpose is to create tanks more suitable for war in built-up areas.

The main task of the main battle tanks has always been to fire and destroy other MBTs on the battlefield, and for many countries this is still the main task.

However, the Russian experience in Chechnya, operations in the Balkans, recent Western operations in the Middle East and other places have shown that MBT is a very flexible weapon system, which plays an important role not only in urban combat, but also in counterinsurgency operations.

In order to remain combat-ready in urban environments, tanks must be modified in three key areas: survivability, firepower and situational awareness. There is a wide range of options for such modifications, and although some approaches are universal, there are a number of individual solutions that are identified with specific theaters of war (theater of operations).

Traditionally, the highest level of protection of the OBT has always been in a frontal arc from 60 to 90 degrees, but when fighting in the city, they can attack from anywhere, including above and below. In this regard, many OBT was installed additional armor on the body and in some cases also on the tower. As for the hull, here the onboard booking now protects not only the driver’s compartment in front of the car, but also expands more and more towards the stern to protect the crew compartment. Currently, tank feeds often have anti-tank protection. weapons, for example, widespread grenades RPG-7 rocket launcher.

Another direction is the installation of dynamic protection units (DZ), which have long been installed on most Russian MBTs in order to increase their survivability along the frontal arc. Currently, DZ is also part of the TUSK (Urban Survival Kit) tank survival kit kit installed on the American MBT M1A1 / M1A2. The main disadvantage of DZ is that it can be potentially dangerous and can injure dismounted infantry, located near the machine. The Israeli army has equipped many of its old tanks with active armor, but the Merkava Mk 4, currently produced by MBT, has a passive booking system; its components are modular and this allows you to remove and replace blocks, depending on the combat conditions or the development of reservation technology.

Some MBTs were also equipped with anti-tank mine protection, but this can be an expensive exercise due to the fact that it involves modifying armor on vehicles with relatively low ground clearance and not intended for this. Krauss-Maffei Wegmann developed a mine protection kit for the Leopard 2A6 tank, designated 2A6M, which mainly consists of additional bottom plates. This initially met the requirements of Germany and the Netherlands, but the Canadian army also leased 20 German tanks Leopard 2A6M, of which 19 was deployed in Afghanistan.

In general, virtually all tanks involved in Afghanistan and Iraq were equipped with various electronic devices to neutralize improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

MBT protection can be further improved by installing an opto-electronic countermeasure complex or an active protection complex along with a fire extinguishing and explosion suppression system in order to increase the survivability of the crew if the complex does not work properly and the vehicle is hit.

Different seats are available to improve crew protection. For many years, the driver’s seat of Russian tanks was attached to the roof rather than to the bottom in order to increase its survivability, and some countries are now replacing their usual seats for all crew members with Autoflug seats that are attached to the sides and the roof and do not have contact with bottom.


Tank Leopard 2 PSO, equipped with a front dozer blade, with camouflage for urban conditions and a remotely controlled combat module with an 12,7-mm machine gun


Enhance firepower

With regard to firepower, urban operations offer a set of goals different from the traditional set for MBT and tank ammunition is not always suitable for the task. Most of the Western MBT usually shoot two types of ammunition from their 120-mm smoothbore guns: sabot armor-piercing (APFSDS) and universal cumulative anti-tank (HEAT-MP). Russian MBTs also shoot APFSDS, but their second high-explosive fragmentation projectile (HE-FRAG) and the recent Russian development is a high-explosive fragmentation projectile that can be programmed to different ranges by means of an OMS and which is considered as a means of attacking targets for cover.

A number of other countries have now begun to acquire similar projectiles, some of which can be programmed to explode over the entrenched infantry in order to maximize impact. Skull shells are highly effective against infantry as well as for neutralizing barbed wire obstacles. Israel Military Industries has developed and launched the Anti-Personnel / Anti-Material (ARAM) projectile / for defeating the materiel, which produces a number of lethal submunitions during horizontal flight to create a highly efficient zone approximately 50 m long and 20 m wide. The first entry to the troops was a shot for the 105-mm rifled gun and then a projectile for the 120-mm smooth-bore gun.

The British Challenger 2 tanks retain their L120 30-mm rifled guns, which, in addition to APFSDS, can also fire a high-explosive projectile with crushable warhead (HESH), well suited for urban operations, as it is effective in breaking through walls. Another popular way to destroy fences is to install a dozer blade at MBT. He also showed his effectiveness in clearing city blockages; in Afghanistan, with the help of his body, he ditched pits and cleared paths so that the cars following him would quickly move forward. In some cases, these dozer blades may be replaced by plow or roller type clearance systems, which are used in conjunction with mines in front of the machine.

Self-defense capabilities can be improved by installing a remote-controlled combat module on the roof with a 7,62-mm, 12,7-mm machine gun or 40-mm automatic grenade launcher, which the loader usually works with. This provides significant advantages in areas where there is a high risk of sniping at snipers, which forces the crew to work under armor protection while reducing the level of situational awareness.

Finding an opponent can be challenging in an urban environment and good situational awareness is vital, especially when you are in a tank with batten hatches. Apart from the tank commander, who often has a stabilized panoramic sight mounted on the roof, turning 360 degrees, optoelectronic devices for the driver, gunner and loader usually cover the frontal arc, although some of the most recent MBTs are also equipped with rear-view cameras so that The driver can take back safely. However, there are several ways to improve the situational awareness of the crew, tanks can be equipped with a camera on the mast or a group of compact cameras that are installed in the front, side and aft, while the picture is displayed on the display, as is done in the newest Merkava Mk 4.

However, some electro-optic devices are vulnerable to small arms bullets and shell splinters, and some cars were equipped with flaps that close the devices when they are not needed, although this is only a half-measure.

