Military Review

The newest Chinese tank ZTZ-99A2 against the Russian T-90MS: which is better?

117
At a military parade in Beijing dedicated to the 70th anniversary of the Victory in World War II, the armed forces of China will present their latest tank, known as the ZTZ-99A2. For the first time, information that Chinese engineers are working on a deep modernization of their main combat tank ZTZ-99, appeared back in 2007. Actually, there was no information. Just according to the old Chinese tradition, the leak of one single photograph was organized, on which this combat vehicle was depicted. True, as it now turns out, most of the equipment on it was in the form of layouts.


Then, in order to keep the interest in the car unabated, the Chinese military several times organized leaks of photographic materials. From them it was possible to understand that the tank is being actively tested. It was expected that the upgraded ZTZ-99 will demonstrate 1 on October 2009, when China celebrated 60 on the anniversary of the founding of the people's republic. But, to the chagrin of military experts, the newest tank did not appear.

The newest Chinese tank ZTZ-99A2 against the Russian T-90MS: which is better?

ZTZ-99A2


T-90MS

Deliveries of new tanks began, apparently, in the summer of 2007. Then for the first time a whole train was noticed. As it became known later, the elite 112-I mechanized division of the 38-th army of the Beijing military district became one of the units where these combat vehicles were sent in the first place.

In the 2014 year, these previously secret tanks were demonstrated at the exercises of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization "2014 Peace Mission" at the training ground in the autonomous region of Inner Mongolia, China. The technique was introduced into the training battles of the above-mentioned 112-th mechanized division.

As is usually the case with the Chinese, there is practically no official data on the ZTZ-99A2, it is known that almost all of its design was modified on the new tank. Radical refinement has undergone the tower. The machine has received more powerful multi-layered armor. It is believed that the applied dynamic protection is capable of much more effectively reducing the effect of tandem warheads of anti-tank missiles. In addition, the “reactive armor” is installed more rationally, the uncovered zones on the tower and on the hull are much smaller.





The rapid development of Chinese electronics affected the quality of the sights, they were also refined, the thermal imaging channel appeared in the commander's panoramic sight. The laser complex of active countermeasures was also significantly upgraded. Chinese designers had to improve the characteristics of mobility and firepower.

The gun of the tank remained the same: it is a clone of the Soviet 125-mm gun, although there were reports of the development of 140-mm guns.

The engine was used 1500-strong diesel, however, given that the tank "got better", according to some sources, up to 58 tons, the mobility characteristics remained at the level of foreign cars of the third generation. The maximum speed is estimated at 70-75 kilometers per hour.

The tank has an information management system, new means of communication and navigation.

If to compare the newest Chinese tank with the Russian T-90MS, then, according to the available data, both cars are about equivalent. For example, if we talk about the characteristics of protection, the machine from the Middle Kingdom is very weak, in contrast to Nizhny Tagil, covered from the sides. To understand this, just look at the photo. Apparently, the Chinese designers very much hope for the capabilities of the laser complex of active counteraction, but he has a lot of restrictions in work, and he cannot fight with sub-caliber ammunition.

According to military experts, the capabilities of sighting systems in tanks, at least, are equivalent. Nothing new, superior sight "Pine-U" was created. True, the Russian car still has an understudy-sight, which the Chinese do not have. Also on the T-90MS mounted video cameras that allow for a circular review of the area. ZTZ-99A2 is not yet equipped with such a system. The Chinese do not have remote-controlled machine gun installations. Moreover, such a system is present on the export tank VT-4. Probably, it is still “raw”, and therefore it was not put on a PLA machine.

The armament of the tanks is also about the same: modifications of the Soviet 2А46. The Chinese have repeatedly stated the gigantic success in the development and production of new projectiles, but even Western experts are skeptical of such information. Their ammunition is approximately Russian. The same applies to guided weapons: the Chinese have bought from Russia a license for the ATNG 9М119 “Reflex”.

According to some information, the version of the upgraded T-90 tank can have a completely new gun, the 2-82, similar to the Armata standing on the T-14, then our tank will get a significant lead in firepower.

Many are surprised by the significantly increased mass of the Chinese tank. It's all about the not quite rationally designed engine-transmission compartment (MTO), where you had to implant an engine that is much larger than the Russian B-92С2F. And, unlike the Chelyabinsk engine, the engine is still placed along the hull, as in Western tanks. As a result, it turned out to be disproportionately long and weighted. True, there is one advantage: the power unit and transmission are made in the form of a monoblock, which greatly facilitates the replacement.

Judging by official data, the Chinese tank surpasses the Russian one in maximum speed. But, according to some data, the superiority of ZTZ-99A2 is minimal, since the machines have almost the same power density. And, there were reports that at the T-90MS test sites it was easy to accelerate to 70 kilometers per hour.

True, in contrast to the tank from Nizhny Tagil, the Chinese car is being mass-produced, while we still think whether it is worth buying the upgraded T-90, waiting for the appearance of “Armata” in the troops.
Originator:
http://vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-13245.htm
117 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 29 August 2015 06: 39 New
    +15
    The Chinese have repeatedly declared gigantic successes in the development and release of new shells, but even Western experts are skeptical of such information


    And what, besides the “Western experts”, are there no others?

    These "experts" always blow in one pipe, and always by order.
    And from their bell tower, there is nothing better than Western models, and never will be.
    This is the same part of the policy of meritosco, and others like them.
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 29 August 2015 07: 39 New
      +21
      Quote: aszzz888
      And what, besides the “Western experts”, are there no others?

      These "experts" always blow in one pipe, and always by order.

      The only objective "examination" of tanks in history is the Kursk Bulge. Everything else is officially called the "TTX comparison", and unofficially - "who is stronger - a whale or an elephant."

      How to compare tanks, even if they are tested at different training ranges - each on its own? And not in combat conditions. And the crew are test specialists.

      Crap all these comparisons. Let it be argued that it is better - MP-40 or PPSh. The 1945th year "examination" was carried out ...
      1. Tanais
        Tanais 29 August 2015 09: 58 New
        +3
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        The only objective "examination" of tanks in history is the Kursk Bulge. Everything else is officially called the "TTX comparison", and unofficially - "who is stronger - a whale or an elephant."


