T-90MS not yet satisfied with the General Staff

The latest development of the Russian military industry - T-90S, which was to become the main combat a tank, the other day was inspected by Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. It was also provided to the general public in Nizhny Tagil, where the exhibition was held. And this tank caused a lot of questions from the leadership of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation.

Nikolay Makarov, chief of the general staff of the RF Armed Forces, reported this. He also said that a very high-quality tank turret completely suits the military. Makarov said that the tower draws considerable respect from domestic experts - it is not only not inferior to the best analogues in the whole world, but also surpasses them in some characteristics. However, Makarov believes that the tank system itself and some nodes have flaws. He argues that in general T-90C has a lot of flaws that are to be fixed in the near future. That is what all development work will be directed to.

It should be recalled that last week Vladimir Putin visited armory exhibition, which took place in Nizhny Tagil, where he got acquainted with the T-90S. Climbing into the tower, he carefully studied the controls of the tank. Representatives of the Uralvagonzavod, on which the tank is manufactured, informed the prime minister that the armament of the tank is guided missiles capable of hitting the enemy at a distance of five kilometers. The mass of the T-90S tank is 46,5 tons. At the same time, engine power is a thousand horsepower. The crew is three people. On the highway, he can reach speeds of up to 60 kilometers per hour. The tank is equipped with a 125 mm smoothbore gun. It is capable of firing rockets and shells at a distance of up to five kilometers. Guidance missiles carried a laser sight. The tank is also equipped with a night thermal imaging sight. In addition to the main armament, the tank is equipped with a 7,62 mm machine gun coaxial with a cannon, as well as a 12,7 mm anti-aircraft machine gun mounted on the turret. Universal dynamic protection reliably protects the tank and its crew. The complex of optoelectronic suppression perfectly complements this protection. For the comfort of the crew, the hull of the tank is equipped with air conditioning.

It should be recalled that representatives of the Ministry of Defense have already criticized modern Russian armored vehicles. So, Alexander Postnikov, commander-in-chief of the Russian armed forces, said that modern armored vehicles in Russia are noticeably inferior in terms of characteristics to their counterparts, which are used by NATO countries. Colonel-General A.Postnikov reported that the modern T-90 tank is a modification of the T-72, and its value is 118 million rubles. He believes that three Leopards could be bought with this money.

However, the Minister of Defense Serdyukov said that the Russian army would not buy foreign equipment.

Comments

[Phoenixl]

And since when did they begin to put HFM on export cars?
And why did these missiles become the main weapon of the tank?

[SOLDIERru]

Of course, the T-90S is a fully operational tank. But at the same time, it is definitely far from the best, and even expensive. Remove the external tinsel from the T-90 (dynamic armor is generally a double-edged sword) and you will not distinguish it from the T-72. And if you recall how much time it is given as a novelty, it generally becomes sad.
PS I want to remind you that tank production was phased out at UVZ. Only the repair shop is functioning

[Joker]

Quote: SOLDIERru

But at the same time, it is definitely far from the best, and even expensive.

- I completely agree with the assessment, the assessment is far from the best, and I can’t get past the expensive one, but what is the comparison with?

In addition, do not forget that the main component of the price of a modern tank is electronics, somewhere I read a comparison of the cost of the T-80B and T-80U, with a similar design as a whole, the version “U” for example is more expensive than version “B” at about 2,5 -35 times, by the way.

[Joker]

A typo, I do not agree with the assessment at all

[inviter3]

Fuck you dear editor prostsysh what kind of tank are you talking about!? T-90s is an export version, and here the Russian army is here!? At the exhibition with a new tower was shown T-90AM! And what kind of 12.7mm machine gun on the tower is it talking about if it has the usual 7.62mm!? What tank are you writing about! ????????????????????????

[esso]

Today, it surpasses all tanks in most respects. But it’s not the T-90MS. It’s the t-90AM. The first t-90 (developed at the end of the 80th.) Then the t-90C for export tank modified for India. (For the Russian army it goes like the T-90A). Then the T-90AM appears.
I agree that the tank is not cheap, but cheaper than everyone else. There are no complaints about the tower. I’m certainly not an expert. But the video from the landfill. The undercarriage of the tank needs refinement. The tank rides while it rattles and rattles. The old T-80 is quieter. I read that the T-90 is, in principle, a hybrid of the T-80 and T-72. The current with the chassis that has not been finalized, I guess. The chassis from the T-80 is still there. It has not been changed. It’s clear to the fool a new load on the chassis. And Dear Author, do not write the old characteristics of the tank. Tired. There is an engine 1250l.s speed on the highway 70km per hour. Weight about 48 tons. Somewhere I saw about Ukrainian diesel engines. They say better than Russian. Can be put on t -90am and check.