Limited elevation and declination angles can make it difficult for tanks to fire at the enemy, both in close combat and in high buildings, but, at least for MBT, electrically operated grenade launchers, usually firing smoke grenades or other means, usually have masking. Some countries rework them to shoot frag grenades to protect against infantry in urban environments.

Instead of direct visual exchange, modern MBTs have a battle management system for quick information exchange, as well as a comprehensive communication system. For melee with dismounted infantry, many MBTs deployed in urban or counterinsurgency operations are equipped with a telephone in the rear and a “smart” internal communication that provides wireless communication for the infantry with the crew of the tank.

French design

Some machines are quite interesting systems. Necter's Leclerc MBT option, which France acquired 406 machines, is specifically designed for urban operations and is named Leclerc Action en Zone Urbaine (AZUR). It was shown for the first time in the middle of 2006, and was evaluated by the French army at the end of 2006 and the beginning of 2007.

The onboard screens of the standard Leclerc MBT protect only the front of the chassis, but the new screen of modular composite armor was installed on AZUR, where it was extended from the front of the chassis to the end of the fighting compartment. The rest from the sides and the stern is protected by lattice armor, and the roof of the aft engine compartment has been upgraded to provide increased protection against incendiary bottles. The panoramic camera is mounted on the roof to provide the tank commander with a quick all-round view, the remote-controlled 7,62-mm machine gun is mounted on the roof, guidance and shooting are conducted from inside the tank. The tank also has seven GALIX grenade launchers on each side of the turret, which fire smoke grenades GALIX 4. In addition to the standard APFSDS and HEAT ammunition, the 120-mm smoothbore gun can also fire with the newly developed high-explosive Nexter Munitions 120 HE F1 high-explosive ammunition. It was developed under a contract with an arms procurement agency, ordered 10000 of such shots.

Modernization of MBT with the aim of increasing their combat effectiveness in urban environments
Image of Leclerc MBT from the stern; tank upgraded for urban conditions, changes are shown in blue


The Leclerc MBT MBT usually has two additional tanks for diesel fuel, but they were removed from the AZUR tank and replaced with two drop boxes in which ammunition or allowance for dismounted infantry can be transported. The infantry has a direct communication channel with the crew of the Leclerc tank through a short-range communication system.

According to Nexter Systems, the AZUR kit is modular, and users can select the parts that fit their requirements. In this regard, the entire kit can be installed on the machine in less than half a day using standard tools and equipment.

Further improvements in survivability may include the installation of an active protection complex, possibly using Nexter Systems' KBCM (Kit Basique de Contre-Mesures) experience, which was tested on the AMX-10RC 6x6 reconnaissance vehicle at the beginning of 2000-x.

In total, the Leclerc 254 machines of the French army will undergo a medium modernization (installation of the AZUR kit), the first vehicles will be re-commissioned in the 2015 year. According to Nexter, the upgrade could be forced and tanks deployed ahead of time, if operational requirements require it.

Leclerc AZUR tanks are not equipped with dynamic protection, but the French army installed DZ on some of its AMX-30B2 MBT, which are currently out of service. DZ is currently installed on an EBG engineering machine and remotely controlled demining machines based on the AMX-30 chassis.

The French army also tested two wheeled armored vehicles, upgraded for urban conditions: the VAB from Renault Trucks Defense BTR and the VBL light reconnaissance vehicle from Panhard General Defense.

Leopard PSO

Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW), the main manufacturer of the widely used MBT Leopard 2, developed the Leopard 2 PSO (Peace Support Operation), which was shown to the public for the first time in the middle of 2006. In the course of development, carried out with KMW’s own funds and many other subcontractors, the wishes of a number of MBT Leopard 2 buyers were taken into account. According to KMW, the modular design of the Leopard 2 PSO allows it to be adapted to the specific requirements of the customer, some components of the kit can be quickly installed on the vehicle before being sent to the troops.


Canadian Leopard 2A6 CAN under test in Germany with grid armor on the hull and turret



Upgraded Büffel BRAM for Canada with a new reservation kit including grid armor around the stern


Rheinmetall 120-mm L / 44 smooth-bore cannon left, but standard APFS-DS and HEAT-MP projectiles are not optimized for urban operations. To address this shortcoming, Rheinmetall Munitions has developed a new “smart” 120-mm high-explosive projectile, which will be programmed to explode the target for maximum impact on dismounted or entrenched infantry.

7,62-mm coaxial machine gun left, but also installed remotely controlled combat module for direct cover. You can install an 7,62-mm or 12,7-mm machine gun or an 40-mm automatic grenade launcher from which you can fire a loader.

All Leopard 2 MBTs have two groups of four 76-mm grenade launchers installed on each side of the tower, smoke or grenade traps are installed as standard, but you can also shoot fragmentation grenades from them to fight the infantry.

Tank Leopard 2 PSO is equipped with additional armor on the roof, as well as armor screens, extended to the stern and down on each side of the tower.

It is possible that the Leopard 2 PSO tanks will also be equipped with the 2A6M standard mine protection kit, which already stands on some Canadian, German and Swedish Leopard 2 MBT systems. A hydraulically driven bulldozer blade is installed in the front, controlled by the driver from his seat, and can be used to clear obstacles, such as road barriers and barricades.

The optics of the Leopard 2 PSO are protected so that it cannot be damaged by stones. Cameras can also be installed to increase crew situational awareness for all 360 degrees. AZEZ situational awareness system from Rheinmetall Defense Electronics has already been tested on the Leopard 2A4 tank.

