Stealth coating for Russian technology

The first stage of testing a fundamentally new stealth cover, which is suitable for any armored vehicles, reports TASS a message from the representative of the enterprise developer Konstantin Lachikhin.




“We experience three types of paint - with anti-icing effect, with radio-absorbing and deactivating (reducing radiation contamination) properties. These types of stealth paint are suitable for any type of armored vehicles, including the newest Armata family models. ”- said Lachikhin.

According to him, the T-72, the BMP-1KSH and the BMP-2 tanks were involved in the experiment, which took place at the center of the Central Military District for a month.

“During the night stage, the properties of the paint were checked with the help of intelligence equipment, in particular, unmanned aerial vehicles and foreign-made night-vision devices. Two of the three samples showed almost complete absorption both in the light range and in the infrared spectrum. Also, the painted equipment has passed the test on rough terrain - ditches with water, dirt, ”the center informed the press service of the Center, adding that“ the color range of new materials meets the standards adopted by the Russian Armed Forces. ”

The composition of the paint is kept secret. “These tests are very important for us to be able to adjust the composition of the coating, add some elements. Per unit of technology goes from 25 to 50 kg of paint. After six months, we will check how the stealth coating and its properties are preserved on the equipment, ”said Lachikhin.
Photos used:
IA "ARMS OF RUSSIA", Alexey Kitaev
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

52 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Irokez 15 October 2015 16: 33 New
    • 13
    • 0
    +13
    Invisibility is invulnerability.
    So keep and promote teleportation technologies on the battlefield, right now here - and right there, now it will be cool.
    1. War and Peace 15 October 2015 16: 50 New
      • 45
      • 0
      +45
      "stealth", but you can’t say in Russian? stealth, zhurnalyugi steamed-nerus ...
      1. kocclissi 15 October 2015 16: 55 New
        • 24
        • 0
        +24
        Look how they disguised themselves ....... they can’t find it!
        1. kocclissi 15 October 2015 17: 34 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          The new device operates in the thermal wavelength range and not only disguises a combat vehicle on the ground, but creates illusions if necessary. "Cloak" tricks devices and eyes, making the armored monster look in the IR spectrum, like a car.

          The technology, called Adaptiv, will officially debut at the end of September in London at the international arms exhibition DSEi 2011. The development is an active coating for tanks and infantry fighting vehicles. It consists of many hexagonal pixels, capable of very quickly changing their temperature in one direction or another at the command of the electronics.
          1. pilot8878 15 October 2015 19: 10 New
            • 11
            • 0
            +11
            Quote: kocclissi
            It consists of many hexagonal pixels, capable of very quickly changing their temperature in one direction or another on the command of electronics

            And how do these pixels respond to external mechanical commands from landmines, bullets, fragments?
            1. crazyrom 16 October 2015 00: 39 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              Quote: kocclissi
              making the armored monster look like a passenger car in the IR spectrum.

              Why look like a car if you can not look at all? I do not know if everyone understood here, but our paint is much better than all the masks presented before. Previous reduce visibility, turn the tank into a car, and our paint - the tank is not visible at all. The rocket is not induced, the radar and the aircraft do not notice. Imagine if ukram give javelins, but they just do not catch a tank in the sight, although here he goes! Only RPG-7 in the afternoon, only hardcore!
          2. just exp 15 October 2015 19: 36 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            just compare this shell with paint, these are two different things. For example, I can hide equipment in an underground hangar, and it will not be visible either.
          3. Siberia 9444 15 October 2015 19: 52 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Cool stuff !!! I would have to hide from the rangers from the rangers! But noverno is very expensive.
            1. Andrey Yuryevich 16 October 2015 03: 58 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Quote: Siberia 9444
              Cool stuff !!! I would have to hide from the rangers from the rangers! But noverno is very expensive.