[Joker]

Quote: Esso

I read that the t-90 is, in principle, a hybrid of the t-80 and t-72.

T-90 is T-72B + FCS T-80U, hodovka and all the rest of the hardware is native. And shaking is a "trademark" of his walker, but strong.

[MKALEKSEY]

It would be nice to replace the engine. The same Leopard has an MTU engine of 1500 hp, while ours only has 1000, while ours "eats" more.

[esso]

On the new 1250 hp it eats less at what the developers say. But the Ukrainian t-84 engine already has 1200 hp. It would not be bad to test the new engines of the Kharkov plant on the new t-90am.

[Bogatir]

There is no at 1250.

[Bad_gr]

The engine on the T-90AM is 1130 horses. The Ukrainian two-stroke engine has 1200 hp, but it retains this power in a very narrow speed range. The momentum has fallen - and there is no power, like the engine of a sports car.
The four-stroke T-90 does not have this drawback, it pulls in a wide speed range, which is important for the tank.
On the websites of manufacturers take a look at the guaranteed engine life of engines. In a two-stroke, it is half as much.
By the way, there is also a V-99 engine - it’s 1200hp, but they don’t put it on tanks yet (the engine is in the same dimensions as the V-92)

[Bogatir]

With an output gearbox and power take-off for a cooling drive - not 1000, but less than 850.

[Vyalik]

I think that the MO should be given the performance characteristics of the tanks that they need, and not wait for the plant to build the tank, and then say that it is not needed. In addition, you need to decide on the concept of using cars. And to say that the leopard is better than the T-90C is very arguably, especially on the battlefield, they did not meet, as far as I know.

[svvaulsh]

Missiles are guided by a laser beam, the tank has an optoelectronic suppression system. So if such suppression systems have tanks of a probable enemy, will missiles be useless and the advantage in the firing range is leveled? Specialists, I'm waiting for clarification.

[esso]

Yes, there is such equipment. Smoke grenades are fired. The beam is scattered and the missile cannot be aimed at the target. There is equipment that monitors the irradiation of the tank. Such systems are just starting to be implemented on Western tanks. They are on the latest modifications.
There is passive missile guidance; the guidance system recognizes the infrared tracer of the flying missile and adjusts its flight in accordance with the chosen target. In this case, no irradiation of the target occurs.
On the t-90 there is a Shtora-1 complex. It creates flare and a small rocket tracer is not visible for the missile guidance system. Western tanks do not have such equipment.

[svvaulsh]

Judging by the article, we are talking about an active guidance system. Although, maybe the inaccuracy of the author?

[kagorta]

Missiles guided by the tracer in the West will not be used against us, as they are obsolete.

[esso]

For that we will be against them!

[viktor_ui]

Esso - in connection with conversations about the use of aerosols and irradiation systems for the seeker of a rocket such as a curtain ... Yesho amers in Vietnam, when they used Shriki against radar systems and, having met relatively similar opposition, found a way out in the fact that with the loss (illumination) of the target GOS, the carrier itself continued rectilinear motion along the residual vector. I think that this system should certainly be implemented ...
And then one gets the impression that it’s enough to puff like an aerosol or to shine with a crap, and the flying gift will start rushing from side to side or like a candle it will go into milk (I’ll exaggerate).

[kagorta]

The laser beam, as far as I know, is interrupted by an aerosol cloud, and this is a curtain-mounting system, not an optoelectronic suppression system, which is designed to suppress missiles with a semi-automatic guidance system.

[svvaulsh]

Can't you blindfold an optical missile? There are IR spotlights on the same T-90.

[esso]

They create flare. And missiles go astray. In principle, this can be called optical blinding.