        And with that in mind: http://topwar.ru/81279-otkazavshis-ot-zakupok-tankov-t-90a-rossiyskie-voennye-so
        vershili-bolshuyu-oshibku.html
        What are we discussing at all?
        1. garrikz
          garrikz 29 August 2015 11: 24 New
          +10
          Actually, the article said about the T-90A. Since then, a lot has changed in the T-90. Modification AM, MS - this is almost a new tank. That's right and they do that they don’t buy it yet, but they manage with the T-72 modification: the same gun, the case and the tower are the same. set new sights and other mounted ...
          Germany Leopard 2 30 years to modernize ...
          "Armata" will still replace the existing equipment.
          But before it, neither China, nor Europe, nor the United States can jump.
          1. Sailor
            Sailor 29 August 2015 23: 30 New
            +6
            I do not agree with you, the army needs the T-90AM, even if it is a transition model on the way to the T-14, the Armata is expensive and it is still unknown whether it will be purchased in those volumes (2300) or whether the T-72B3 will be limited (God forbid) , and the Chinese make their best tank in series and not at 10 units per year, and this is alarming.
      2. yehat
        yehat 29 August 2015 10: 00 New
        +8
        you forgot something - each country creates a tank for its conditions.
        how to evaluate a strong tank or not, if many of them are specialized ???
        Israeli carrots for urban fighting, Americans for fighting in open areas, German for Europe with woodland, Japanese tanks are easier to armor, but not because they are diby, but because the tanks are adapted for mountainous terrain, they have additional tilt systems. Chinese tanks are also adapted to terrain with significant elevations - they continue the ideology of super-pershing from the Korean War. DIFFERENT machines are effective in different conditions.
        1. armata37
          armata37 29 August 2015 14: 14 New
          +5
          But it somehow turns out that the tanks are adapted to everything, more precisely the golden mean.
          This is not urya-patriotism, but simply based on at least the one who buys them and where they really are fighting.
          1. svd-xnumx
            svd-xnumx 29 August 2015 21: 42 New
            +5
            But it somehow turns out that the tanks are adapted to everything, more precisely the golden mean.
            This is not urya-patriotism, but simply based on at least the one who buys them and where they really are fighting.
            One comrade worked at our factory and he said that during the service he participated in testing the sight for tanks (he served in the 80s and even gave a non-disclosure agreement), so the tests took place in all climatic zones: in the mountains of Armenia, in the deserts Central Asia, in the northern regions and the middle zone of Russia. He recalled the T-64, T-72 and T-80, that he was behind the scope and didn’t say whether he went into the “series”.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. gjv
        gjv 29 August 2015 16: 47 New
        +1
        Quote: Zoldat_A
        they are even tested at different test sites - each in its own

      5. karabas-barabas
        karabas-barabas 6 March 2017 22: 01 New
        0
        The only objective "examination" of tanks in history is the Kursk Bulge. Everything else is officially called the "TTX comparison", and unofficially - "who is stronger - a whale or an elephant."


        In fact, in addition to the "Kursk Bulge" and during the 2nd World War there were quite a few big tank battles, but up to today there are quite a few well-known episodes using tanks directly against tanks. And how should the Kursk Bulge help in matters of modern tank construction?
      6. karabas-barabas
        karabas-barabas 6 March 2017 22: 01 New
        0
        The only objective "examination" of tanks in history is the Kursk Bulge. Everything else is officially called the "TTX comparison", and unofficially - "who is stronger - a whale or an elephant."


        In fact, in addition to the "Kursk Bulge" and during the 2nd World War there were quite a few big tank battles, but up to today there are quite a few well-known episodes using tanks directly against tanks. And how should the Kursk Bulge help in matters of modern tank construction?
    2. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 29 August 2015 08: 28 New
      +7
      The newest Chinese tank ZTZ-99A2 against the Russian T-90MS: which is better?

      Let them bring them to Alabino, to the tank biathlon, and there we compare!
      And then they brought Type-96 with claims that it’s the best and how many times it has died there,
      smeared from it, and in speed it was bypassed at a turn along a larger radius!
      So only in comparison with the trials can the winner be revealed!
      And the "experts", for sure:
      Quote: aszzz888
      These "experts" always blow in one pipe, and always by order.
      1. Temples
        Temples 29 August 2015 10: 07 New
        +5
        The latest Chinese tank ZTZ-99A2 against the Russian T-90MS: what's better?


        It would have been better to head the article differently.
        Compare performance - a good thing.
        But it is not necessary to bet against each other.
        There are enough opponents.

        PS In this case, the title of the article correctly poses the question of WHO.
        1. Phantom Revolution
          Phantom Revolution 29 August 2015 10: 39 New
          +8
          The comparison is ridiculous, how many T-90MS are in the army? How much ZTZ-99A2 is and will China have?
          I assume that China will have a lot of them, because they modernize the aircraft briskly, alas, I can’t say the same about T-90MS; if I’m not mistaken, I do not reach the T-72MS by weight and alas, the budget is bursting at the seams.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. cosmos111
            cosmos111 29 August 2015 12: 00 New
            +4
            Then for the first time a whole train was seen.


            under a thousand the hans of these / ZTZ-99A2 tanks have already riveted, that's for sure, or maybe more ...

            1. gjv
              gjv 29 August 2015 16: 54 New
              +3
              In the forest (front-line?)
            2. Lord of the Sith
              Lord of the Sith 29 August 2015 21: 52 New
              +3
              Quote: cosmos111


              under a thousand the hans of these / ZTZ-99A2 tanks have already riveted, that's for sure, or maybe more ...

              Type99 - 500 units
              Type99A-100 units
        2. Talgat
          Talgat 29 August 2015 21: 01 New
          +3
          Quote: Temples
          But it is not necessary to bet against each other.
          There are enough opponents.


          Well, yes, in principle it’s already clear. that for the coming years 40-50 with China we’ll kind of “friendship go crazy” so that these tanks will never become enemies

          Here then. when the external threat of the West and the United States disappears, a confrontation may arise between the Eurasian and Chinese civilizations - worlds (but not the fact - I hope the tradition of friendship can last)

          But then there will be completely different generations of tanks
          1. The brightest
            The brightest 31 August 2015 11: 29 New
            0
            And why didn’t they put your latest tank on biathlon, in my opinion no one limited them. And since they are hiding, then they don’t see friends here. Do not entertain yourself with illusions at their expense.
      2. valerysvy
        valerysvy 29 August 2015 19: 56 New
        +1
        Let them bring them to Alabino, to the tank biathlon, and there we compare!

