Military Review

In the US, demonstrated the latest modification of "Abrams"

184
General Dynamic Corporation for the first time demonstrated in Washington at the exhibition AUSA 2015 the latest modification tank M1 Abrams - a variant of M1A2 SEP v.3, reports the blog bmpd with reference to armyrecognition.com.




According to the resource, the main differences of the M1A2 SEP v.3 modification from the previous one (SEP v.2) are:

“An introduction to the ammunition of a new 120-mm sub-caliber armor-piercing projectile M829EX4 (M829A4) of enhanced armor penetration.

- Introduction of the Advanced Multi-Purpose (AMP) ХМ120 type "High Explosive Multi-Purpose with Tracer - HEMP-T) with a programmable fuze to the ammunition package of the new 1147-mm multipurpose shot. Thus, unification of the tank ammunition will be achieved on the basis of just two shots - the multipurpose ХМ1147 AMP and the armored-piercing sabot M829E4 AKE.

- Modernization of the tank fire control system with the installation of Ammunition Data Link equipment (ADL), which allows firing AMP shots with a programmable fuse.

- Installation of new thermal imaging devices IFLIR in the gunner’s sight and independent commander’s panoramic sight, with an image output on high-definition displays.

- Installation of the Commander's Remote Operated Weapon Station Low Profile (CROWS-LP) remotely controlled by the commander of the tank onto the roof of the turret of the tank with the 12,7-mm MXXUMX machine gun. The module is equipped with a round-the-clock surveillance and aiming system, which allows it to be used as the actual second panoramic sight of a tank crew. ”


It is assumed that the upgrade to the level of SEP v.3 will begin in the next fiscal year. For these purposes, an amount of $ 367,9 million has been budgeted for.
Photos used:
http://www.armyrecognition.com/
184 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Velizariy
    Velizariy 14 October 2015 15: 37 New
    42
    Serdyukov would envy the chinory there)
    1. Baikonur
      Baikonur 14 October 2015 15: 42 New
      +5
      Пытаются после аперкота "арматой" "лицо" из грязи поднять! Типа наш новыи Абрамс (которыи РПГ хлопнуть может) тоже не лыком шит! + бабла подпилить!
      1. marlin1203
        marlin1203 14 October 2015 15: 53 New
        18
        I understand everything, weight over 60 tons, sandwich armor and all that ... But doesn’t this dynamic trough need dynamic protection? what
        1. st25310
          st25310 14 October 2015 15: 57 New
          29

          There is no shell capable of hitting ARMATU!
          1. st25310
            st25310 14 October 2015 16: 20 New
            +1
            Who is the minus? Deputy Director Khalitov told you in Russian that there is no shell capable of hitting ARMATU! Or do you know him better?
            1. kocclissi
              kocclissi 14 October 2015 16: 49 New
              +2
              It’s probably hard to come up with something new, when everything new has been invented before ........
              о
            2. sa-ag
              sa-ag 14 October 2015 17: 21 New
              +8
              Quote: st25310
              Deputy Director Khalitov told you in Russian that there is no shell capable of hitting ARMATU!

              Did they try to break through its depleted uranium core?
            3. pilot bin-bom
              pilot bin-bom 14 October 2015 21: 28 New
              +5
              Have you tried a subcaliber of depleted uranium at a distance of a direct shot?
              if not, why la-la.
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 14 October 2015 23: 31 New
                -2
                Well, this can be calculated by knowing the thickness, tensile strength of the armor, impact strength, speed, mass, strength and diameter of the OBPS.
          2. Bird the Talker
            Bird the Talker 14 October 2015 21: 31 New
            -1
            very rarely can one hear, so competently submitted commentary, respect to Halitov.
        2. NEXUS
          NEXUS 14 October 2015 16: 18 New
          15
          Quote: marlin1203
          I understand everything, weight over 60 tons, sandwich armor and all that ... But doesn’t this dynamic trough need dynamic protection? what

          And I already thought that the negro-loader was also modernized. And the engine of the tower was left. A good target for a simple and tested RPG-7.
          1. RBLip
            RBLip 14 October 2015 16: 24 New
            +7
            Quote: NEXUS
            And I already thought that the Negro-loader is also being modernized.

            also the first thought was - the blacks were sent to retire, now they scored new ones ...
            1. abrakadabre
              abrakadabre 15 October 2015 10: 58 New
              0
              No, they were upgraded - everyone was given a free membership to the rocking chair.
          2. figter
            figter 14 October 2015 17: 29 New
            +2
            NEXUS
            And I already thought that the negro-loader was also modernized. And the engine of the tower was left. A good target for a simple and tested RPG-7.

            Will Negro-DMN-M (Long Arm with a Motor in an EN Place)?
            1. Aqela
              Aqela 15 October 2015 09: 11 New
              0
              Oh, how are you kidding blacks-loaders laughing
        3. vorobey
          vorobey 14 October 2015 16: 22 New
          10
          Quote: marlin1203
          But is this trough really not needed dynamic protection?


          why is it not so bad burning ...
          ухмыльнулся РПГ 29..., и подмигнул "Конкурсу".. - Орешек знаний расколоть поможет нам киножурнал хочу все знать...
        4. Karlovar
          Karlovar 14 October 2015 17: 06 New
          -4
          They are imprisoned under the Papuans with bows ....
          1. Vladimirets
            Vladimirets 14 October 2015 18: 48 New
            16
            Quote: Karlovar
            They are imprisoned under the Papuans with bows ....

            The tank is not bad, too far-stained, but not bad. You can minus.
            1. vorobey
              vorobey 14 October 2015 19: 34 New
              +2
              Quote: Vladimirets
              You can minus.


              Well, for the time being, I’m allowing you for a compass .. laughing Hi Zheka ..
              1. Vladimirets
                Vladimirets 14 October 2015 22: 04 New
                +3
                Quote: vorobey
                Well, for the time being, I’m allowing you for a compass ..

                Sanya, you are allowed to slap two by status. yes Great. drinks
                Quote: vorobey
                а еще он летать умеет, судя по фильму "команда А" и под водой плавать

                At least he is clearly no worse than the T-72B3.
            2. SSeT
              SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 01 New
              +5
              But I won’t! really good, and the new modification, whatever the sofa cap-kickers would say, really strengthened the already good opportunities hi
            3. Corsair
              Corsair 14 October 2015 21: 58 New
              0
              Quote: Vladimirets
              The tank is not bad, too far-stained, but not bad.

              wassat а еще он летать умеет, судя по фильму "команда А" и под водой плавать, правда там полковник был чересчур умный и изобретательный, сомнительно что у амеров такие найдутся...

              http://vk.com/video54566323_168165762 вот здесь отрывок
            4. Zai pali
              Zai pali 15 October 2015 17: 02 New
              0
              Quote: Vladimirets
              Quote: Karlovar
              They are imprisoned under the Papuans with bows ....