[kagorta]

You just somehow jumped from one to another. I shared it, since the curtain has both an optoelectronic suppression station (SOEP) TSHU-1 and an aerosol curtain setting system (SPZ). SOEP is a source of modulated IR radiation with parameters close to the parameters of ATGM tracers such as "Dragon", TOW, NOT, "Milan" (outdated complexes in my opinion). Acting on the infrared receiver of the semi-automatic ATGM guidance system, it disrupts the missile guidance (as you said, it flashes). The SPZ, designed to thwart attacks from missiles such as Maverick, Helfire, and the Copperhead 155mm artillery projectile, reacts to laser radiation. The received signal is processed at high speed by the control unit, and the direction to the source of quantum radiation is determined.
The system automatically determines the optimal launcher, generates an electrical signal proportional to the angle to which the turret of the tank with grenade launchers should be turned, and issues a command to shoot a grenade, which forms an aerosol curtain at a distance of 55 m three seconds after the grenade is fired. EOS operates only in automatic mode, and SDR - in automatic, semi-automatic and manual. Field tests of Shtora-1 confirmed the high efficiency of the complex: the probability of hitting a tank by missiles with semi-automatic command guidance is reduced by 3 times, by missiles with semi-active laser homing - by 4 times, and by corrected artillery shells - by 1,5 times. The complex is capable of providing countermeasures against several missiles simultaneously attacking a tank from different directions. Which suggests that Shtora is outdated against modern missiles and it is urgent to develop a new KAZ (the text was copied in the Internet and modified).

[svvaulsh]

Actually, I asked to answer the question:

Quote: svvaulsh

if such suppression systems have tanks of a probable enemy, will the missiles be useless and the advantage in the firing range is leveled?

and the comment branch went a bit into the technical area.

[kagorta]

I also think so that it is leveled. Yes, I do not really believe in this "long arm", since where can I find a platform in Europe, so that the range of a shot on it was from 5 to 3 km. And the Chinese countermeasures will also spoil the gunner's sight.

[Tyumen]

Such distances are only in Russia:)

[Professor]

Against Javelin and Spike, only KAZ and no curtain or other flare can help.

[ZEBRASH]

However, the Minister of Defense Serdyukov said that the Russian army would not buy foreign equipment.

Look who's Talking

[esso]

Well, he didn’t lie. Iveco was now Lynx. Now it’s the child of the Russian defense industry. Completely copied from the Italian Iveco. They are trying to assemble it in Russia. KAMAZ assembled an experimental series of 10 cars. And in the future completed cooperation on this issue. Lynx cars will not be assembled in KAMAZ.

[Rustam]

Lynx cars will not be assembled in KAMAZ.
______________
will be collected in Voronezh



____________________________
It would be nice to replace the engine. The same Leopard has an MTU engine of 1500 hp, and ours only has 1000, while our "eats" more
____________________________________
not only eats but also its motor resource is three times less !!! Ukrainians put on their BTR-3e for Thailand Mercedes MTU-just a fairy tale-after which the Thai army ordered another 200 units !!!!!



I think that the MO should be given the performance characteristics of the tanks that they need, and not wait for the plant to build the tank,
______________________________
say the plant ???? yes uralvagonzavod give free rein they would still cram the t-90a without modifications at an unbelievable price
if the Ministry of Defense did not require in 2009, (but only then how much dirt was poured into the media on Popovkin who said that levers instead of the helm and the absence of an automatic box is a stone age) we still had a tank with levers like a tractor etc

[AleksUkr]

Something I can not believe.

[kagorta]

The laser beam, as far as I know, is interrupted by an aerosol cloud, and this is a curtain-mounting system, not an optoelectronic suppression system, which is designed to suppress missiles with a semi-automatic guidance system.

[ZEBRASH]

All the same, it’s not our development, and you need to buy components over the hill.

[AleksUkr]

We discuss the pros and cons. Nobody cares about our proposals. Rate it better: "Vladimir Putin got acquainted with the T-90S. Climbing into the tower, he carefully studied the control elements of the tank." Is the tank so easy to control that you can learn in a few minutes? Or does he have a special talent? Be proud of the talents of our beloved leader EdRo.

[zczczc]

So he is a fan of climbing everywhere - from a whaling plant to planes and tanks. This is normal, especially if after hours.

I would also love to climb the tank. And if they had given me a taxi, I would have driven around the field. And if they let me shoot ... :)))

[Vyalik]

Most likely, Putin was shown not the control of the tank, but the mechanism of turning the turret. And the korns, as always, heard the ringing, but not there. It seems to me that first we need to decide what kind of technical characteristics of the tanks you need to have, and then order them. And it will be like before war. They ordered a bunch of wheeled and high-speed tanks, and then did not know what to do and where to use them. Tanks do not always move on roads. Tukhachevsky in my opinion had no idea what to do with these tanks. And the fact that the tanks shoot in a jump is in my opinion the view is beautiful. And what is the likelihood of hitting when shooting in a jump?