        Are you kidding along the way or what? Which tank bitlon? What we show on TV is nonsense Natural-Spectacle .. nothing more ... with the use of armored vehicles in real conditions has nothing to do ..
        1. Igor K
          Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 02 New
          +9
          In real conditions, the tanks do not drive and do not shoot?
    3. Aljavad
      Aljavad 29 August 2015 22: 06 New
      +2
      And what, besides the “Western experts”, are there no others?

      These "experts" always blow in one pipe, and always by order.


      All the "independent experts" quoted by the press are bonded people. And an objective analysis gives current to those who have paid them a lot for a long time. Otherwise, their comments are also part of the Big Game.
      Therefore, you should always look who said to whom he said and when he said.

      According to the Hamburg account, only war evaluates.

      PS: Our experts are silent.
    4. victor
      victor 29 August 2015 22: 10 New
      0
      And hfoto ??? By the way, Chinese ...
    5. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 17 July 2017 19: 47 New
      +1
      Quote: aszzz888
      The Chinese have repeatedly declared gigantic successes in the development and release of new shells, but even Western experts are skeptical of such information

      During the events on Damansky, for our military, the Chinese armor-piercing bullets of the 7,62x39 cartridge proved to be an unpleasant surprise - when they fired from the AK-47, they pierced the armor of the BTR-60.
      Why am I doing this? Moreover, the Chinese metallurgists were able to do something 50 years ago. From then on, they could learn something else.
  2. bolat19640303
    bolat19640303 29 August 2015 06: 42 New
    +14
    The main difference is that the Type-99A2 has been in the PLA since 2007, unlike the T-90MS, which most likely will never go to the troops. In the course of military operation, shortcomings are identified, improvements are constantly being made.
    Therefore, it is somewhat unethical to compare a production car with single samples.
    You need to compare with the main tank T-72B3. It would be interesting to compare. Although the performance characteristics of the Chinese are unknown - conditional comparisons.
    1. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 07 New
      +2
      I agree with you, I think the t-72b3 is not inferior to the Chinese, the use of a laser suppression system is very debatable. there will be smoke, fog, dust on the battlefield, which will significantly complicate the use of this unit, and besides, the high-explosive impact of closely exploding shells has not been canceled.
      The Chinese are not sure of the technical advantage of their tank, so they go to tricks, a copy is always worse than the original.
  3. Voha_krim
    Voha_krim 29 August 2015 07: 16 New
    0
    Quote: bolat19640303
    You need to compare with the main tank T-72B3. It would be interesting to compare. Although the performance characteristics of the Chinese are unknown - conditional comparisons.

    In the tank biathlon compared! Fact on the face! This was especially evident last year!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. bolat19640303
      bolat19640303 29 August 2015 07: 27 New
      +1
      Quote: Voha_krim
      Quote: bolat19640303
      You need to compare with the main tank T-72B3. It would be interesting to compare. Although the performance characteristics of the Chinese are unknown - conditional comparisons.

      In the tank biathlon compared! Fact on the face! This was especially evident last year!


      For you, perhaps there is no difference between Type 96 and Type 99, but nevertheless - what did you see? Is it worse or better than the Chinese tank prepared for the biathlon of the Russian tank?
    3. Samy
      Samy 29 August 2015 07: 30 New
      +3
      There was another Chinese car, Type 96A
    4. valerysvy
      valerysvy 29 August 2015 19: 58 New
      +1
      In the tank biathlon compared! Fact on the face! This was especially evident last year!

      Are you sick all chtoli? Do you judge tank qualities by tank biathlon? It's just funny ... Tank biathlon-hat-catcher-nothing more ...
      1. Igor K
        Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 10 New
        0
        The basis of tank combat consists of jerks, shooting, march throws.
        What are you talking about dear?
  4. fomkin
    fomkin 29 August 2015 07: 34 New
    +1
    I do not presume to judge in detail, and indeed in general, but there is such a thing as correspondence to the current moment. Like it or not, the T-90 modernization of the T-72. And this is the last century. You can beat yourself with your left heel in the chest as much as you like, but a quarter of a century is irretrievably lost. And a breakthrough into the future is needed. Today's authorities have proven their powerlessness or unwillingness to engage in the security of the country. We will continue to be zombified with pictures and projects for the future. But really, judging by the bouncy message about the early completion of the defense order for 2015. to the Ural car factory, not even a word about the T-90, only the modernization of the T-72. See archive for July.
    1. Forest
      Forest 29 August 2015 14: 58 New
      +2
      They don’t buy T-2011 from 90 of the year, why write about it? If there is an extra 100-150 billion to re-equip the latest modifications to the T-90 - please. so big money is now going to defense by the standards of our economy.
    2. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 12 New
      +1
      Abrashka, leopard, challenger breakthrough into the future?
      What are you talking about?
  5. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 29 August 2015 07: 34 New
    +1
    Honestly, I was always surprised by such a long "commitment" of the designers of the Nizhny Tagil plant to the "hemispherical" tower. In the era of "classic" armor-piercing ammunition and the classic layout of tanks of the 40-50s, this kind of tower, indeed, provided the best armor resistance and was acceptable in terms of ergonomics. However, with the development of anti-tank warfare and the saturation of tanks with various mechanisms and devices, the “hemispherical” tower became a deterrent to the development of the tank, since it was difficult or impossible to install a large number of devices in it, place an ammunition box, strengthen armor protection, etc.
    1. yehat
      yehat 29 August 2015 10: 07 New
      +5
      Well, I don’t know))) it seems to me that the IS-7 proves that you can cram enough into such a tower!
    2. Grenader
      Grenader 29 August 2015 11: 38 New
      +2
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      Honestly, I was always surprised by such a long "commitment" of the designers of the Nizhny Tagil plant to the "hemispherical" tower.