While the Leopard 2 PSO can be manufactured to this specification, it seems that most buyers would prefer to redesign existing machines instead. It is possible to install new electric drives instead of the electro-hydraulic system of the standard MBT Leopard 2. An auxiliary power unit can also be installed, which will allow the subsystems to operate when the main diesel MTU diesel engine with an 1500 hp power is muted.

KMW has completed several prototypes of the Leopard 2 PSO, but so far the German army has not confirmed its purchasing plans. At one time, it was intended to upgrade a batch of 70 towers from the Leopard 2, which could be quickly installed on the existing Leopard 2 chassis.

The Canadian Army rented 20 Leopard 2A6M tanks from the German Army for use in Afghanistan to meet the urgent operational requirements (UOR). Before deployment, they were upgraded to the configuration of the Leopard 2A6M CAN, which includes the installation of Canadian communications equipment, protective screens to reduce heat signatures from Saab, cooling jackets for the crew, lattice armor on the hull and turret, and electronic equipment to combat the VCA.

The Canadian Army also rented two BihfelRHEMs manufactured by Rheinmetall Landsysteme to support its Leopard 2A6M CAN tanks deployed in Afghanistan. They were upgraded by Rheinmetall Landsysteme before shipment, additional grid armor was installed in the stern of the vehicle, Canadian communications, cooling of the crew, modified dozer blade and additional water for the crew. This upgrade also includes a new mine protection kit for Biiffel, of which Canada was the first customer.

Strengthening the protection of the tank Merkava

The Israeli MBT Merkava was originally created for normal combat operations and is currently being mass-produced the Merkava Mk 4 model. He, perhaps, has the highest level of protection among modern tanks, he has an unusual layout, the power unit is located in front, and the remaining space is given to a manned compartment.

Merkava has a high level of protection not only in the frontal arc, but also the sides and the stern. In addition to the crew of the 4 man, he can carry infantrymen, who quickly parachute from the stern.

Not one MBT can provide the crew and the landing force with 100% protection, a certain amount of MBT Merkava has been lost in recent years from the detonation of mines and anti-tank weapons. The combat experience gained in South Lebanon accelerated work to further increase the survivability of the Merkava MBT.

After intensive testing, the Israeli army has now begun to equip its MBT Merkava Mk 4 with the Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Trophy active defense system. During recent tests, he successfully intercepted 100 per cent of some types of anti-tank weapons, which increased Merkava Mk 4’s anti-tank weapons, such as the RPG-7, from all perspectives.

To work together with its MBT, Israel has developed a wide range of support vehicles on a tank chassis, including the Achzarit armored combat vehicle based on the chassis of the T-54 and T-55 tanks, the Puma engineering vehicle on the Centurion chassis. They have a high level of protection with installed systems manufactured by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and Israel Military Industries. Both companies also offer protection kits for foreign MBTs, they have been sold to a number of countries, including Slovenia (T-55) and Turkey (M60A3).

Currently, the Namer (Tiger) heavy infantry fighting vehicle is in service, it is a completely new vehicle based on the components of the Merkava Mk 4 tank. The Iron Fist active protection complex from Israel Military Industries is installed on it.

Russian Experience

During the war in Chechnya, about 10 percent of infantry fighting vehicles deployed in Chechnya by the Russian army were lost, most in close urban combat. Since then, Russia has placed an increased emphasis on increasing the survivability of its infantry fighting vehicles, but a large number of different types of vehicles currently deployed, which the Russian army is currently trying to get rid of, have a negative impact.

Currently produced Russian MBT T-90 have advanced booking solutions, including remote sensing in a frontal arc.

Russia has developed and tested a number of defense complexes, for example, the Arena from KBP and Drozd-2 from KBM, but they, apparently, did not enter service with the Russian army.
During the hostilities in Georgia in 2008, most of the Russian army’s BMPs were obsolete, including the T-62 and T-72 and BMP-1 and BMP-2 MBTs. None of these machines was optimized, although on some T-62 lattice armor was installed on the sides of the turret to protect against RPGs.

Lattice armor was also installed on a number of other Russian BBM, mostly based on combat expediency.

Russia has been developing remote sensing equipment for many years and has the latest systems that provide protection against kinetic, high-explosive and cumulative ammunition. In addition to installing the MBT, these DZ units were also installed on the BMP-3 and offered for export.

The BMPT based on the T-90 MBT chassis (Terminator) is currently being produced in small quantities for the Russian army, the machine will usually be used to support other BBM in urban operations.


Upgraded Russian tank T-72M1 with DZ and KAZ Arena


Bold expectations

The British army at one time held an OBT company Challenger 2 from BAE Systems in the city of Basra in southern Iraq, but now after the withdrawal of troops from there, they have all been returned to Britain.

Under the leadership of BAE Systems, a number of upgrades were carried out on these Challenger 2 in order to adapt tanks to urban operations. The upgrade includes the installation of a remote-controlled combat module Enforcer from Selex Galileo in place of the loader; It was originally purchased for the Panther communications and control machine. A new set of passive armor was installed in the front of the chassis, sides of the hull and turret, and lattice armor around the stern. Also on the tower was installed additional armor.

A new passive armor in front of the hull was replaced with a DZ, which was originally developed for the Challenger 1 and installed for Operation Desert Storm. Subsequently, it was installed on the Challenger 2 tanks for operation "Iraqi Freedom" and supplemented with lattice armor.

More recently, a mine protection kit was developed and installed on the Challenger 2, as well as on the Challenger BRAM.

New night vision devices were installed for the driver and electronic suppression devices to neutralize the VCA. Other improvements include a wire cutter to protect people on the roofs of cars, an upgraded air conditioning system, and measures to reduce thermal signatures.