              The tank is not bad, too far-stained, but not bad. You can minus.


              I don’t think he would have been popular in the big tank war. The problem is that it is not expected.
        5. Observer2014
          Observer2014 14 October 2015 18: 56 New
          +3
          In the US, demonstrated the latest modification of "Abrams"
          And the black man that shoves manually, the shells in the gun also upgraded ?!
        6. Shurik70
          Shurik70 14 October 2015 22: 47 New
          +1
          Quote: marlin1203
          I understand everything, weight over 60 tons, sandwich armor and all that ... But doesn’t this dynamic trough need dynamic protection? what

          So all American strategies come from the fact that they will shoot and kill, and opponents will shoot from the muskets.
          laughing
      2. Lissyara
        Lissyara 14 October 2015 16: 01 New
        +6
        Во! Во! И я про тоже. Изделие 6Г3 (в простонародье РПГ-7 "шайтан труба") стоимостью 120 баксов "на ура" работает против шестилямовой машины.
      3. Starover_Z
        Starover_Z 14 October 2015 16: 38 New
        +4
        Either the article is stingy or the translation is incomplete:
        And where is the PR? recourse
        Where are the phrases about invincibility and determination to destroy other people's tanks,
        в частности "Армату" с одного выстрела ?
      4. northern
        northern 14 October 2015 18: 08 New
        0
        And did the negros charge, too, a new, shortened sub-caliber?
      5. ejov1976
        ejov1976 14 October 2015 18: 32 New
        0
        We wanted to spit on your abrams ...
        1. Semen Semyonitch
          Semen Semyonitch 14 October 2015 22: 12 New
          +1
          Two girls sat on the roof and spat on passers-by ... One is good, the other is bad ... The bad hit 3 times, and the good 5 .... And because good always wins ... laughing
      6. Baloo
        Baloo 14 October 2015 20: 34 New
        0
        And I like, a good target, it will burn beautifully wassat
      7. PSih2097
        PSih2097 14 October 2015 21: 03 New
        0
        Quote: Baikonur
        Type our new Abrams (which RPG can slam)

        DShK in the aft of the tower ...
    2. avg
      avg 14 October 2015 15: 51 New
      17
      For these purposes, the budget includes an amount of $ 367,9 million.
      Правильней писать : "Для начала, на эти цели в бюджете заложена сумма в $ 367,9 млн."
      1. KazaK Bo
        KazaK Bo 14 October 2015 16: 10 New
        +5
        avg . Правильней писать : "Для начала, на эти цели в бюджете заложена сумма в $ 367,9 млн."

        Знающие эту тематику -- и СКОЛЬКО ТЕПЕРЬ СТОИТ ЭТОТ ТАНК...Если память не изменяет, раньше он стоил в районе 10 "лимонов"... А сейчас? И много ли будет теперь у этого танка покупателей? Ведь "боевая жизнь" танка уж очень коротка в бою...
        Как здесь с соотношением "ЦЕНА-КАЧЕСТВО"???
        ... or else, I'm sorry, but for now only slogans ..
        1. Lissyara
          Lissyara 14 October 2015 16: 18 New
          +1
          Борис, ну 10 вы подзагнули. Предыдущее "модельки" стоили 6 лямов, +- 200 тыс "енотов".
          1. Basarev
            Basarev 14 October 2015 16: 38 New
            0
            They call the projectile and sight a modification?
            1. Sid.74
              Sid.74 14 October 2015 18: 56 New
              0
              Some kind of nonsense, controlled commander module and immediately open machine gun with a very leaky stitcher.
              1. SSeT
                SSeT 14 October 2015 20: 46 New
                +3
                And in your opinion, a scrap of a NEW generation with radically increased penetration, a multi-mode programmable OFS SERIAL NEW generation, the best of the available thermal imager and DBM with duplication of gearboxes - is that not a STRONG modification ?? It gives a lot of quality enhancements, by the way, this is not an ala T72B3 craft
                Think at least sometimes what you write, if, of course, the thinker has already grown
              2. SSeT
                SSeT 14 October 2015 20: 49 New
                +2
                This is an additional option, negro-pitching on patrols to protect and block posts. 2 remote machine guns and 4 eyes are always better than the 1st and 1st pair of eyes! So-and-so (well, a black man is not so sorry as a commander, therefore only a visor)
              3. SSeT
                SSeT 14 October 2015 20: 51 New
                0
                Quote: SSeT
                This is an additional option, negro-pitching on patrols to protect and block posts. 2 remote machine guns and 4 eyes are always better than the 1st and 1st pair of eyes! So-and-so (well, a black man is not so sorry as a commander, therefore only a visor)
        2. ejov1976
          ejov1976 14 October 2015 19: 03 New
          +1
          pobayayu)) This box is worth MILLIONS of Amer Rubles and makes its way through and several thousand of them and how many different Soviet-Russian tanks in the same RF))))))? Tens of thousands and everything from 34 RCTs is in excellent condition. Take off the monument and go into battle.
          1. Lt. Air Force stock
            Lt. Air Force stock 14 October 2015 19: 13 New
            -1
            But there is no active defense system. What will happen when a direct hit ATGM Cornet or RPG-29,32?
            1. SSeT
              SSeT 14 October 2015 20: 54 New
              +3
              And reinforced armor, especially with PPS and the new OFS, is just against them. Like new thermal imagers. They change the application concept, hence such changes and the lack of KAZ
  2. A-Sim
    A-Sim 14 October 2015 15: 38 New
    +9
    Sawing beetles. This coffin will bring dividends to their grandchildren.
    1. Sasha 19871987
      Sasha 19871987 14 October 2015 15: 40 New
      14
      Well, I don’t know, I prefer the photo of BURNING ABRAMS ...
    2. lelikas
      lelikas 14 October 2015 15: 44 New
      +2
      Quote: A-Sim
      Sawing beetles. This coffin will bring dividends to their grandchildren.

      And not small - they still need, at least, remote sensing kits.
      1. clidon
        clidon 14 October 2015 15: 53 New
        10
        Комплекты ДЗ на "Абрамс" ставятся только в городской модернизации и на борта - лоб там и так толстенный. А вот что нибудь типа "Трофи" запросто.
        1. lelikas
          lelikas 14 October 2015 16: 06 New
          +5
          Quote: clidon
          Комплекты ДЗ на "Абрамс" ставятся только в городской модернизации и на борта - лоб там и так толстенный. А вот что нибудь типа "Трофи" запросто.

          Of course. Maybe they’ll finish their Quick Kill.
        2. dvina71
          dvina71 14 October 2015 16: 43 New
          +3
          Quote: clidon
          Комплекты ДЗ на "Абрамс" ставятся только в городской модернизации и на борта - лоб там и так толстенный

          EMNIP vld at him 90mm .. or whatever his detail is called in which the hatch is a mechanical drive. This detail is invulnerable to a projectile fired from the same plane with an abrams, but if you shoot from above .., and this is two fingers on the asphalt in the city.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 14 October 2015 17: 10 New
            0
            Quote: dvina71
            or whatever his detail is called in which the hatch is a mechanical drive.