      Learn the mat part. On the T-90 Vladimir, a welded, never hemispherical tower has already been installed, on the T-90AM Proryv, which is also in the photo in the article (we’ll keep silent about the T-14 Armata). So your post is a shot past the target.
      1. valerysvy
        valerysvy 29 August 2015 20: 00 New
        +2
        about the T-14 Armata

        Yeah, yeah ... especially IT is relevant (to keep silent) in the light of the fact that there is no Armata tank ... Is it accepted for service?
        1. fomkin
          fomkin 30 August 2015 06: 03 New
          +2
          You’re right, I’m ready to argue that in a year they will modestly forget about the T-14.
    3. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 21 New
      +6
      Learn mat.chast comrade:
      1. The ammunition is placed in the housing
      2. Strengthening the reservation ?? The armor resistance of the frontal part 90 is not less than that of the competitors, and without the use of uranium plates as on an abrashka
      3. The angles of safe maneuvering in our tank are greater than those of the capitalists (36 ° versus 22 °)
      4. In terms of instrument placement, I am simply silent (what are you talking about), the reduced internal reserved volume is less due to az.
      5. Our tank is smaller when protecting not worse, but some parameters are better.
      But the main problem - the defeat in the tower from above is the same for all tanks of all countries and is solved only at the expense of KAZ, which we have enough of and has been installed properly on the t-14.
  6. exalex2
    exalex2 29 August 2015 07: 39 New
    +1
    "Tank biathlon" showed who is "all prettier and nicer." It’s strange that others like ... Well, others don’t want to show themselves at all.
  7. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 29 August 2015 07: 51 New
    +1
    "Every sandpiper praises its swamp."
    Until there are comparative tests, and even better they meet in a one-on-one battle, talking about which tank is better is pointless.
  8. sssla
    sssla 29 August 2015 07: 54 New
    +2
    True, unlike the tank from Nizhny Tagil, the Chinese car is mass-produced, while we still think

    Yeah, I had to start reading the article from the end)))
  9. NEXUS
    NEXUS 29 August 2015 08: 15 New
    +2
    I saw on the tank biathlon what the Chinese tanks are worth. They break down forever, and the level of training of the tankmen leaves much to be desired.
    1. yehat
      yehat 29 August 2015 10: 05 New
      +1
      at biathlon you saw something completely different: flaws in the organization of training due to the lack of the necessary experience.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 29 August 2015 11: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: yehat
        at biathlon you saw something completely different: flaws in the organization of training due to the lack of the necessary experience.

        At the biathlon, I saw the eternal breakdowns of the Chinese tank, problems with the cannon and the low speed of the car, as well as the very average training of the crews representing the great country. The lack of organization for the quality of the Chinese tank has nothing to do with it. Do not make me remind you of the saying about a bad dancer .. hi
        1. yehat
          yehat 29 August 2015 14: 37 New
          -4
          Well, remember the KV-1A tankers in the 41st year.
          the tank had an absolute advantage in defense and weapons over German tanks, but they still beat it.
          and then, remember the 44th year when our tankers beat panthers on the t-70.
          1. valerysvy
            valerysvy 29 August 2015 20: 02 New
            -3
            and then, remember the 44th year when our tankers beat panthers on the t-70.

            You are so funny laughing They beat you like that? Well, bring a dozen cases .. Can't you? THIS wasn’t “beaten”, it was luck and luck in the first place ... well, of course, experience ...
    2. prorab_ak
      prorab_ak 29 August 2015 11: 56 New
      +3
      And how many “biathlon T72” do we have in our units? ... in general, there’s enough to count fingers on our hands. It’s clear that the “biathlon” ones are different from the military ones, like the Skoda Fabia road from the WRC version)). Which, however, does not cancel the fact that the Chinese, of course, also "tuned" theirs ... and blew it. And on the topic of the article ... the whole article fit in its last sentence, unfortunately.
      1. NEXUS
        NEXUS 29 August 2015 12: 03 New
        +3
        Quote: prorab_ak
        Which, however, does not negate the fact that the Chinese, of course, also "tuned" ... and purged

        The point is not in the tank itself. People win, not cars, and then the Chinese have shown a weak level of training of SELECT crews.
      2. KGB WATCH YOU
        KGB WATCH YOU 29 August 2015 20: 56 New
        +1
        And how many “biathlon T72” do we have in units?

        T-72B3? At least hundreds, at most about 1 thousands.
        1. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 29 August 2015 22: 21 New
          +5
          Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
          And how many “biathlon T72” do we have in units?

          T-72B3? At least hundreds, at most about 1 thousands.

          Ilya, biathlon is ... ahem, biathlon. Index machine T-72B3M.
          And in parts - linear B3.
          wink
          1. Igor K
            Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 26 New
            0
            Well, yes, there are fewer b3 horses, I agree.
          2. KGB WATCH YOU
            KGB WATCH YOU 30 August 2015 08: 18 New
            0
            T-72B3M machine index

            This is a popular name. I met only T-72Б3 with additional options (created specifically for biathlon).
            http://www.btvt.narod.ru/5/t72b3m/t72b3m.htm

            In the 2015 biathlon of the year, everyone performed at the T-72Б3 (drill).
            There was also news that all T-72B3 will be brought to T-72B3 with additional options.
            This is really good, there will be a powerful engine and panorama.
            http://lenta.ru/news/2015/06/18/t72b3/
            http://www.vz.ru/news/2015/8/14/761162.html
            1. Aleks tv
              Aleks tv 30 August 2015 14: 37 New
              0
              Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
              This is a popular name. I met only T-72Б3 with additional options (created specifically for biathlon).

              Without a difference.
              Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
              In the 2015 biathlon of the year, everyone performed at the T-72Б3 (drill).

              Ilya, you are mistaken.
              1. KGB WATCH YOU
                KGB WATCH YOU 30 August 2015 15: 43 New
                0
                No, I'm not mistaken. In 2015, everyone was on the T-72Б3 except the Chinese. T-72Б3 with additional options was used only in 2014 by the Russian team, that's all.
                1. Aleks tv
                  Aleks tv 30 August 2015 16: 56 New
                  0
                  Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
                  No, I'm not mistaken. In 2015, everyone was on the T-72Б3 except the Chinese. T-72Б3 with additional options was used only in 2014 by the Russian team, that's all.