The main weapon is the L120 30-mm rifled gun, it shoots an APFSDS projectile with a depleted uranium tip, but for urban operations a HESH shot is preferred and is well suited for neutralizing bunkers, buildings and walls.

With the initial deployment, the Challenger 2 weighed roughly 62,5 tons, with a complete UOR retrofit kit, the mass is now approaching 73 tons with a corresponding increase in ground pressure and a decrease in power density.

During the invasion of Iraq in 2003, units of the American 1 reconnaissance division were deployed to Baghdad with Abrams tanks. In the city, tanks performed a variety of tasks, ranging from psychological restraint to covering the coalition infantry.

The standard armor of the Abrams tank is thicker in the front and is designed to protect against other combat vehicles and does not protect against circular attack in the context of an asymmetrical war that took place in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

This forced the army to install a TUSK retrofit kit on their Abrams МХNUMX series tanks.

The Army Combat Systems Directorate has teamed up with General Dynamics Land Systems to develop these retrofit kits. The first Abrams M1A1 / M1A2 tanks equipped with TUSK were deployed in the second half of 2007, the total number of sets was 505 units by the middle of 2009. Subsequently, the TUSK I was replaced by the TUSK II kit.

Other improvements include new equipment designed to improve situational awareness and enhanced bottom protection against roadside bombs to increase crew survivability.

To adapt tanks for urban battles, the original TUSK package included remote IR sights, external gun screens, armored tiles, sterned armor, a telephone for communication of the crew and dismounted infantry mounted in a box in the stern of the vehicle.

The TUSK kit is designed modular (separate systems can be enabled or excluded) to meet operational requirements. According to General Dynamics, part of the whole package is a thermal imaging loader (LTWS), which provides it with the ability to aim at night with a video signal output to a monocular.

Other upgrades related to situational awareness include a camera installed in the stern that has an 180 overview of the aft of the MBT, as well as a video amplifier to improve visibility at night and under any weather conditions. In order for all new systems to work, a switchboard was installed to protect the electrical circuits of the TUSK components.

As for enhancing protection, there is a loader flap (LAGS) made of armored glass, which protects it when working with the machine gun M240, when you need to pop out of the hatch. Included TUSK II protection expanded to 360 degrees. In both cases, the flap rotates with the machine gun on the rotary axis.

TUSK can also offer a anti-sniper / anti-combat weapon installation (CS / AMM), which provides stabilized anti-sniper fire without the need for crew members to lean out. This is the 12,7-mm machine gun M2 paired with the main Remote Thermal Sight (RTS) at the top of the 120-mm MBT gun.

Another popular component of TUSK is the CROWS remotely controlled module. It allows crew members to work with a stabilized 12,7-mm M2 machine gun from inside the machine with a joystick that can rotate the machine gun 360 degrees horizontally and vertically from -20 to + 60 degrees. M2 is targeted with a day / night sight, the picture is displayed.

In order to increase the protection of the tank sides, DZ XM32 units are installed. They are designed to combat manual weapons, which can shoot with cumulative anti-tank ammunition.

However, as you know, roadside bombs caused most of the casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan. In this regard, additional upgrades were carried out in order to increase protection against IEDs. They include increased underbody protection, a driver's seat attached to the roof, not to the bottom, and electronic countermeasures to neutralize remote-controlled improvised explosive devices.

Materials used:
Jane's International Defense Review
www.defense-update.com
www.kmweg.com
www.imi-israel.com
www.nexter-group.fr
www.tankinfo.ru
www.gdls.com
Author:
39 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 10 July 2014 10: 12
    +2
    In the field of MBT passive protection systems, the most successful Israeli engineers in the world.
    They have a lot to learn in this area.
    But in the competition, the shell-armor, as a rule, wins the last.
    Therefore, it is not possible to solve the problem only with passive protection, you need a good multi-functional KAZ that can work effectively against the average defeat and at the same time it will not cause harm to the infantry that covers the tank in battle in the military units.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 10 July 2014 10: 41
      +6
      KAZ hits rockets flying relatively slowly.
      No KAZ will have time to intercept (and damage) OBPS -
      simple tungsten or uranium arrow.
      Therefore, they put passive ceramic armor, which
      extinguishes a kinetic blow.
      1. bmv04636
        bmv04636 10 July 2014 10: 58
        +2
        Well, it seems like the development is underway and to intercept OBPS
      2. Styx
        Styx 10 July 2014 11: 09
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        KAZ hits rockets flying relatively slowly.
        No KAZ will have time to intercept (and damage) OBPS

        AMAP-ADS can.
        AMAP-ADS requires 560 microseconds for the entire protection procedure, from the detection and complete elimination of the threat.
        According to the developer, the AMAP-ADS complex is capable of hitting the cumulative ammunition of melee weapons, such as RPG-7, ATGMs, as well as armor-piercing ammunition shells.
        Actuators create “focused blades of concentrated energy”, intercepting a flying projectile 1,5-2 meters from the machine.
        http://topwar.ru/40621-zaschita-bronirovannyh-mashin-chast-2.html
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 10 July 2014 12: 55
          +2
          I read about AMAP-ADS, thanks.
          Confused (from WIKI):
          "The main elements are the sensor-countermeasure modules arranged all around the vehicle."

          This is more like DZ modules ..., in my opinion? Modules are located around the machine.
          They are a one-time operation like DZ.

          And more:
          "it was tested in Sweden under urban combat conditions. Threat rejection and multi-hit capability were proven,
          when 7.62 mm rounds and RPG-7s were fired from a short distance of some 50 m, a range typical for urban missions "

          Tested on bullets (!) 7.62 mm and RPG-7 grenades. This is oooooo-very far from the OBPS
          ("Childishness", as Vladimir Ilyich would say) negative .
          1. Styx
            Styx 10 July 2014 14: 03
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            This is more like DZ modules

            Something like that.