[Tyumen]

Well, if Putin shoots. . . :)

[datur]

Vyalik,
.Tukhachevsky in my opinion had no idea what to do with these tanks. And the fact that tanks shoot in a jump is beautiful in my opinion. And what is the probability of getting shot in a jump? --- what did he know as he was preparing for war at the European theater . and then the bourgeoisie had roads and not directions. yes and BT- were not so bad tanks, and ESPECIALLY the latest models.

[Joker]

Quote: datur

. And it will be like before the war. They ordered a bunch of wheeled and high-speed tanks, and then they did not know what to do and where to use them.

- before the war were ordered:
KV-1; KV-2; T-34; T-50;

[serezhafedotow]

Makarov’s tower of tanks was more than praised. He admired her. Most likely he did not like the time of replacing the engine, which remained the same.

[PSih2097]

Once the money is saved from the Ministry of Defense, let them buy MBT from all countries producing 2-3 pieces each, one tank for a range for firing RPGs, artillery and artillery, and another for analysis at a research institute for comparison with our tank and finding new solutions.

[Rustam]

WHICH IDIOT WILL SELL SINGLE INSTANCES (this is Russia only - in 1993 they sent one T-80U to England and one BMP-3 and Tunguska, along with ammunition), after which she was immediately sent from England to the USA for testing

[PSih2097]

There are many idiots, and they have a price.

[Vyalik]

datur

Generals are always preparing for the past wars. The tanks that Tukhachevsky ordered for his tank corps amazes at their combat senselessness, it seems that this commander never imagined himself either in a tank or in battle, and the greatest thing his military imagination is capable of is - These are exercises and parades. And the point is in the very meaning of these tanks - for what combat use did he order them? Meanwhile, no matter how strong the tanks are, they are only a means of strengthening the infantry, since only that territory is considered conquered, on which the foot of the infantryman has stepped. Why were high-speed tanks needed if no high-speed support vehicles were built for them? There are not many tanks without infantry. The last, the most modern, modification called BT-7M (700 cars), was produced in 1939-1940, its weight was 14t, engine power 400hp, armor 20mm forehead and 13mm side, speed on tracks 50km on wheels 70km. And the Czech tank 38 (t), produced by the Czechs for the Germans with a weight of 9,7 tons, engine power 125 hp, armor 50 forehead, 30 sides and speed on tracks of 40 km, our light tank BT-7M is almost 50% heavier than a German light tank and engine has 4 times more power, but the armor ... 2,5 times thinner! At the same time, 38 (t) has a speed that is quite acceptable for a tank. But a 4 times more powerful engine is a many times greater cost of all mechanisms, their weight, complexity, fuel consumption. And all for what? In the name of the figure "70 km / h on wheels"? Which no one needed and never needed. If only for Operation "Thunderstorm", and after all it was necessary to break through not friendly countries, and the Czechs and Poles, oddly enough, had anti-tank guns, and with a small thickness of armor losses of tanks and, most importantly, tankers. This is what I need, that you need to clearly understand what tanks are needed and which ones. And then order. If for general engagement, then you need one, if for action in mountainous or rough terrain, then others. Although in my opinion tank battles are a thing of the past. Of course, if there are no other military branches besides tanks. Sorry, if not a lot of messy wrote. You can't blame the tank manufacturers that the tanks are not like that, you need to clearly imagine "WHAT IS NECESSARY WITH WHAT CHARACTERISTICS?

[Joker]

Quote: Wyalik

engine power 400l.s

- 500hp - there were diesel B2, another, less common name BT-8.

Quote: Wyalik

Why were high-speed tanks needed if no high-speed support vehicles were built for them?

- I disagree, the high-speed tanker will eat more fuel itself + the high cost of production and maintenance.

Quote: Wyalik

A Czech tank 38 (t) produced by Czechs for Germans with a weight of 9,7 tons engine power 125l.s. armor 50 forehead, 30 side

- This is data for later versions, at first the frontal armor was about 30 mm.