                  Do you want to say that in 2015 and the drives for all the teams on the T-72 were the same? Including Russia?
                  1. KGB WATCH YOU
                    KGB WATCH YOU 30 August 2015 18: 50 New
                    +1
                    Exactly. Before the start of the competition, participants spoke about this and wrote on thematic military blogs. And from the records you can understand that the Russian tank did not break out. For example, the Kazakhs “scammed” in the finals, went to the 1 place. True, because of their rush, they seriously violated the rules. laughing
                    1. Aleks tv
                      Aleks tv 31 August 2015 01: 33 New
                      0
                      Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
                      Exactly. Before the start of the competition, participants spoke about this and wrote on thematic military blogs. And from the records you can understand that the Russian tank did not break out. For example, the Kazakhs “scammed” in the finals, went to the 1 place. True, because of their rush, they seriously violated the rules. laughing

                      Ilya, this year the biathlon did not track. So maybe it’s not right.
                      Please throw off the links to Old, Toko normal, not populist.)))

                      Curious:
                      They put LINEAR B3 out of parts or ... how is it written in the TTZ (which they show at the exhibitions)?

                      Alex.
                      1. KGB WATCH YOU
                        KGB WATCH YOU 31 August 2015 10: 01 New
                        +2
                        Request to throw off links to info

                        "Tank Biathlon" - this time everything is fair! http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2015/07/blog-post_5.html
                        They put LINEAR B3 out of parts or ... how is it written in the TTZ (which they show at the exhibitions)?

                        The behavior of the T-72 (Russian team) was different from last year. If last year on the "hill" he just took off, then this time he overcame with certain difficulties. So this is the B3 combatant, with 840 hp.
                      2. Aleks tv
                        Aleks tv 31 August 2015 12: 05 New
                        +1
                        Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
                        "Tank Biathlon" - this time everything is fair!

                        Thanks Ilya.
                        hi
                        Frankly - pleasantly surprised.
                        yes
                      3. KGB WATCH YOU
                        KGB WATCH YOU 31 August 2015 12: 43 New
                        +1
                        You are welcome! wink An honest victory, so to speak, is twice as pleasant.
  • Igor K
    Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 24 New
    0
    China has never defeated anyone in its history, they even purged Vietnam.
    1. Kir
      Kir 30 August 2015 12: 46 New
      0
      The truth was won in a different way, look at the current population of the PRC and its relation to the same Teacher-kun, although a decent part has no relation to that ethnos. With regards to relations with Divet (Vietnam at present), they have centuries-old mutual claims, though they are really Warriors, and these are more powerful in terms of philosophy and sciences.
    2. poquello
      poquello 31 August 2015 01: 58 New
      0
      Quote: Igor K
      China has never defeated anyone in its history, they even purged Vietnam.

      Americans in Korea, but they also purged Vietnam
  • Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 29 August 2015 08: 30 New
    +1
    Which is better, which is worse I don’t know, but if Chinese tanks go in the thousands they will simply crush the quantity and mass hi
    1. dudinets
      dudinets 29 August 2015 10: 02 New
      +1
      Thousands of tanks require millions of tons of fuel. but you will not copy it, nor clone it.
      1. Siberia 9444
        Siberia 9444 29 August 2015 10: 50 New
        +1
        You are talking about a country that accidentally is not about Ukraine!? The second economy in the world !!! Soon, the yuan will be the reserve currency! They will slap these tanks like a 3D printer. I am already silent about the human resources that will climb into these tanks and notice they have nuclear weapons, so they will refuel their tanks. hi
      2. Igor K
        Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 27 New
        0
        And millions of tons of rice))
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 29 August 2015 11: 53 New
      +2
      Quote: Siberia 9444
      Which is better, which is worse I don’t know, but if Chinese tanks go in the thousands they will simply crush the quantity and mass hi

      On the way there are several Tornado divisions to set up and I want to see what will become of this Chinese scrap metal. Do you think the Chinese forgot Daman Island? There they also tried to crush the "mass". hi
      1. Siberia 9444
        Siberia 9444 29 August 2015 12: 49 New
        0
        I think no, they didn’t forget, but the Chinese army was completely different from that bast shoe, it became modern and very strong. And I don’t think that they will stupidly send their tanks to our tornadoes, we sold them our own developments and technologies to them, so they have the same MLRS hi
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 29 August 2015 13: 00 New
          +1
          Quote: Siberia 9444
          and technology so they have the same MLRS

          And I’m interested in what is the launch range of the Chinese Katyushas? M. And also the accuracy would be discussed. wink
          1. Siberia 9444
            Siberia 9444 29 August 2015 16: 01 New
            0
            laughing Yes, for God's sake, then tell me only here about tanks, the article was laughing laughing laughing
          2. Dimka off
            Dimka off 1 September 2015 17: 14 New
            0
            Quote: NEXUS
            And I'm interested in what is the launch range of the Chinese Katyushas?

            Well, the MLRS WS-2D stated that it hits up to 400 km. And it is the MLRS. I myself am not a supporter of our "friendship" with the Chinese, but this system is very good.
      2. Aljavad
        Aljavad 29 August 2015 22: 24 New
        +1
        NEXUS (1) SU Today, 11:53 ↑
        Quote: Siberia 9444
        Which is better, what is worse I don’t know, but if Chinese tanks go in the thousands they will simply crush the quantity and mass of hi
        On the way there are several Tornadoes divisions to set up and I want to see what will become of this Chinese scrap metal. Do you think the Chinese forgot Daman Island? There they also tried to crush the "mass". hi


        Well. Again, who is stronger, an elephant or a whale. The Nexus is right. On any tank there are anti-tank forces.
        Not tanks are at war! Country. Their armies. PEOPLE.

        Yehat correctly writes: And you can catch Lyuli on HF, and Panther on T-70.
    3. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 27 New
      +1
      Thousands have nuclear tactical weapons and the Iskander complex.
      1. moroz656
        moroz656 30 August 2015 22: 44 New
        -2
        You count how much nuclear weapons are needed ... With a laugh, you need to destroy 2 million Chinese every day for two years - 200 kilotons (almost a standard warhead), in a densely populated area we round up to 200000 losses. Because no nuclear shield in the confrontation with China will save us .And don’t make yourself laugh ...- MLRS in the direction of a tank strike ...... If China needs our territories, we won’t have time to pop up.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null 30 August 2015 22: 53 New
          +1
          Quote: moroz656
          2 million Chinese need to be destroyed every day for two years

          What you .. bloodthirsty ..