            VLD - she is the most darling.
            Quote: dvina71
            he has 90mm wld ..

            Not only she - in principle, his tower roof is very cardboard, that is, it is very easy to break through it with a mounted fire (or fire in the upper floors of buildings), given the huge tower roof area. So no matter how you upgrade this car, it is unlikely that you can seriously improve its characteristics.
          2. clidon
            clidon 14 October 2015 20: 33 New
            +3
            Any tank has its own weakened zones and they are generally well known. But in general, there the forehead of the tower and the NLD are very, very serious
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 14 October 2015 21: 09 New
              +1
              Quote: clidon
              Any tank has its own weakened zones and they are generally well known. But in general, there the forehead of the tower and the NLD are very, very serious

              Of course, the Abrashi lobeshnik is equivalent to like 900 mm of homogeneous steel, and NLD, if the memory is not changed, is equivalent to 600 mm. The problem is different - on existing machines, such zones are well known to everyone, and most importantly it is not possible to fundamentally increase their protection - a new tank is needed (armata is bish))))
              1. clidon
                clidon 14 October 2015 21: 42 New
                +1
                If we take into account the general attitude in the states towards tanks, I don’t think that they will have something new in service before the year 2030.
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 14 October 2015 22: 36 New
                  0
                  Quote: clidon
                  I don’t think that they will have something new in service before the year 2030

                  If not later ...
          3. SSeT
            SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 04 New
            +1
            It is reinforced with him, if not noticed. Yes, the conception has changed - now he will not climb on the erpoghe and ptursa from the upper floors
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 14 October 2015 21: 12 New
              0
              Quote: SSeT
              It is reinforced with him, if not noticed.

              Всё равно сильно увеличить толщину НЛД в случае Абрамса не получится, да и крыша башни судя по всему если и усилена, то не значительно (иначе бы высота башни весьма заметно выросла), так что вряд ли амерам удастся на абрамсе полностью изжить этот недостаток. И большую опасность будут представлять не столько ПТУРСы с верхних этажей в городе, сколько появление у нас и наших союзников крышебоев аля "джавелин" или "спайк", а этого полностью исключать не стоит.
  3. Sukhoi
    Sukhoi 14 October 2015 15: 38 New
    +3
    Introduction to the ammunition of the new 120-mm sub-caliber armor-piercing projectile M829EX4 (M829A4) of enhanced armor penetration.

    - Introduction of the Advanced Multi-Purpose (AMP) ХМ120 type "High Explosive Multi-Purpose with Tracer - HEMP-T) with a programmable fuze to the ammunition package of the new 1147-mm multipurpose shot. Thus, unification of the tank ammunition will be achieved on the basis of just two shots - the multipurpose ХМ1147 AMP and the armored-piercing sabot M829E4 AKE.


    And they no longer need a cumulative shell?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 14 October 2015 16: 48 New
      12
      The multi-purpose projectile has a cumm. But she’s not against MBT,
      but against lightly armored targets and concrete.
      Anti-tank cumm shells now almost stopped
      apply in tanks. Their power with caliber 120-125 mm is not
      enough to overcome the frontal armor of modern MBT.
      1. Sukhoi
        Sukhoi 14 October 2015 17: 17 New
        +1
        But what about the ATGM? They are not all 152mm
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 14 October 2015 17: 29 New
          +8
          ATGMs - not less than 150 mm.
          RPGs are usually smaller in caliber, but they have frontal armor
          they don’t take it anymore: from the side there, from below, from behind ...

          The Americans already in the 1st Iraqi had only OBPS
          in the ammunition tank.
          1. Sukhoi
            Sukhoi 14 October 2015 17: 32 New
            +1
            Attack and Whirlwind at 130mm. And they are not considered obsolete, as I understand it.
            RPGs 29,30,32 on 105 mm (700-750 mm homogeneous without DZ) - these also do not take?
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 14 October 2015 17: 43 New
              +7
              750mm
              And the equivalent of the armor of the forehead of the tower and the body of Abrams from the COP is about 900 mm
              1. Sukhoi
                Sukhoi 14 October 2015 17: 49 New
                +1
                Ok, with RPG everything is clear.
                Reflex-M - 900mm without DZ. Thus, the Attack and the Whirlwind should be even deeper.
                1. SSeT
                  SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 10 New
                  +3
                  So no one will be saved from heavy birds, IF they get, but! they are damped by interference quite simply now. I think it’s not in vain that these interesting diplomatic boxes appeared on his face :)
                  So shta ... don't flatter yourself
            2. just exp
              just exp 14 October 2015 17: 46 New
              +2
              cumulative artillery guns were always inferior to ATGMs of the same caliber in penetration, I don’t remember the details, but it’s something like the warhead of an ATGM is longer, since a projectile has a caliber (funnel width) that comes closer to the end of the projectile, whereas a missile the full gauge width immediately follows the fairing.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. The comment was deleted.
              2. Sukhoi
                Sukhoi 14 October 2015 18: 02 New
                +1
                cumulative artillery guns were always inferior to ATGMs of the same caliber in penetration, I don’t remember the details, but it’s something like the warhead of an ATGM is longer, since a projectile has a caliber (funnel width) that comes closer to the end of the projectile, whereas a missile the full gauge width immediately follows the fairing.


                interesting remark. Reflex - 900mm, 3BK31 - 800mm.
                Those. voyaka uh actually right. Promising shells (for the T-14) keep in mind, but no more.

                PS Although the questions did not end))) If the length is cum. a shell affects armor penetration, why not increase it? Subcaliber lengthen and nothing.
                1. Sukhoi
                  Sukhoi 14 October 2015 18: 25 New
                  +3
                  I'll argue with myself laughing :
                  Perhaps it is easier to defend against cumulative ammunition - DZ, lattices, screens, composite armor, etc. ATGM easier to kill with KAZ than BOPS.
                  1. SSeT
                    SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 14 New
                    +2
                    EXACTLY! You have come to the absolutely correct conclusion - this, by the way, served as a refusal by the amans from tank cops - they are no longer needed now, in such a caliber, from the word at all. There is a funnel in the universal OFS, but it is only for LBT and wall break! hi
                    1. Sukhoi
                      Sukhoi 14 October 2015 23: 22 New
                      0
                      Is this a global trend, or just an American feature?
                    2. dvina71
                      dvina71 15 October 2015 00: 15 New
                      0
                      Quote: SSeT
                      In the universal OFS, the cum funnel is

                      Nuka tell me, can it be a caress, how can this kumvoronka help against concrete walls? And then a shell is a miracle ... and BT crumbles into small cabbage and breaks through walls .. and all with one shell ..
                      1. clidon
                        clidon 15 October 2015 06: 51 New
                        0
                        She breaks through such walls. Speeds then what expiration ...
                  2. dvina71
                    dvina71 15 October 2015 00: 20 New
                    0
                    Quote: Sukhoi
                    Perhaps it’s easier to defend against cumulative ammunition - remote sensing, gratings, screens