            Quote: voyaka uh
            They are a one-time operation like DZ.

            The number of counter-ammunition in the KAZ Trophy is infinite?

            Quote: voyaka uh
            Tested on bullets (!) 7.62 mm and RPG-7 grenades. This is oooooo-very far from the OBPS

            I don’t know what they tested on, I read it here: http://topwar.ru/40621-zaschita-bronirovannyh-mashin-chast-2.html

            The system allows intercepting approaching missiles flying at speeds of up to 2000 m / s, which means that KAZ can be effective against 120 mm armor-piercing projectiles with an extended core, provided that the actual armor can withstand residual kinetic energy.
            KAZ is currently fully qualified and mass-produced for unnamed buyers. One of the customers has signed a contract and deliveries are already underway.
        2. opus
          opus 10 July 2014 13: 15
          +4
          Quote: Styx
          AMAP-ADS can.

          What can? intercept / damage OBPS?
          5-6 kg of tungsten or ob-uran (the densest substances at a given time) with a diameter of 20-40 mm at speed 1500-1800м / с?
          BOPS for 0,56 with flies 924 m (for v 1650 m / s)



          AMAP-ADS 200 confident scan radius (realistic value) -500m (fiction)


          against ATGM (or NUR), especially subsonic, yes, for a generator at a speed of 4M = unrealistic
          1. Styx
            Styx 10 July 2014 13: 58
            -2
            Quote: opus
            What can? intercept / damage OBPS?

            Easy! AMAP-ADS actuators create “focused blades of concentrated energy” that intercept a flying projectile 1,5-2 meters from the machine.
            Most likely, “focused blades of concentrated energy” are cumulative blades. As in the DZ "Knife", only larger.

            Quote: opus
            BOPS for 0,56 with flies 924 m (for v 1650 m / s)

            It was hard to learn at school, right?
            560 microseconds = 0.00056 seconds.
            BOPS during this time will fly the distance = speed x time = 1650 m / s x 0.00056 s = 0.924 meters = 92.4 Centimeters !!!!!!!
            1. opus
              opus 10 July 2014 15: 20
              +3
              Quote: Styx
              It's Easy!

              I am plagued by vague doubts ...
              Quote: Styx
              create “focused concentrated energy blades”

              1. how is it "focused" (and what)? Focus the blast front
              Quote: Styx
              blades
              (MI)
              !
              2. "concentrated energy" - what kind of animal is this?
              Quote: Styx
              intercepting the flying projectile in 1,5-2 meters from the car.

              To "grab" it, you need to take less than a second from a distance of 1000m:
              1.notch
              2. calculate the trajectory (at least the approach area)
              3. Give a command to destroy
              4. Destroy
              And the BOPS can be detected for about 300m (at a speed of 4M).
              Quote: Styx
              It was hard to learn at school, right?

              No, and you?
              Let me explain, for the gifted, who was easy to learn in school ^
              - current speed (signal by wire)
              - number of meters of wires
              sensor response time
              -time performance of the computer (even if it’s worth it)
              0,00056 does not fit

              Quote: Styx
              560 microseconds = 0.00056 seconds.

              read carefully:
              560 microseconds, threats can be eliminated
              0,56 reaction time (initiation
              Quote: Styx
              focused concentrated energy blades
              AFTER THE DETECTION OF THE SHOT, THE CALCULATION OF THE TRAJECTORY - i.e. the most time-consuming "action left behind the scenes"
              0,5-1 s goes to everything about everything, 0,56 for simplicity wrote


              Quote: Styx
              BOPS during this time will fly

              For 0.00056 seconds, nothing can be done (to find, calculate the trajectory) = this is ridiculous.
              Air defense complexes (SAM) with everything you need (not 1-2000 kg of scanty equipment) and "sharpened" for this:
              -One only retake target (detected SOC) radar guidance or thermal imager takes one second.
              - 4-6 seconds with target detection SOC, strung trails, turning the tower and only then retake the radar guidance or thermal imager.
              1. Styx
                Styx 11 July 2014 11: 44
                -1
                Quote: opus
                1. how is it "focused" (and what)?
                2. "concentrated energy" - what kind of animal is this?

                This is written in an article by Alex Alexeeva, the source is http://www.armada.ch.
                The original says: Effectors generate “focused blades of concentrated energy” intercepting the incoming round at 1.5 or 2 meters from the vehicle.
                I already gave a link to the article above: http://topwar.ru/40621-zaschita-bronirovannyh-mashin-chast-2.html

                Most likely, “focused blades of concentrated energy” are cumulative blades. As in the DZ "Knife", only larger.

                Quote: opus
                To "grab" it you need ...
                I will explain, for the gifted, ...
                ... for everything about everything it takes 0,5-1 sec, 0,56 wrote for simplicity
                nothing can be done in 0.00056 seconds ...

                Your thoughts are absolutely uninteresting to me.

                Quote: opus
                read carefully:
                560 microseconds, threats can be eliminated
                0,56 reaction time (initiation

                Translation: Due to the short reaction time of approximately 560 microseconds, threats can be eliminated at ranges of about 10 m, regardless of the speed of the threat.

                Well, where is it written about initiation ???
      3. wanderer_032
        wanderer_032 10 July 2014 12: 07
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        KAZ hits rockets flying relatively slowly.
        No KAZ will have time to intercept (and damage) OBPS -
        simple tungsten or uranium arrow.