          - why destroy all the Chinese? Enough to knock out the army .. and not necessarily the whole wink
          - factors for the defeat of a nuclear explosion - once taught a thread? So, there is such a "radioactive infection." A few pieces of "200 ct" will create a strip into which not a single Chinese (being in their right mind) simply snoops around
          - and won’t poke around for a very long time ..

          Quote: moroz656
          If China needs our territories, we won’t have time to bark

          Oh, not a fact ..
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 29 August 2015 08: 49 New
    +8
    Why write an article without material in it?
    What is it compared to? Own fantasies with ... own imagination?
    ... if only yes ...
    ... maybe that ...
    ...probably...

    In general - like humor to raise the mood for a Saturday morning coffee - come down.
    yes
    1. cosmos111
      cosmos111 29 August 2015 11: 44 New
      +2
      Quote: Aleks tv
      In general - like humor to raise the mood for a Saturday morning coffee - come down.

      I welcome Alex hi
      and under the whiskey ??? not like drinks ??? pardon, under vodka --- import substitution understand-whether ...

      But what can’t they compare with Armata ??? he is the newest Russian tank ...

      PS: interesting: in 20016-18's “Armata” will take part in the tank biathlon ???
      1. activator
        activator 29 August 2015 15: 53 New
        0
        Quote: cosmos111
        PS: interesting: in 20016-18's “Armata” will take part in the tank biathlon ???

        Well, except as an honored guest yes
        1. FM-78
          FM-78 29 August 2015 21: 18 New
          0
          What did you mean by that, my Ukrainian friend?
        2. Aljavad
          Aljavad 29 August 2015 22: 30 New
          +1
          UA activator Today, 15:53 ​​↑
          Quote: cosmos111
          PS: interesting: in 20016-18's “Armata” will take part in the tank biathlon ???
          Well, except as a guest of honor, yes


          In these distant years - only in the form of museum rarities from the deep past.
          PS: And in the 201st century there will still be biathlon ??? what
      2. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 29 August 2015 17: 30 New
        +2
        Quote: cosmos111
        and under the whiskey ??? not like ??? pardon, under vodka --- and

        Darova, Andrey.
        hi
        Vintso - in the evening ...)))
        I'll try to beat the fighters for a good booze.
        yes

        And Armata has a road to landfills, there she now has a place.
        Wah, good and kind test to her.
        drinks
      3. CT-55_11-9009
        CT-55_11-9009 29 August 2015 21: 41 New
        +3
        Quote: cosmos111
        PS: interesting: in 20016-18's “Armata” will take part in the tank biathlon ???


        In 20016, Armata will become obsolete for 18 thousand years ...
  • dirik
    dirik 29 August 2015 09: 13 New
    +5
    Is there at least one tanker on the branch? We are engaged in verbiage, comrades generals (((
    1. Petrik66
      Petrik66 29 August 2015 10: 09 New
      +3
      Well, they are given virtual shoulder straps for this. Couch troops - crowed - hold a seed.
      1. CT-55_11-9009
        CT-55_11-9009 29 August 2015 21: 42 New
        +1
        Bad is the soldier who does not dream of becoming a general. So, Comrade Senior Lieutenant?
  • Peacemaker
    Peacemaker 29 August 2015 09: 52 New
    0
    The Chinese decided to make their own tank. And they had a streak of a mixture of a bulldog with a rhino ... A semi-leopard with a gun from t 72.
    1. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 29 New
      0
      Not only a respected gun, az, chassis, the overall design of the tower.
  • da Vinci
    da Vinci 29 August 2015 10: 01 New
    -5
    That's what I don't like about the T90 - the open base of the tower - that's what the shell asks for.
    1. Forest
      Forest 29 August 2015 15: 02 New
      +2
      Firstly, nothing is open there, if you look, secondly, the tower there is a vertical monolithic plane from the hull, thirdly, this feint with a ricochet and a wedge of the tower can only be rotated with armor-piercing caliber and old subcaliber, now BPS under the wildest angles into the armor.
  • da Vinci
    da Vinci 29 August 2015 10: 08 New
    +2
    I look at a lot of information about new products and I get a contradictory feeling: everything seems to be fine, but it reminds me of the 30s and 40s of the 20th century: the same many varied, often “unique” (read the book “Tukhachevsky’s Great Bluff ...”), techniques, top engineering, and the war began - the house of cards crumbled. It is necessary to draw the correct historical conclusions - choose the 2-3 best (with the prospect of modification) and give enough! fellow
    1. dokusib
      dokusib 29 August 2015 11: 17 New
      +2
      The thing is that the best just during the war and come to light. Here Abrashka is imprisoned just to stop our tank columns in Europe. And when they were brought into the cities in Iraq, what were their losses? This tank was practically useless for urban combat. It took an urgent modernization and quite serious.
      1. Igor K
        Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 32 New
        0
        I agree with you, in Yemen now the loss of abrashek is only in the way, I watched a video recently, the result of shelling by our bassoon.
        And the whole world was treated that they had a child prodigy.
    2. oldkap22
      oldkap22 31 August 2015 15: 36 New
      0
      the main thing is not to fly with promising models. maybe all the same the ancestors are right when they passed everything through local wars or, in extreme cases, training grounds ...
  • polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 29 August 2015 14: 22 New
    +3
    So far we are only talking and showing single copies, and China is already making its own (under 1000 pieces). I consider it possible to compare only when there will be materials on the combat use of vehicles.
  • Radogiz
    Radogiz 29 August 2015 16: 16 New
    0
    Quote: polkovnik manuch
    So far we are only talking and showing single copies, and China is already making its own (under 1000 pieces). I consider it possible to compare only when there will be materials on the combat use of vehicles.