The leadership in the USSR came to understand this problem much earlier than the 41st. The development of anti-tank armor tanks was started, by the way the T-46 (experimental vehicle) is approximately equal to the t-38 with more armor. As a result, we came to KV-1 (heavy breakthrough), T-34 (medium "maneuverable") and T-50 (light infantry support). So I think it is wrong to talk about the lack of understanding of the top management of this problem. I hope you will not argue that the T-50 is much better than the t-38 (we take a modification of the beginning of the war without modifications)?

The T-50 is: a commander relieved of the duties of a gunner, 37 mm tilt armor, wide tracks, a more advanced torsion bar suspension, an engine of 250 hp (diesel). The guns are approximately equal in armor penetration despite the larger caliber of the T-50, 45 versus 37, but the high-explosive fragmentation effect is higher. Well, the fact that they released them a little and with the start of the war production was curtailed - so the war interfered, all efforts were concentrated on mastering the production of the T-34.

[Joker]

PS

400л.с. это М-5/17, БТ-2/5/7/7А

The speed of BT-7M / 8 on a diesel engine due to the higher power of 60 and 80 km / h, respectively + increased range.

[Vyalik]

Support vehicles are not only tankers, but also repair ones, and transportation of ammunition and kitchen, and of course mother infantry also needs to be transported for something. I honestly didn’t understand when I first heard the concept of irretrievable losses, but what happens And then I realized that the equipment could be restored, and when I read the percentage of restoration of the tanks the Germans were struck. It is easier for us to build a new tank, and not to restore the wrecked one. As far as I know, our tanks had very low motorship and very often losses from damage there were more combat losses.

[Joker]

Quote: Wyalik

Support vehicles are not only tankers, but also repair vehicles, and the supply of ammunition and kitchen, and of course Mother Infantry also needs to be transported for something.

- An example would be for a tanker but applicable to everyone else, a balance is needed.

Quote: Wyalik

, and when I read the percentage of tank restoration, the Germans were amazed.

Quote: Wyalik

It’s easier for us to build a new tank, rather than restore a damaged one.

- if we are talking about the beginning of the war, it must be borne in mind that the wrecked German tanks remained on their territory and they could restore them, while ours accordingly remained with the enemy + many cars were worn out. If you take from about the middle of the 42nd year and beyond, the percentage of recovery of our machines was very high.

Quote: Wyalik

.As far as I know, our tanks had very low moto-resource and very often losses from breakdowns were more than combat losses.

- I would not be so categorical. By the standards of wartime, the engine life was sufficient, as regards breakdowns in general, at the beginning of the war the T-34 and KV-1 were new machines and suffered from childhood diseases, which were later fixed. As for major damage in comparison with combat losses, it is more likely to the German menagerie (Panther, Tiger, Royal Tiger, Ferdinand / Elephant and vehicles based on them).

[Vyalik]

Joker,
As for major damage in comparison with combat losses, it is more likely to the German menagerie (Panther, Tiger, Royal Tiger, Ferdinand / Elephant and vehicles based on them).

As far as I remember, the whole "menagerie" was also produced since 1942. And they had the same problems as our tanks. And about the motor resource, if we consider 100-200 hours a great resource, this is in my nonsense. In general, I did not write about this , but about what before ordering tanks you need to imagine what you want from them and what characteristics. There can be no tanks with absolute protection. Of course, making tanks for the sake of what might not be worth doing. But the army must clearly say which ones. she makes demands on the machines and then ask. And when the bigwigs from the army only take care of their pockets without thinking, then it turns out to be a BARDAK. You can make tanks that cannot be sent into battle. We must also think about those tankers who will go to And the PARMs in our army were and the equipment was restored, but if we compare with the Germans: we did not even have tractors to pull tanks from the battlefield, or do you think that tractors of the "Komsomolets" type are tank tractors?

[Joker]

We had a tractor tractor, in my opinion Kirovets.

Motor resource 100-150 until about the beginning of 42 years. By the 43rd, about 300-500 (I don't remember exactly). For a "war tank" is quite. I'm not saying that this is ice, but enough. And I think I wrote that at the beginning of the war, the cars were damp and needed fine-tuning.

About the fact that I don’t know what they want, I did not quite understand. If about the current leadership, I fully support it, if it is about the development of tanks in the period preceding the Second World War, then I advise you to read thematic literature on the development of those years.

[Joker]

Kirovets after the war, Voroshilovets truck called.