                    This is all and still AB on the tank there is up to the first 120mm landmine next to the tank .. So to refuse a projectile that does not lose its power from a distance .. is ridiculous somehow .. This is everything for an American .. became and shoot a bunch of commies crawling at you ..and the best thermal imager to help ..
                    Russian fight differently .. and I must say more successfully than others.
            3. kot stepan
              kot stepan 15 October 2015 12: 06 New
              +1
              У арт. снаряда толстостенный корпус,который должен выдержать без необратимых деформаций огромные перегрузки при выстреле. У ПТУР корпус относительно тонкостенный,соответственно больше "полезного" объёма занято ВВ. Т.е. по калибру боеприпаса можно кое-какие выводы сделать,но нужно учитывать особенности...
          2. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 14 October 2015 17: 38 New
            +3
            But their marines were lucky, they had not yet switched to Abrams, and they had an office on their M-60
      2. Disant
        Disant 15 October 2015 00: 10 New
        0
        why so. I think a cumulative shell with a triple cumulative charge ..
        "Start-2" with the help of a triple cumulative charge pierces up to 660 mm of armor for the built-in dynamic protection or 680 mm for the mounted. the body in the front projection is weak
      3. Disant
        Disant 15 October 2015 00: 33 New
        0
        what about
        - cutout in the mask of the gun under the head of the driver’s mechanic (thickness about 300mm).
        - The cutout between the hull and the tower: represented by the lower frontal part of the tower, going up to the shoulder strap (the thickness gradually decreases from 850mm to 300mm.
        - gun mask itself
        - frontal projection of the body
        quite a cumulative projectile should be enough to break through
  4. sinukvl
    sinukvl 14 October 2015 15: 39 New
    +1
    Это, что ответ на нашу "Армату", что бы свое самолюбие утешить? Не утешите, как вы яхту назовёте так она и поплывет (Абрамс назван в честь генерала Клейтона Абрамса, Наша Армата носит имя не только русского орудия, но и еще и с тюрского переводится как "сила отцов", да и во многих европейских языках переводится как армия, армада)
    1. kil 31
      kil 31 14 October 2015 15: 42 New
      +3
      It is assumed that the upgrade to the level of SEP v.3 will begin in the next fiscal year. For these purposes, an amount of $ 367,9 million has been budgeted for.
      Somehow not enough, I'm used to hearing numbers in yards from them. It didn’t even reach the floor of the yard. request
      1. yushch
        yushch 14 October 2015 15: 57 New
        +1
        <!--QuoteBegin wink кил 31 --><div class="title_quote">Цитата: wink кил 31</div><div class="quote"><!--QuoteEBegin-->[quote]Предполагае
        It is expected that upgrades to SEP v.3 will begin next fiscal year. For these purposes, the budget includes an amount of $ 367,9 million. [/ Quote] Something is not enough, I'm used to hearing numbers in yards from them. It didn’t even reach the floor of the yard. request[/ Quote]

        This is to ensure that the Senate Committee on Defense of the loaves of bread relaxes, and as it relaxes, they will be planted with the most tomatoes in numbers in yards. They are virtuoso sawflies, our sawflies are suckers compared to them.
        1. SSeT
          SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 29 New
          +1
          For it’s really modernization, they haven’t been producing NEWs for a long time - they are sawing old ones at a single tank factory. BUT! they do it very efficiently, there is a real conveyor belt, everything is debugged to the smallest detail, the cost is like a Renault factory. There 90% of the amount for a new kit goes. And the series is not voiced 370 lyamov say for a hundred - and not cheap at all
          1. kot stepan
            kot stepan 15 October 2015 12: 14 New
            0
            Да,про модернизацию американские товарищи целый фильм сняли. Всё хорошо,но,вот,интересный вопрос:если они больше не производят танковые двигатели для "Абрамсов" с конца 90-х,а постоянно ремонтируют-реставрируют их... какой же у них ресурс?! Или всё-таки производят новые двигатели?
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 14 October 2015 15: 58 New
        +3
        Quote: keel 31
        Somehow not enough, I'm used to hearing numbers in yards from them. It didn’t even reach the floor of a yard

        Dear Kil 31, you just inattentively read the message :)
        Quote: keel 31
        It is expected that upgrades to SEP v.3 will begin next fiscal year.

        Those. - will begin next year, 2016. But in what year it will end, not a word is said request
        Quote: keel 31
        For these purposes, the budget includes an amount of $ 367,9 million.

        Those. in 2016, they will spend 367,9 million. And in subsequent years? laughing
        How many tanks are they going to modify in 2016? 1000? 300? One and a half? laughing
        1. kil 31
          kil 31 14 October 2015 16: 33 New
          +2
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Those. in 2016 they will spend 367,9 million. And in subsequent years, how many tanks are they going to modify in 2016? 1000? 300? One and a half
          Well yes. I didn’t think how many tanks the money was. Another thought came to me. How much money was allocated from the budget to factories for the invention of new electronics and ammunition. It was not for their money that they decided to invent new equipment and ammunition. They received an order and money from the Pentagon. That would know the amount. hi
        2. Bayonet
          Bayonet 15 October 2015 07: 01 New
          0
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          How many tanks are they going to modify in 2016? 1000? 300? One and a half?

          We clearly know what will happen in 2020, and they are all silent ...
      3. The comment was deleted.
    2. lelikas
      lelikas 14 October 2015 15: 45 New
      +2
      Quote: sinukvl
      Это, что ответ на нашу "Армату", что бы свое самолюбие утешить?

      It’s even a pity that they are not Ukrainians — they would already have read that their new projectile is breaking everything that moves! and what doesn’t move - the tank moves and breaks through! .
      1. jjj
        jjj 14 October 2015 16: 22 New
        +1
        Quote: lelikas
        It’s even a pity that they are not Ukrainians — they would already have read that their new projectile is breaking everything that moves! and what doesn’t move - the tank moves and breaks through! .

        They have everything in the subject. No words needed
    3. Longmire
      Longmire 14 October 2015 15: 58 New
      -10
      Quote: sinukvl
      This is the answer to our "Armata", to console your vanity

      is it a planned modernization, and by the way, how old have Armat, 2.5 prototypes already been riveted there? laughing
      1. avt
        avt 14 October 2015 16: 05 New
        0
        Quote: Longmire
        is it a planned modernization, and by the way, how old have Armat, 2.5 prototypes already been riveted there?