        Not yet, because which can not yet be created.
        Therefore, I wrote that: you need a good multifunctional KAZ.
        1. cosmos111
          cosmos111 10 July 2014 12: 43
          +1
          Quote: wanderer_032
          Modernization of MBT with the aim of increasing their combat effectiveness in urban environments

          all this ((article ... on the invention of another bike ...

          1. To make the tank invulnerable from modern ATGM ATGMs, the mass of MBTs is needed, it should be at least 150 tons !!!!
          2. vertical elevation angle of OBT +20 deg ... the upper floors of buildings are not included in its affected area ...

          what you need: everything has already been invented by the Red Army in the Second World War and creatively revised and supplemented in Tsakhal ...
          1. BMR-T, and BMP-T are needed for safe delivery to the clash of revenge, without losses ... and covering with 20 mm, 23 mm, 30 mm cannons with elevation angles of up to 80 degrees ... infantry from BMP-T. ...

          2. the reconstruction of the Soviet: assault battalions (((SHISBr)) included sappers, flamethrowers, snipers, machine gunners, and since 1943 grenade launchers with captured Faust cartridges ...
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 10 July 2014 13: 11
            +2
            "all this ((article ... on the invention of another bicycle ..." ///

            I can not agree with you. The topic is relevant.
            And they are feverishly trying to solve it in many countries.
            After all, the tank, infantry fighting vehicle, armored personnel carrier has a bright future. Walking in war in connection with the development of precision weapons becomes so dangerous that it will soon not be lured into the infantry.
            Everything will go for armor, KAZs, DZ, etc. Something will happen to the crews (and the landing party), something on the remote control, something on the autonomous.

            Both circular armor and circular weapons (including fire upwards) are a challenge for
            designers. And to reduce weight - the transition from metal to carbon materials, all kinds of super-films, liquid armor, etc. Chemists have come up with a lot of things, which designers still do not know how to add to combat vehicles.
      4. max702
        max702 10 July 2014 14: 38
        +2
        How often did tungsten arrows and even more so uranium arrows fly into Merkava and other tanks? It seems to me that if it flew, it’s only on tests, but RPG 7 and other ATGMs with the damaging part based on cumulative action occupy 95% of all threats, 5% on mines and IEDs, so the emphasis is on the destruction of relatively slow flying targets .. .
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 10 July 2014 15: 14
          +1
          "How often did tungsten tanks arrive in the Merkava and other tanks?
          and even less uranium arrows? "///

          They arrived in Merkava. And pierced the forehead. True it was
          Merkava-1 with simple homogeneous armor. And the Syrian fired
          T-62 from a close range in Lebanon in 1982. Then they were pleased,
          that the tankers didn’t suffer, and the tanks didn’t catch fire - the first test in battle.
          But today is not enough.
          A closer example: the 2nd Iraqi. Abrams and T-72 repeatedly (!)
          converged head-on. And uranium arrows confidently pierced the forehead
          T-72. True, not the newest "export" T-72, etc. But still ... fighting examples.
          OBPS is a terrible force. In Israel (for advertising purposes) they put 4 pieces of T-54 sideways. And the Merkava shell pierced 4 towers - 8 layers of armor! and flew on.
          1. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 10 July 2014 15: 58
            0
            Quote: voyaka uh
            OBPS is a terrible force. In Israel (for advertising purposes) they put 4 pieces of T-54 sideways. And the Merkava shell pierced 4 towers - 8 layers of armor! and flew on.


            You can wonder at what distance?
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 11 July 2014 00: 22
              +1
              It’s a shame to shoot from less than 1 km, but
              more than 2 km - the effectiveness of OBPS is already lost ...
              Probably 1 km. I repeat, it was an advertising test
              guns and shell, but with a real shot and a real slow motion.
              The sides of the T-54 tower are very "cardboard" - it's not a secret.
              But breaking through 8 walls of armor at intervals of 1.5 m each without
              changes in the course of the projectile - a convincing demonstrator of the power of the OBPS.
      5. Saburov
        Saburov 11 July 2014 00: 02
        -1
        I was at the comparative tests of the Arena and Drozd 2, active defense systems, in principle, do their job well, but in what conditions you are going to use it, it’s one thing when you are in the field and somewhere a grenade launcher is seated, and if the enemy is hammering with artillery, he uses aviation , everything boils and smokes, scraps of earth and stones, constant flare, fire of small arms and heavy machine guns, the KAZ's effectiveness is reduced to zero and it becomes just a ballast if you use it for counter-Pisan actions (counter-terrorism sky) it doesn’t make much sense, since any group of soldiers trained in the slightest degree can do this better than the tank and as a result its task is only to support fire from safe distances, in the second Chechen there were two 80s with Arena for testing, half of the ZB It worked nowhere, although the manufacturers claimed that it works selectively and does not respond to low-speed objects (birds, clods of land, etc.), the mine went off and the car door flew toward the tank, the airbags worked and so on for all kinds of crap another half. so its use is especially effective in local conflicts when the opposing side has only light anti-tank weapons, so the decision of the commission decided not to recommend serial production, and it costs a lot, and there are still many shortcomings, for this money you can get in touch to heels, so for large-scale military operations, the thing is useless, maybe with the development of electronics, selection of goals, you get something worthwhile.
  2. Professor
    Professor 10 July 2014 10: 24
    +3
    Article "plus", but why not a word about Abrams's urban kit?
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 10 July 2014 10: 59
      0
      remember professor cadres syrian t-72 and narrow city streets all side screens cuts off
      1. Professor
        Professor 10 July 2014 12: 32
        +1
        Quote: bmv04636
        remember professor cadres syrian t-72 and narrow city streets all side screens cuts off

        Normally, nothing flies. You just need to fix it more reliably. wink

        1. bmv04636
          bmv04636 10 July 2014 13: 00
          -2
          it’s necessary to fix it better, but when passing through narrow streets, all screens are torn off, I think the professor for the city will still have a better robot and a tank with an operator on the way will clear out.