    I wonder where China is going to send these machines.
    1. moroz656
      moroz656 30 August 2015 22: 59 New
      0
      If you objectively think ... Taiwan, he could (China) eat breakfast (there would be a desire), and even no one would help, ..... including mattresses. Too much power. + Nuclear weapons. So the answer is obvious.
  • WE ARE MAKING
    WE ARE MAKING 29 August 2015 17: 42 New
    +1
    I like the objective approach in the article, there is no excessive blind "patriotism".
    PS: Our technique is better;)
  • Gouging
    Gouging 29 August 2015 20: 52 New
    0
    Well, I don’t know, in tanks I’re the same “expert” as in machine milking. So far, NOTHING among the Chinese has worked better than the original. Or at least equal to him. Military equipment a hundred times harder to copy than a variety of smartphones.
  • Vlasovite
    Vlasovite 29 August 2015 21: 10 New
    -4
    Military equipment a hundred times harder to copy than a variety of smartphones.

    I am embarrassed to ask: why then mighty Russia does not produce smartphones
    1. Aljavad
      Aljavad 29 August 2015 22: 35 New
      +1
      I am embarrassed to ask: why then mighty Russia does not produce smartphones


      Who studied what!

      You can’t release EVERYTHING yet!
      The Shvets and the reaper and the dude are in dudu - now this does not work.
      1. goblin xnumx
        goblin xnumx 30 August 2015 19: 44 New
        0
        But can’t your washing machines be TV sets? - Well, at least just mobile phones or video intercoms?
        1. poquello
          poquello 31 August 2015 02: 19 New
          +1
          Quote: Leshy74
          But can’t your washing machines be TV sets? - Well, at least just mobile phones or video intercoms?

          Che, and Google doesn’t seem? Here they are the machinations of bourgeois enemies.
        2. Kir
          Kir 31 August 2015 17: 21 New
          +1
          There are domestic laptops and computers, as it seems, and cameras (I don’t know how it is with sim today, but there were persistent rumors about the production of "household appliances" at the Krasnogorsk Optical-Mechanical), but it makes us both warm and cold as consumers, since they are either just by special order, or even if you can buy them at such prices that .......

          Vlasovets, may I remind you that with any Russia, the main emphasis was on the military segment, while the domestic one was already somewhere in the tail.
          Now on
          ......... now this does not work,
          I dare to ask, and when and where it was different, oh yes now there are large transcontinental monsters, but this is a stigma, but brains and hands are all the same from different Countries !!!
    2. oldkap22
      oldkap22 31 August 2015 15: 39 New
      0
      there’s no time to do small things .... we open the "aegis"
  • FM-78
    FM-78 29 August 2015 21: 15 New
    +1
    It is very interesting to me??? Does anyone know the history of China?
    1. Kir
      Kir 30 August 2015 12: 55 New
      +1
      And you, I dare to ask her for what, but at the same time and in what volumes data is needed?
      1. FM-78
        FM-78 2 September 2015 20: 31 New
        0
        Sorry, left. I am sure that I am writing in the void, but I will answer - if you know it, then China, in all its half-invented history, has not won a single external war. If you are a great Chinese scholar, then you will most likely refer to the Chinese "Birch bark scrolls" where 5 so-called. The Chinese Empire defeated the Yakut Kingdom.
        1. Kir
          Kir 3 September 2015 13: 19 New
          0
          Well, not only China has myths, so ....... Moreover, many mythical, or rather legendary, characters are not denied by real historical facts. For military "companies", well, excuse me, but the fact that the most worthless workers should be sent to military needs and the deadest nag says a lot, although there were Emperors who knew how to fight, but the trouble is not from the camp of the followers of the Master. Then how many Yakuts are remembered an ethnic group of Turkic origin, and therefore simply does not have such a history of statehood.
          PS Nevertheless, read a little higher, where I clearly indicated Igor K in the response to the post, so your appeal is not entirely to me. By the way, there is one good work by F.N. Nietzsche regarding the Franco-Prussian war of the 19th century. I will not retell, I can only search how exactly the work is called, I’ll just point out that in Prussia’s opinion it was only a military victory, but no more, it’s actually a close analogy of the situation with China during the Manchuzhi occupation.
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 29 August 2015 21: 46 New
    +3
    Our tanks, albeit "tuning", showed themselves quite well at the tank biathlon. And the crews - well, well done. Nevertheless, they understand that professionalism with decent weapons (I miss the best word) is stronger than the most sophisticated “box” with new recruits inside. Most importantly, the people in the parts stirred, competing. And this is an additional motivation.
    And about the 41st I have an opinion. There were more tanks than the Germans, but only the crews were not trained. They really cherished the materiel ... Yes, and the motor resource was such that only in battle, for a couple of hours. I read a lot of literature about this time. Actually it was, 100 hours - the engine life of the first diesels. I do not know how the BT and T 26 have, however, it seems to me that there was not everything in order. How to teach crews on such a technique? So they practiced "Landing in the tank and landing." Now the situation is different. They ride, shoot ...
    1. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 57 New
      0
      And fall yes and take the first places.
    2. goose
      goose 31 August 2015 10: 56 New
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      And about the 41st I have an opinion. There were more tanks than the Germans, but only the crews were not trained. They really cherished the materiel ...