        Do not swagger, there will be enough of the maydown banderlogs that the militias have selected and repaired, but this is not for the Ukrainians, for a more serious enemy - we will be in time, we will finish it and put it in a series.
      2. Scoun
        Scoun 14 October 2015 16: 17 New
        +4
        Quote: Longmire
        Quote: sinukvl
        This is the answer to our "Armata", to console your vanity

        is it a planned modernization, and by the way, how old have Armat, 2.5 prototypes already been riveted there? laughing

        Да как Вы "смеете" что-то писать про американцев в положительном ключе?! Вы засланный "казачок", это только мы имеем право модернизировать Т-72 и это не является распилом а есть модернизация. laughing ++))
        And you spoil your karma with ur comment quack quack crackers)))
        No ** I, Americans should sit down, cry. put your hands down with the words ahh! the Russians have "Armata" and we have fucked up all the polymers! At the same time, tactfully keeping silent that in the near future the Armat, like the T-90 with a gulkin nose and a main battle tank in various modifications (and not always successful), remains the T-72.
        laughing
        Damn, at such a pace, I’ll soon jump to trolling utryakryalok)))
        1. Altona
          Altona 14 October 2015 18: 16 New
          +3
          Quote: Scoun
          No ** I, Americans should sit down, cry. put your hands down with the words ahh! the Russians have "Armata" and we have fucked up all the polymers! At the same time, tactfully keeping silent that in the near future the Armat, like the T-90 with a gulkin nose and a main battle tank in various modifications (and not always successful), remains the T-72.

          --------------------
          Yes, everything is fine, the Americans’s most beautiful tank, just let it ride off the highway and climb into our non-chernozem region, loam in the Middle Lane, see how this railway wagon (by weight) on the tracks works ...
      3. Major Yurik
        Major Yurik 14 October 2015 16: 22 New
        +4
        Quote: Longmire
        Quote: sinukvl
        This is the answer to our "Armata", to console your vanity

        is it a planned modernization, and by the way, how old have Armat, 2.5 prototypes already been riveted there? laughing


        Enough for you, just keep in mind - TANKS OF KLOPA DO NOT CRUSH! negative
      4. Albert1988
        Albert1988 14 October 2015 17: 13 New
        +3
        Quote: Longmire
        how quickly have Armat, 2.5 prototypes already been riveted there?


        Минимум 10 штук, если иметь ввиду танк Т-14, а так вообще машин на базе "арматы" десятка 3)))
  5. Maksus
    Maksus 14 October 2015 15: 40 New
    +7
    All the same, the Americans are still strong; it’s too early to take them off. Everything is their way - and the tanks are upgraded and the army is at war. They will not give peace to the world ...
    1. vovanpain
      vovanpain 14 October 2015 15: 45 New
      14
      They’ll upgrade the tanks, but they’ll either fight from afar or with the wrong hands, but they don’t have to put their caps on, you are right.
      1. Maksus
        Maksus 14 October 2015 15: 51 New
        +4
        About "by the wrong hands" тут да, не поспоришь. А вот в "from afar" не вижу ничего плохого. Живой солдат - лучше мертвого, разве не так?
  6. Cananecat
    Cananecat 14 October 2015 15: 41 New
    0
    Then v4; v5; v6 ... the relatively fair selection of dough from Congress continues.
    1. DIVAN SOLDIER
      DIVAN SOLDIER 14 October 2015 15: 48 New
      10
      And what do we have, t72 B3 B4 B5 ????
      1. afdjhbn67
        afdjhbn67 14 October 2015 15: 52 New
        +2
        Quote: DIVAN SOLDIER
        And what do we have, t72 B3 B4 B5 ????


        Well, why else B1, G1, D1 .. etc.
  7. gukoyan
    gukoyan 14 October 2015 15: 42 New
    -2
    I see them thieves in the open already grandmas begin to steal))
  8. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 14 October 2015 15: 42 New
    +2
    Something announced improvements do not pull on a new modification.

    And, most importantly, all modifications - as you can easily see - are offensive in nature, which confirms the essentially aggressive and militaristic nature of the United States.
  9. X Y Z
    X Y Z 14 October 2015 15: 42 New
    +1
    A cart for colonial wars and heavy cutting of dough. Other use is not intended.
  10. demo
    demo 14 October 2015 15: 43 New
    10
    Interestingly, does the tank meet California requirements in terms of nitrogen oxide content in its exhaust?
    Or only Volkswagen for 18 lard can be shod.
  11. tihon4uk
    tihon4uk 14 October 2015 15: 44 New
    0
    The turret with a machine gun could be made smaller, more compact.
  12. Denis DV
    Denis DV 14 October 2015 15: 44 New
    0
    And most importantly, they feel that this is the latest version of the tank drinks
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 October 2015 15: 55 New
      0
      Почему последняя? Запросто будет и "Абрамс М1А3". Вряд ли в ближайшие 10 лет там на вооружение примут абсолютно новый танк.
  13. K-50
    K-50 14 October 2015 15: 45 New
    +5
    According to the resource, the main differences between the modification of M1A2 SEP v.3 from the previous one (SEP v.2) are

    Without KAZ and dynamic protection all this is just firewood request laughing
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 October 2015 15: 57 New
      +2
      They put DZ on the sides, KAZ (Trophy applicant number 1) will also be easy, it’s not difficult to integrate it.
      Our tanks now also do not have KAZ.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 14 October 2015 23: 39 New
        0
        Like new shells - this new OBPS for Abrams is likely to break all of our dynamic defense systems
  14. Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 14 October 2015 15: 47 New
    +7
    Насколько знаю, в ФША "Абрамсы" уже много лет не производятся. Всё заточено на модернизацию того, что имеется. Под это имеется два завода, на одном разбираются до винтиков,на другом собираются и усовершенствоваются. Даже после боёв всё, что остаётся от танка собирается и вывозится. И чтобы уменьшить поголовие этих танков необходимо раскурочивать так, чтобы основные элементы корпуса и башни не поддавались реставрации. Только тогда танк будет считаться уничтоженным.Тогда восстановление будет по стоимости дороже производства. Это капиталисты, а они любят счёт деньгам wink
    hi
    1. Monos
      Monos 14 October 2015 16: 01 New
      +6
      smile Well, why be sure to chicken? Just leave the battlefield behind you. Scrap metal is also useful to us. wink
      1. Rurikovich
        Rurikovich 14 October 2015 16: 12 New
        +1
        It is also an option wink
  15. ratfly
    ratfly 14 October 2015 15: 47 New
    +1
    I opened the article with alarm, expecting a lot of dirty tricks, but with relief I saw only changes in the body kit and the unification of ammunition for a lot of loot ...
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 October 2015 15: 58 New
      +1
      Modernization is the same. Of the most significant, there are actually new ammunition.
    2. Longmire
      Longmire 14 October 2015 16: 01 New
      -5
      Quote: ratfly
      I was anxiously opening an article

      and the tank itself does not cause alarm? Do you throw your hats?
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 14 October 2015 16: 02 New
        +5
        Quote: Longmire
        Do you throw your hats?