          We are waiting for the professor of ground operations and entering מרכבה.
          1. jjj
            jjj 10 July 2014 18: 42
            -1
            In those streets along which the T-72 crawls, the "Merkava" simply will not fit
            1. Professor
              Professor 10 July 2014 20: 31
              +2
              Quote: jjj
              In those streets along which the T-72 crawls, the "Merkava" simply will not fit

              It will come down as a slogan. good
        2. cosmos111
          cosmos111 10 July 2014 13: 19
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          Normally, nothing flies. You just need to fix it more reliably.

          and use engineering armored vehicles .... IMR-3M only needs to be better booked ... and defensive weapons, 2-a, 3-and 12,7 machine guns just right ...
          1. Professor
            Professor 10 July 2014 13: 39
            +2
            Quote: cosmos111
            and use engineering armored vehicles ....

            Gold words. Let D-9 go forward as they usually do. By the way, D-9 is already with remote control.

  3. Shurale
    Shurale 10 July 2014 11: 03
    0
    One chemist told me that from improvised means - sold in any store, you can organize several types of "Molotov cocktails". One recipe interested me, it turns out a very sticky liquid mixture, and spontaneously igniting from high temperature, you throw such a bottle on the propulsion system, the mixture flows to the engine and ignites, when the fire extinguisher is triggered, the flame goes out, but the mixture itself is almost impossible to wash off with a directed stream of water - it's too sticky, after heating, the mixture ignites again. I think such a cocktail in a city would create decent problems for the enemy's equipment. Do not ask for a review - do not know.
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 10 July 2014 11: 07
      +2
      the fire extinguishing system also includes inert gases i.e. there is simply no air and no fire
      1. jjj
        jjj 10 July 2014 18: 44
        0
        Gases also run out. And spontaneous combustion occurs from high temperature. One way out - forced cooling
  4. Kars
    Kars 10 July 2014 11: 10
    +3
    It is necessary to increase the crew and the number of firing points of the tank. The upper / anti-aircraft gun must change the machine gun to a gun with a caliber of up to 50 mm, put on a machine gun mounted .. by Voroshilovsky .. to the stern.

    It would not hurt to introduce liquid propellant all the same - which, to the main advantage, is an increase in transportable ammunition, and greater safety (especially with two-component HMV), it will allow you to adjust the ammunition's initial speed in wide parameters and therefore their trajectories, and use the main gun as a flamethrower.
    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 10 July 2014 13: 12
      +3
      Kars .... specially, for you ... Chinese tanks cross the Russian-Chinese border to participate in the tank biathlon ... 07.07.2014/XNUMX/XNUMX ...

      1. Kars
        Kars 10 July 2014 14: 57
        +2
        Quote: cosmos111
        ars .... specifically,

        Was reading.
        second frustration.
        Apparently the Chinese do not respect the T-72B3 that put up their linear tank and not the latest.
  5. sandrmur76
    sandrmur76 10 July 2014 11: 10
    0
    Yes, the article is quite interesting good Dear readers, have you heard anything about armature? Where is the new tank? Or are these just words request At least see a photo recourse
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 10 July 2014 11: 15
      +1
      there is evidence of new armor; there is evidence that by 2018 a hybrid propulsion system (an electric diesel type of which was tested in the Crimea) will be received by a crew of two people and a 152 gun; well, it seems like they promise to make an unmanned vehicle on this base
      1. Kars
        Kars 10 July 2014 11: 40
        +2
        Quote: sandrmur76
        At least see a photo

        wait 9 May 2015 of the year - then it will become more or less clear.
  6. Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 10 July 2014 12: 16
    +2
    No defense systems that operate ex-post (i.e. after the start of a tank attack) can guarantee its protection.
    Only the prevention of attack, through detection with subsequent destruction, can save the tank.
    Cheap quadrocopters with telecontrol (on a separate BM or directly on the tank), disposable with explosives and a fragmentation jacket, or equipped with "shotgun" -type weapons.
    To protect the upper hemisphere, you can use the same quadrocopters, but in the performance with power and control by wire from the machine systems. Quadrocopter, like a kite on a rope, flies in the sector over BM checking the windows.
    1. bmv04636
      bmv04636 10 July 2014 12: 40
      0
      no quadrocopters will pull the reconciliation network and everything will be sure to buzz
      how about protecting quadrocopters from shrapnel and shrapnel and machine gun fire
      1. max702
        max702 10 July 2014 14: 51
        +1
        Quadrocopters are a priori cheaper than a tank, when we talk about defense, for some reason we forget that the resources on the attacking side are not endless, but they destroyed one quadric, but the firing point was identified, and therefore destroyed, do you think many who want to die in vain? The more sophisticated the defense becomes, the higher the requirements are for the attacker, for his training and equipment, and these are both material and temporary resources, for example, aviation and air defense, something else has become very high-tech and terribly expensive, plus it requires the highest level of staff training, which again takes a long time and expensive..
        1. bmv04636
          bmv04636 10 July 2014 15: 57
          0
          the bullet is probably cheaper than a quadrocopter
          1. Evgeny_Lev
            Evgeny_Lev 10 July 2014 16: 11
            +1
            You get into it for a start.
            Quadric, and so it is chatting like a guano in an ice hole, and if you program it on a Brownian motion, then stabilize the detection organs ...
    2. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 10 July 2014 14: 34
      0
      Quote: Evgeny_Lev
      No defense systems that operate ex-post (i.e. after the start of a tank attack) can guarantee its protection.