      In most tanks - T-26, BT, the track fingers were manufactured using the old technology, with a resource of just over 200 km. Naturally, with such a resource one could forget about mass combat training. The technology was introduced only in 1938-39. Given that the production of these tanks was curtailed, their availability of new tracks was low. On the T-28, T-34, KV, new tracks were already moving without problems with the resource.
      The same thing with the technology for the production of mass armor-piercing shells - trial batches were normal, mass batches were an open marriage. Eradicated only by the end of 1940, but the warehouses were already clogged with trash. In this regard, the volume of production of armor-piercing shells was slightly reduced to solve the problem. Tungsten deposits and processing plants started operating only in the mid-30s. Metallurgists barely had time to master tungsten in pilot production, so the mass production of sub-caliber shells could be forgotten until 1942.
      The first B-2 tank revolution diesel engines had a resource several times shorter than a similar aviation ancestor due to an unsuccessful design of the air filter, without a filter, a tank could travel 3 times more than with a filter, from 450 to 800 km passed. Moreover, a normal filter existed and was produced in parallel with the wrecker, it simply was not installed on the engine.
      Why diesel? According to pre-war treaties, the Americans were obliged to build two large oil refineries by 1934-35, but only 1 was built - the second plant forbade the Senate to build, despite the money already paid. Therefore, I had to urgently look for a diesel engine for a tank and aircraft, because in the USSR at that time, equipment for oil processing was not produced, and the commissioning of new capacities due to the economic blockade was not expected. Try to create a good engine in 5 years. Usually in history this process takes 8-12 years. The creation of the ACh-2, V-2 and V-4 was a kind of feat ahead of time. If we take modern engines, they are often worse in design than the same B-2 and the only valuable innovation is electronic injection and ignition. The M-17 was a good engine, but Lend-Lease with gas was not expected, which could cause a severe deficit, and, according to pre-war plans, the truck fleet was supposed to grow almost 3 times faster than it was in reality, and under this growth fuel production was completely unprepared.
    3. yehat
      yehat 1 September 2015 10: 03 New
      0
      there were many factors:
      1. The total lack of logistics, educated mechanics actually reduced the effective tank fleet to one third - i.e. about 7 thousand units (at the time of the attack the Germans had about 5 thousand together with training units), this was aggravated by colossal non-combat losses on each long march (about 50%).
      2. The relatively weak overwhelming part of the fleet (80%) - tanks that were inferior to the German in combat conditions for various reasons - mainly the quality of shells, tracks, machine equipment - optics, communications, etc., poor booking
      most of the tanks of TIII, Stug withstood frontal shelling of any of our light tanks. If we compare the number of modern vehicles, they were approximately equal (about a thousand), however, in spite of the TTX concessions, the German tank units were much better trained, had twice as high combat readiness, and also good maintenance - repair shops, refuellers, reconnaissance, support by artillery and aviation, etc. I recall that most of the t34, kv-1a, kv-2, t-28 was not lost in battle.
      3. Before the war they messed up with the organizational structures - they brought too many tanks into single units, unsuccessfully located the supply and repair facilities.

      All this led to the fact that in 3 months all our tank potential was lost.
  • Igor K
    Igor K 30 August 2015 06: 54 New
    +1
    I wanted to add about the security of the abrashka and the idea of ​​knockout panels on the combat station in the tower in action.
    A record was set for the range of flight of the tower, a record, respectively, for the most protected tank, I attach the photo.
    1. Nikoha.2010
      Nikoha.2010 30 August 2015 07: 03 New
      0
      Quote: Igor K
      I wanted to add about security abrashki

      I agree with you! Igor, this was already discussed at VO on April 21, 2012 in the article “M1 Abrams. Fighting.” You can read. hi
      1. Igor K
        Igor K 30 August 2015 10: 14 New
        0
        If it’s easy, discard the link.
      2. Igor K
        Igor K 30 August 2015 10: 14 New
        0
        If it’s easy, discard the link.
  • foma2028
    foma2028 30 August 2015 08: 29 New
    +1
    And who will explain to the amateur why in many tanks the armor mask is at the exit point of the barrel from the turret, including on our old ones. And on our modern ones, I apologize for the "tarp wound".
    What's under the tarp? Why such a decision and how does this decision behave when a shell hits it?
    Even the T-34 had an armored mask, not a tarp. What is the matter here?
    1. goose
      goose 31 August 2015 10: 30 New
      +1
      Tarpaulin from water and sand, but not from shells delivered.
    2. yehat
      yehat 1 September 2015 09: 45 New
      0
      It is worth noting one caveat - during the Second World War, the distance of skirmishes with tanks were often less than 1 meters. Now the development of technology has led to the fact that detection and accurate shooting can be much further, respectively, the accuracy of hits changes and the role of the armored mask decreases. Also, against cumulative charges, the mask is now ineffective.
  • Shurik70
    Shurik70 30 August 2015 09: 17 New
    +1
    Quote: foma2028
    What's under the tarp? Why such a decision and how does this decision behave when a shell hits it?


    Very good photo.
    Firstly, it is really unknown what is under the tarp.
    And secondly. Is it really possible to get there with a shell?
    Is that front-to-top, and then by accident. From where the planes never attack (any pilot will come from behind or from the side).
    The barrel exit is recessed in the tower. Any shot will hit the tower, not the base of the barrel.
    1. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 10: 13 New
      0
      At t-90ms, the problem of the weakened zone in the gun area was solved.
      A simple steel cover like on a leopard-2 will not solve the problem due to the presence of ammunition with a large penetration.
  • Whowhy
    Whowhy 30 August 2015 10: 49 New
    +3
    What is the point of comparing with the T-90 if they have “nothing at all” in our troops? negative
    1. Igor K
      Igor K 30 August 2015 11: 43 New
      0
      The process is underway, the t-72 of the previous models must be compared with the Chinese type-69, 79, 80.
  • Tutu
    Tutu 30 August 2015 13: 33 New
    0
    They are alike?
  • goose
    goose 31 August 2015 10: 28 New
    0
    Quote: Starover_Z
    The newest Chinese tank ZTZ-99A2 against the Russian T-90MS: which is better?

    Let them bring them to Alabino, to the tank biathlon, and there we compare!
    And then they brought Type-96 with claims that it’s the best and how many times it has died there,
    smeared from it, and in speed it was bypassed at a turn along a larger radius!
    So only in comparison with the trials can the winner be revealed!
    And the "experts", for sure:
    Quote: aszzz888
    These "experts" always blow in one pipe, and always by order.

    That is not smeared by the Chinese from their Type-96, definitely. But the tank is noticeably less mobile, in the mountains of China it would be difficult for him.
  • yehat
    yehat 10 March 2017 17: 16 New
    0
    I thought there would be a comparison, but here they wrote in general terms "about the same"

    I’ll add a few words from myself - the Chinese panoramic sight allows you to inspect the battlefield somewhat wider than pine-y. Also, it is interesting to compare aiming speed on the go and accuracy
    nothing is said about armor resistance, although I can say that the Chinese’s forehead is thicker, though not so much due to the thickness of the armor, but more due to its spacing, which is good against cumulative.
    It is very interesting to compare how tanks are covered by relief, their visibility, firing range and detection.
    nomenclature of shells, anti-personnel equipment.