        In large fields.
        1. dsi
          dsi 14 October 2015 16: 12 New
          +2
          Poplar also does not roll on the road. He needs goals.
          1. Alexander Romanov
            Alexander Romanov 14 October 2015 17: 25 New
            +1
            Quote: dsi
            Poplar also does not roll on the road. He needs goals.

            The whole continent in the form of a target.
            1. dsi
              dsi 14 October 2015 18: 56 New
              0
              The whole continent in the form of a target.

              Is not a fact. The target is for mercenaries, etc. etc. How shallow you think ...
              1. dsi
                dsi 14 October 2015 19: 24 New
                0
                I need to clarify something ...
      2. Albert1988
        Albert1988 14 October 2015 17: 15 New
        +1
        Quote: Longmire
        Do you throw your hats?

        BOPS ...
  16. bmv04636
    bmv04636 14 October 2015 15: 50 New
    +1
    Interesting Negro loader still left. And Che didn’t understand KAZ. No Jews clamped?
  17. rubidiy
    rubidiy 14 October 2015 15: 50 New
    0
    something the sum does not inspire ... what
  18. IAlex
    IAlex 14 October 2015 15: 50 New
    +5
    A good tank, though a bit old, but it has already been tested and has participated in many conflicts ...
  19. bocsman
    bocsman 14 October 2015 15: 50 New
    +1
    Interestingly, they removed their notorious additional generator from the rear of the tower ?!
    1. Th1nker
      Th1nker 14 October 2015 16: 16 New
      +3
      Removed from the time of the first version of the M1A2 SEP, the APU was removed from the turret basket, due to its high vulnerability, and an option was developed to install a new auxiliary unit (Under Armor Auxiliary Power Unit) in the fenders on the left side. At the moment, the project has not been implemented and the tanks are supplied only with an additional battery, which allows the tank to function for up to 10 hours in "silent" mode.
  20. McLuha-MacLeod
    McLuha-MacLeod 14 October 2015 15: 51 New
    0
    All their tankers are already sick from their tank depleted uranium armor
    1. IAlex
      IAlex 14 October 2015 15: 53 New
      +1
      Well, passengers and Boeing pilots have not yet complained ...
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 14 October 2015 23: 42 New
      0
      But the armor does not fonit and shells, too, so they have nothing to hurt.
  21. Mikhail Krapivin
    Mikhail Krapivin 14 October 2015 15: 51 New
    0
    It will burn like a darling ...
  22. 3 Gorynych
    3 Gorynych 14 October 2015 15: 52 New
    0
    Judging by the picture, because of this, even a loser will not miss! A good target ..
  23. mpzss
    mpzss 14 October 2015 15: 53 New
    +1
    most importantly, they did not write anything about armor protection ... either they darken or just made a new body kit, added two types of shells (and I think they are quite expensive) and now they ask for money!
  24. Persifal
    Persifal 14 October 2015 15: 55 New
    +1
    I do not understand. Where are guided missiles? Where is the dynamic protection? Where is the active defense? Some kind of coffin ...
  25. JonnyT
    JonnyT 14 October 2015 15: 56 New
    +2
    against t-xnumx prepared. unpleasant news of a new shot ...
    1. Engineer
      Engineer 14 October 2015 16: 00 New
      +1
      I’ll tell you more: all the tank’s shots before that were designed specifically to destroy Soviet, and now Russian, in short, Russian tanks.
  26. Engineer
    Engineer 14 October 2015 15: 57 New
    -1
    A remote-controlled combat module appeared on an American tank !!!! After 35 years, he still appeared.
  27. Bort radist
    Bort radist 14 October 2015 16: 00 New
    +1
    The news appeared at one of the factories of the Leningrad Region invented paint. BMP and tank become invisible to radars and thermal imagers.
    1. SSeT
      SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 36 New
      0
      And also for the eyes! and the smell of logan is indistinguishable!
      Меньше верьте этим байкам - такую "краску" каждые 3 года изобретают уже лет 30 как (вообще-то 70 - до этого было "радиационо-защитно-поглощающаяя")
  28. greshnik80
    greshnik80 14 October 2015 16: 01 New
    0
    As I understand it, the charger remains with them? Automatic loading is not provided?
  29. evil partisan
    evil partisan 14 October 2015 16: 03 New
    0
    As I understand it, they have already decided on Ukrin that they will be delivered to the Armed Forces of Ukraine firstwinked . For nothing repeat .
    1. Baloo
      Baloo 14 October 2015 22: 03 New
      -1
      I doubt the Macington macaques are dumb, but not so much. Again, the geyropa asks and asks for tanks, planes ... such as protect, protect ...
  30. Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 October 2015 16: 06 New
    +2
    Good photo. Visitors to the exhibition are not at all interested in modernization, which is difficult to evaluate or touch. Everyone is standing with their backs to Abrams. Another thing is the demonstration in Nizhny Tagil. Everything is clearly visible: speed, maneuver, fire and accuracy, and at the same time the flight of the tank.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 14 October 2015 17: 49 New
      +2
      Quote: Алексей_К
      Everything is clearly visible: speed, maneuver, fire and accuracy, and at the same time the flight of the tank.

      If Abrash takes off, after landing, they will not only collect bolts and nuts, but also scrape off the crew with the loader from the walls. Although I think it will be easier to paint over.
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 14 October 2015 23: 51 New
        0
        Abrams at least does not fly apart when an ATGM gets into it, unlike our tanks.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 15 October 2015 00: 56 New
          +1
          Quote: Vadim237
          Abrams at least does not fly apart when an ATGM gets into it, unlike our tanks.

          But the turret’s engine is easily damaged by one shot from an RPG-7. They say that a large-caliber machine gun of 14,5 mm flashes the armor that protects the turret’s engine.
          А по поводу "разлетаются"наши танки,так на войне как на войне.Вы считаете что это показатель по которому можно сказать о том,что наши танки хуже?Хм...
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 15 October 2015 09: 13 New
            0
            Safe crew yes.
  31. Sasha75
    Sasha75 14 October 2015 16: 11 New
    +2
    And how they upgraded the automatic Negro's automatic loader was changed to a very healthy Negro)))).
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 14 October 2015 17: 45 New
      0
      On two blue blacks.
  32. Korney84
    Korney84 14 October 2015 16: 12 New
    +1
    Tank for pumping from Xzibit: the main thing is to stick more monitors)))
  33. Belarus
    Belarus 14 October 2015 16: 14 New
    +2
    Let them modify it as they want, but as they burned, the M1 Abrams will burn well. These tanks are designed for those countries where the weapons are not developed or they are very old. For example, until recently in Syria it might have shown itself but not now.
    In reality, these tanks can only show themselves in battle. And the question remains: how much does this tank cost ??? And is it worth that kind of money ???
  34. RUSIVAN
    RUSIVAN 14 October 2015 16: 18 New
    +1
    In the US, the latest modification of the Abrams was demonstrated.
    The tank itself is 50% of the whole, the remaining 50% is the crew of the tank, on which the success of the tank depends, and the crew needs motivation, courage and the ability to fight ...
  35. sergeyzzz
    sergeyzzz 14 October 2015 16: 20 New
    +1
    Quote: demo
    Interestingly, does the tank meet California requirements in terms of nitrogen oxide content in its exhaust?
    Or only Volkswagen for 18 lard can be shod.