      So far they are coping, but in the short term their capabilities will no longer be enough.
      At least until new materials with enhanced protective properties appear.
      The developers of such materials already in the process of fantasy to the limit.

      Quote: Evgeny_Lev
      Only the prevention of attack, through detection with subsequent destruction, can save the tank.


      Many people from design bureaus developing new armored vehicles have long understood this.
      This is a more promising direction.

      At one time, knight-latniki also crushed the people (and also with wedges) until they made a good crossbow, which with its bolt began to pierce their armor right through.
      Thus, the illiterate and hastily trained in the militia peasant, sent well-trained and equipped, in tailor-made armor of the armor to his ancestors.
      For this, the knights fiercely hated crossbowmen and, when captured, scoffed at them as much as they could. However, as well as archers.
      In the same way, fiercely tankers hate enemy rocket launchers and ATGM operators (they don't quietly digest their own), just like fiercely hate pilots of MANPADS and anti-aircraft gunners in general.

      Therefore, to preventively neutralize the threat of defeat, has already become task No. 1, for design engineers of armored vehicles around the world.
  7. Dimon-chik-79
    Dimon-chik-79 10 July 2014 13: 54
    +3
    During the hostilities in Georgia in 2008, most of the BMP of the Russian army was outdated ... although some T-62s had lattice armor installed on the sides of the tower to protect against RPGs ... Russia developed and tested a number of defense systems, for example, Arena KBP and Drozd-2 from KBM, but they, apparently, did not enter the arsenal of the Russian army.
    In short, one sadness and sadness! One hope, in the spring of the 15th "Armata" show will take place. True, if some kind of turmoil begins with what we will fight, we will weld the gratings from the beds to the T-62 ?! In Moscow, there are already more cars costing a tank than the tanks themselves in the army, and we still have not only a new car, T-72s cannot really be modernized. But at exhibitions, yes, it is expensive for sale ...
  8. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 10 July 2014 15: 58
    0
    Maybe a little off topic. The Chinese went to us to participate in the biathlon and have already crossed the border. Will participate on type 96 G. It will be interesting since this tank is tracing paper from the 72nd.
  9. gregor6549
    gregor6549 10 July 2014 16: 16
    +2
    Tank weapon of the battlefield. He has nothing to do in the city. And shoot it there is relatively easy, do not upgrade, do not upgrade. For urban battles, other means are needed, capable of moving in three dimensions (something like an ashtray) and cleaning first of all the upper levels of buildings and structures, roofs, etc. And if you make tanks with equal strength armor and other protection in all directions, then nothing but German Mouse Mouse during WWII will not work. But this elephant’s for a long time in urban conditions will not live
    1. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 10 July 2014 16: 35
      0
      Quote: gregor6549
      Tank weapon of the battlefield.


      You are not quite right.

      Quote: gregor6549
      He has nothing to do in the city. Yes, and shoot it there is relatively easy


      But what about the fire cover of the assault groups in our points?
      There are approximately 521 million-plus cities in the world, not counting others.
      Air. and art. strikes are not always in battle conditions in US points bring the desired result, and sometimes even the opposite (fire in their own way).
      That is why they began to develop "Armata", a heavy tracked chassis of a new generation, which can be used to install various weapons and protection systems.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 10 July 2014 17: 16
      +3
      Controversial.
      Israel once again has successful experience with tanks
      in cities. Without losing a single one: storming Palestinian cities (2002?)
      and Gaza 2008. Therefore, now WITHOUT tanks in the city - no, no.
      Therefore, at Merkava-4, the armor of the "tortoise shell" - specially "for the city" (All losses in Lebanon - open area) were changed.
      What is is not perfect. Need a machine-gun station on the tower for firing from inside the tank 360 degrees and up. And the person who serves her.
      1. gregor6549
        gregor6549 10 July 2014 18: 39
        +2
        Of course, it’s debatable, but I don’t pretend to be the truth, but only express my opinion.
        Israel’s experience is certainly rich, but this does not mean that it is applicable to all theater operations. Moreover, in Gaza, the Merkavs had nothing to oppose. Yes, and the infantry cover was worthy of Merkav.
        My opinion is based on the fact that the tank, whatever one may say, has very limited sectors of view and shooting in the elevation plane, and it is from above that the tank is in greatest danger in the city. And in order to turn the tower in the right direction it takes quite a long time. Considering the fact that all the plans of the modernization under consideration provide for a significant increase in the armor protection of the tank from damage from above, this weight will increase even more, as will the reaction time. And modern anti-tank systems operating on the principle of "fire and forget" may not provide the required time. Moreover, it is necessary to take into account not only portable ATGMs, but also those that are installed on helicopters, UAVs, which, in comparison with a tank, have much greater freedom of maneuver, especially in dense urban and multi-storey buildings. Shot from the corner and washed away. And this can only be opposed by specialized means with no less freedom of maneuver. For example, a UAV with a combined (remote and autonomous control system, capable of not only flying but also driving / crawling, and equipped with a set of sensors and weapons optimized for combat in a city. Modern technologies allow creating such universal robots without any problems. His business is breakthroughs in enemy defenses, deep raids on the rear, support for infantry in the field, etc. In this use of tanks, Israel has managed to show itself much better than using the Merkavs in the Gaza Strip. In addition, Israel often sets its Merkavs unbearable tasks for inflicting targeted strikes at terrorists hiding behind women and children. And this experience is more than a specific
  10. AK-74M
    AK-74M 11 July 2014 11: 39
    0
    With such upgrades, foreign tanks become so large and heavy that you are simply amazed!
  11. Vixen
    Vixen 12 July 2014 00: 37
    0
    Is Canada fighting somewhere, or is it going to?