[Vyalik]

I wrote about the current leadership and that it is necessary to imagine what to order tanks for, and not to blame Uralvagonzavod for the fact that their tanks are the modernization of the T-72. And I wrote about the beginning of the war as an example when Tukhachevsky ordered tanks for tank corps, which then practically all became scrap metal. I wrote a mistake about the "Komsomolets", of course it was a "Voroshilovite" I beg your pardon. My friend's father fought in the tank corps rembat, he said that there were 5 tractors for the whole rembat, and they were in order to pull out tanks from the battlefields used crazy T-34s. And as an example, he cited the organization of the German Rembat, we were simply astonished. Believe me, I do not praise the Germans, but we must learn from the enemies.

[Captain]

T-90MS: official press release
http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2011/09/90_7886.html

[rumpeljschtizhen]

maybe someone didn’t see what the commander’s place looks like inside
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/putin091311/s_p29_RTR2R05N.jpg

[Motherland]

Led by the Furniture Worker, the Ministry of Defense will continue to produce the best equipment that has no analogues in the world, which they will not order even if they donate it

[frame5]

In principle, they can be understood. The T-72 modernization resource has been practically exhausted, a new machine is needed, the General Staff understands this, but for manufacturers it is much more profitable to rivet junk and not change the production base.

[Joker]

However, Makarov believes that the tank system itself and some components have flaws. He claims that in general the T-90S has many shortcomings that need to be addressed in the near future. This is exactly what all development work will be directed at.

Reflected at leisure. We can talk about the following points, I will make a reservation that I am a fan of the domestic BTT, and this is a brief analysis of the nuances that can and should be fixed:

- shaking suspension inherited from the T-72. "Cured" by the introduction of electronically controlled variable stiffness shock absorbers.

- it is possible to replace the "B" series engines with the next generation engine. I see 2 options, this is a Ukrainian boxer and a promising X-shaped engine installed on object 187. Desired power 1200 - 1500hp .. It is also possible with an electric transmission based on its advantages - lower fuel consumption and, as a result, a greater range.

- the presence of a weakened zone in the area of ​​the driver’s landing. Perhaps the use of VLD from the late version of the object 187.

- protection of the MTO roof is necessary at the level of protection of the roof of the tower, not always necessary, but the option of installing armor should be (for actions in urban areas). I don’t see the solution, if there are ideas, I invite you to a dialogue.

- and to a controlled machine gun an anti-personnel grenade launcher and the ability to control it with an operator-gunner, and possibly a fur. by water.

- I would add such a commonplace as the phone at the stern to communicate with the infantry.

- if in general to a tank, it would be nice to have an active defense system with the possibility of hitting ammunition attacking from above.

- due to the lack of a heavy machine gun and in theory fig youI suggest installing a needle system. A variant of the stalker type is possible.

[rumpeljschtizhen]

and to a controlled machine gun an anti-personnel grenade launcher and the ability to control it with an operator-gunner, and possibly a fur. by water.

I agree, but the tower on the tower will turn out a controlled complex like Flurry

[forma2]

Beautifully said, wonderful numbers, you can’t say anything.
But for those who have forgotten, a tank (with its crew) is called upon to break into the hell of a theater of war, change the course of events on it and incline what is happening to their advantage.
So he must:
do not burn in fire
do not drown in water
withstand mines, grenades, ATGM, shells, guided missiles from various carriers (helicopter, plane, rocket launcher, guns, multiple launch rocket systems and other crap).
Before taking it into service, it should be well tested: firing into it from modern models of existing and developed weapons. It’s necessary to connect intelligence, get it to steal from Afghanistan, Iraq, where these Yankees are fighting weapons and to test the vaunted T-90S. It is necessary to compare with real weapons and not by hypothetical standards. If it stands then it’s to be adopted.
I think that the boys (crew) that will manage them will only be happy with such highest requirements.

[Yves762]

"So he must: ..." - I agree with one of the above comments: first of all, it is worth determining his field of activity in modern combat / theater of operations / strategic planning. And only then formulate and issue those assignments. Another point is that our Ministry of Defense (apparently obeying general trends) wants to work according to the American method: to announce a competition; issue a task, and let those who wish to cooperate prepare projects / prototypes at their own expense and submit to the competition, where he will choose what type he needs. The problem at the moment is the lack of free resources from our producer, who is already strangled by "democratic power" and "market economy".