    These 18 lard new tanks and stick. I would use a Volkswagen emblem on a tank in their place. lol
  36. Coconut
    Coconut 14 October 2015 16: 24 New
    0
    General Dynamic Corporation for the first time demonstrated in Washington at the AUSA 2015 exhibition the latest modification of the M1 Abrams tank - the M1A2 SEP v.3 variant, the bmpd blog reports with reference to armyrecognition.com.

    yes yes ... on such or almost such a Taliban with an igil katayutso..a they shout that they took away from Iraq wassat
  37. slaw14
    slaw14 14 October 2015 16: 26 New
    +4
    As a friend of RPG-7 said:
    "Ковырял я его и дальше ковырять буду"
    1. Baloo
      Baloo 14 October 2015 21: 58 New
      0
      Respect and respect for your friend and his parents especially. I’ll go get the medicine for their health. bully drinks
  38. tchoni
    tchoni 14 October 2015 16: 26 New
    +2
    Here you don’t just have to find fault. They are very smart people. In addition, underestimating the enemy is very dangerous. It is clear that Abrash will not be able to reach how many do not upgrade it, but, firstly, the tank and the tank do not converge so often in battle, so that it would be very critical. And the second, while we are riveting a thousand Armats in a crisis, we’ll modernize our thousand abrashks five times.
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 14 October 2015 16: 43 New
      +3
      Quote: tchoni
      And the second, while we are riveting a thousand Armats in a crisis, we’ll modernize our thousand abrashks five times.

      А про Т-90 "ПРОРЫВ"как то вы умолчали,а зря.И в ближайшее время есть мысль сделать дистанционно управляемый Т-90(не все конечно,но думаю в достаточном количестве).А Абраша и дорог и тяжел и без автомата заряжания.Что касаемо уязвимости,то извините двигатель башни как был не защищен по человечески ,так и остался таковым.И РПГ-7 на востоке за 150 долларов ,при попадании в этот двигатель,делает этот модернизированный танк за 8 миллионов в груду ржавого железа.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 15 October 2015 20: 24 New
        0
        If the plans for the modernization of our army remain as they were two years ago, then the picture will be as follows. on tank troops at least.
        500-600 T-90
        +1700-2000 Т-72 модернизированных до уровня Б3 или другого более высокого уровня. Кои и будут плавно заменяться "Арматой" со скоростью батальон-полк в год в течении 10 лет.
        В случае "Абраши" я говорю о том, что это асимметричный ответ на нашу "Армату" и совсем не бестолковый. Потому как технические недостатки танка могут быть скомпенсированы тактикой его применения, информационным обеспечением экипажа, повышением эффективности логистических служб.
        And there is absolutely no reason to relate to the Americans, led by an African American, captainly and contemptuously. It may go sideways. In the same Syria, let’s say.
  39. MolGro
    MolGro 14 October 2015 16: 29 New
    +4

    Yes normal tank !! It burns beautifully!
    1. SSeT
      SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 41 New
      +2
      By the way, it is EXTREMELY a successful hit - at the junction of the bathhouse with the BC and the fighting compartment - and the protective shutters also got into the BC! 1 in 100000, LUCKY!
      P.S. 2nd case nothing - hit and hit, only the dust went
      1. MolGro
        MolGro 17 October 2015 16: 57 New
        0
        Yes, he makes his way to the forehead of the tower!


        and the tower flies off beautifully


  40. Shadowcat
    Shadowcat 14 October 2015 16: 30 New
    +2
    Nah ... the most important modernism is not pumped. Where are the jams? Which is + 5% to the reload speed?
  41. lopvlad
    lopvlad 14 October 2015 16: 39 New
    +1
    These modifications of Abrams are simply an attempt to extend the life of a tank in the late 70s.
  42. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 14 October 2015 16: 42 New
    +1
    In their place, I would not concentrate on upgrading Abrams, but on creating a new generation tank, as opposed to Armate.
    1. AlNikolaich
      AlNikolaich 14 October 2015 21: 48 New
      +2
      Quote: ALEA IACTA EST
      In their place, I would not concentrate on upgrading Abrams, but on creating a new generation tank, as opposed to Armate.

      Colleague, the Americans are doing everything right! They have a new tank and are not in the project. And appropriations
      Congress did not allocate for the development of a new machine ... So, when they will have a new tank will be unknown. And the modernization is timely. As a result, the funds will be justified. Tactical improvement
      characteristics, a reduction in the nomenclature of shells, increased combat power. Not bad!
      With regards to Almaty, how soon will it go en masse to the troops?
  43. Bort radist
    Bort radist 14 October 2015 16: 53 New
    +1
    "В США продемонстрирована последняя модификация «Абрамса»"
    As they say in aviation - The last and the last is a big difference.
    1. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 14 October 2015 23: 42 New
      0
      Quote: Bort Radist
      "В США продемонстрирована последняя модификация «Абрамса»"
      As they say in aviation - The last and the last is a big difference.

      По-русски более правильное выражение "последний". А выражение "крайний" - это большая неопределённость. Например у очереди людей всегда два края, это "первый" и "последний". Или, например, когда артиллеристы выбивают танки на марше или в узком месте, где танки не могут развернуться боевым строем, то они сначала бьют по "последнему", а потом по "первому", но уж никак не по "крайним".
  44. roskot
    roskot 14 October 2015 17: 09 New
    0
    The main thing in the instructions. And it says there’s no way closer than 30 km to Armata.
  45. slizhov
    slizhov 14 October 2015 17: 38 New
    0
    It is necessary to something with our brand new HOLIDAY, however ... :)
  46. alstr
    alstr 14 October 2015 17: 39 New
    0
    But I have a question? If you take down the big garbage on the tower, then it turns out that it will be impossible to shoot new-fangled shells (these are those with remote detonation)?
    If so then it’s absolutely wonderful to shoot on the roof and the whole tank is not dangerous.
  47. Maksus
    Maksus 14 October 2015 18: 07 New
    +6
    Comrades, writing about the automatic loader - read the characteristics of the shells - the length of the American BOPS 980mm, can you imagine what size the carousel and shoulder strap of the tower should be in order to automatically charge it ???? That's why they work nigra.
    But our BOPSs are short, but from Almaty we can get a normal shell, but for now, in this field we are losing NATE.
    1. Rader
      Rader 14 October 2015 21: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: Maksus
      Comrades, writing about the automatic loader - read the characteristics of the shells - the length of the American BOPS is 980 mm, can you imagine what size of the carousel and shoulder strap should be in order to automatically charge it ???? That's why they work nigra ...

      Hmm .... ??? And what do AZs now only do of the carousel type do? And the French with drum AZ? And the last of the French AMX 56 Leclerc with a conveyor belt? And object 640? And on the abrams platform they also wanted to create a tank with an AZ and an uninhabited tower, but it didn’t grow together ... So if we really wanted to, there would have been an AB for the abrams or his successor, there are not so many technical difficulties.
      1. Maksus
        Maksus 14 October 2015 23: 24 New
        0
        The drum mechanism has drawbacks - it is impossible to quickly reload, the same AMX-13, shot its shells at a high pace and went to the rear to reload. And Leclerc was originally designed for AZ, like the Panther K2. Installing a AZ in Abrams will lead to such a cost of remaking that it is easier to wait for lasers and plasma guns)))
    2. SSeT
      SSeT 14 October 2015 21: 50 New
      +1
      Maksus: ты Мечешь бисер перед сви.. ну сам знаешь! Школоте просто не понять, что существует разный подход инженерный - они вычитали у Кошкина про "нигру" - ну вот и резвятся! невдомёк, что бывают технические обстоятельства (унитар амов новый длиннее 152-го от 2А83), про то, что НАШИ танкисты за 4-го только ЗА, ибо ТО воообще, или тупо гуслю менять при -30 лучше 4-м, что чел динамичнее в ряде ситуаций да и вообще 4>3, что АЗ СЛИШКОМ громоздкий при нашем малозабронированном обьёме, что на блокпосте вахту лучше нести 4-м с 2-я пулемётами, чем с 1-м, Что..Что..Чтоо.. есть десятки этих ЧТОО!?ЭЭ, о которых школ или офиспланктон даже не подозревает, а впрочем, см мою верхнию фразу! hi drinks
      1. Shadowcat
        Shadowcat 15 October 2015 03: 27 New
        0
        But half a liter for three is more convenient to share than for four) drinks
  48. Yak28
    Yak28 14 October 2015 20: 07 New
    -2
    Now there are a lot of various ATGMs, grenade launchers in the troops, + helicopters that have shown themselves very well as tank killers. I am silent about aviation, artillery and missiles. In my opinion, tank columns are not formidable like in the Great Patriotic War. Now nobody is tanks don't scare
    1. Maksus
      Maksus 14 October 2015 20: 15 New
      +1
      Well, don't scare. Do you know how far you can hit a tank type target from a grenade launcher? And to get out of the gun into a moving object? Actually, ATGMs and helicopters with ATGMs are terrible for the tank, but some are difficult to carry and expensive, others are very afraid of air defense. A tank is a force, and in itself, but with the presence of support in the form of infantry - this is already fear and horror. And it’s not a fact that a grenade or ATGM hit will destroy the tank.
      1. Yak28
        Yak28 14 October 2015 21: 58 New
        -1
        Well, for example, a Cornet or similar kilometers will shoot for 4-5, grenade launchers are certainly much closer, in a city a couple of hundred meters is just enough. But if you compare the cost of the ATGM and the tank, the difference will be wow.
        Of course, if the tanks come with the support of infantry, aviation, then everything is clear. But I mean that the tank, as I believe, is not such a formidable force as it was before. The Ukrainians with tanks and aviation did not achieve much, and Iraq at one time had more than a thousand tanks and the result is zero. And of course the tank is the most massive and well-armored unit
        1. Maksus
          Maksus 14 October 2015 23: 18 New
          +1
          Have you seen a tank near? Damn, you can crap one's pants on the kind of 80 coming to you, even if you are firmly convinced that this is the tank of your TB. And if he shoots at the same time?
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 15 October 2015 11: 49 New
            +1
            for Maksus:
            That's for sure! I have from my own infantry support tanks
            the hair stood up under a helmet ... lying, and the earth is shaking,
            as in an earthquake - 50 tons of steel creeps nearby.
            A tank, even an old one, is a frightening thing.
    2. SSeT
      SSeT 14 October 2015 22: 01 New
      +1
      Yak28 SU: You just didn’t see him live, and you can’t imagine what kind of power in capable hands!
    3. Shurik70
      Shurik70 14 October 2015 23: 04 New
      +1
      Quote: Yak28
      In my opinion now tank columns do not represent a formidable force as in the great Patriotic war


      Any technique is effective with skillful use.
      Massive tank attacks with hurricane fire sweeping obstacles showed themselves very well in Iraq.
      I believe that the Americans will also modify tanks for this tactic - to shoot faster, further, more powerful, with increased ammunition.
      True, there were no missiles in Iraq for a massive response. Type Solcepёka, for example. And so they would have covered the whole brigade with one salvo.
  49. ssn18
    ssn18 14 October 2015 20: 25 New
    +1
    "На эти цели в бюджете заложена сумма в $ 367,9 млн."

    It was from this point that one had to start!
    For the exceptional ones, the main thing is to cut the loot, but the fact that a new abrash appears is far from a fact. And the most interesting examples are many.
  50. RUS69
    RUS69 14 October 2015 22: 01 New
    0
    Quote: Maksus
    Well, don't scare. Do you know how far you can hit a tank type target from a grenade launcher? And to get out of the gun into a moving object? Actually, ATGMs and helicopters with ATGMs are terrible for the tank, but some are difficult to carry and expensive, others are very afraid of air defense. A tank is a force, and in itself, but with the presence of support in the form of infantry - this is already fear and horror. And it’s not a fact that a grenade or ATGM hit will destroy the tank.

    Yes and not the fact that gets.
    T 14 for this and developed as a complex sorry for offtop
    Unlike traditional tanks, the T-14, like all combat vehicles of the Armata family, is not intended for single combat, but for working with a group of various combat vehicles in one tactical link, performing the function of reconnaissance, target designation and remote control through the ESU system TK (unified tactical link management system) of the Sozvedie concern [23] [25], which allows all Armata vehicles to receive an operational situation in real time and automatically calculate ballistic data for fire control systems in a scenario of hitting targets with more than one Armata ”, And attacks the target as a whole group at once. Due to AFAR, the T-14 radar in the tactical link is positioned as a complex of army intelligence and target designation [17]. Direct destruction of targets can be carried out not by the T-14, but by the BBM of its tactical link. For example, a heavy armored infantry fighting vehicle Armata T-15 is capable of using air defense guns 2A42 [26] and 9M133FM-3 Kornet anti-aircraft missiles [27] to fire at air targets found by T-14. For firing T-14 with the help of another BBM, structural changes are introduced into them, in particular, all armored vehicles with the Epoch combat module (T-15, Kurganets-25) received completely remote control fire, including in the capture and tracking of targets. [28] It is proposed to expand this scenario of the remote delivery of targets from the T-14 to the ability of the T-14 to control missiles and guns of an attack helicopter paired with the T-14 [29]. Uralvagonzavod through its Technowars magazine announced that it plans to make the T-14 itself remotely controlled [30]