              and I would, SVD from poachers, but a handful of oil ...
    2. Gogia 15 October 2015 17: 15 New
      • 13
      • 0
      +13
      Even if this coverage will reduce the reflection by at least 20%, then according to statistics it will be necessary to get closer to shoot at it, the helicopter will see it 4-5 km closer, itself falling under probable shelling. Therefore, a super duper thing !!! Keep it up. It’s like in Vietnam with amers. After adopting an anti-splinter vest with a collar, non-lethal personnel losses decreased by 20-25%. It has long been necessary to develop these areas. For a little bit, and the destroyer turns into a pepelats with a gravitsapoy :)))))
    3. vyinemeynen 15 October 2015 17: 30 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      "Two of the three samples showed almost complete reflection both in the light range and in the infrared spectrum."
      In general, is a full reflection a mirror, is it possible that absorption is all the same?
      And in the QUOTE ABSORPTION!
    4. Foxmara 15 October 2015 17: 53 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      this technology (teleportation) is already there. Re-read the events in Syria and Crimea wassat
    5. clidon 15 October 2015 20: 14 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But more recently, the phrase "stealth" and "invisibility", caused a mountain of laughter, irony and doubts about the effectiveness.
  2. monah10 15 October 2015 16: 34 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Will you get a tank? And I do not see. But he is.
    If true, then great.
    1. beer-youk 15 October 2015 16: 57 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Better:
      -Do you see the tank? And I see. But the ATGM does not see!
  3. major7775 15 October 2015 16: 35 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Oh, it would be faster for us to have such coverage in the troops!
    1. Stiletto 15 October 2015 16: 39 New
      • 9
      • 0
      +9
      Quote: major7775
      Oh, it would be faster for us to have such coverage in the troops!


      Faster is not necessary, it is necessary - better. Speed ​​is usually more useful in another business.
    2. quote 15 October 2015 16: 48 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      You are familiar with such a saying. Slowly but surely. It fits almost all aspects of life. But to army technology, like a plot in literature. That is, from and to !!!!
      Provided, if not war.
      I'll try to exaggerate.
      Let one cartridge, but "nuclear"? or a hundred and 16 caliber?
  4. 3 Gorynych 15 October 2015 16: 40 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    A similar paint, though for aviation, was developed back in the 80s (if I'm not mistaken). In response to the "stealth", the paint is cheaper, and the effect is almost the same!
    1. St Petrov 15 October 2015 16: 42 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      paint is one of the elements of stealth technology

      stealth is not only angles
      1. 3 Gorynych 15 October 2015 16: 44 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        I mean for our aviation. There was an article in the scientific journal of those years - the United States was in shock! How much cheaper stealth cost the Russians.
    2. quote 15 October 2015 16: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: 3
      A similar paint, though for aviation, was developed back in the 80s (if I'm not mistaken). In response to the "stealth", the paint is cheaper, and the effect is almost the same!

      And if the afterburner flight mode is applied? Has it gone “far beyond the sound"? Where is the cover? It’s good if you immediately go home. Covering is not a panacea. One of the means (and fragile and temporary).
      1. pilot8878 15 October 2015 19: 13 New
        • -1
        • 0
        -1
        Quote: devis
        And if the afterburner flight mode is applied? Has it gone "far beyond the sound"? Where is the cover?

        But what if the Su-27 came to supersonic, immediately repaint it? I doubt it very much.
    3. clidon 15 October 2015 20: 21 New
      • -1
      • 0
      -1
      This is a bike of the 90s. For all foreign things they say there is one super-response - super-paint. We painted her a fence and it became invisible. But in fact, they heard a ringing ...

      Paints or coatings have been developed by all and sundry since the 60s. But a coating of small thickness alone does not produce a large effect. Otherwise, it would not make sense to invest so much in the form of stealth machines. Therefore, such coatings actually exist, but the effect of them is not as high as we would like. Roughly speaking, the metallization of the lantern gives almost as much as all the paint from the tip of the nose to the tail (and there is also a special mastic).
      Therefore, the effect of thin coatings is, it does not work in all ranges and does not give any magical effect. The most beneficial coverage is a camouflage net. But it works almost exclusively in the optical range. )
  5. Kalmar 15 October 2015 16: 42 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    With anti-icing properties, everything is clear, a useful thing. The decontamination effect is incomprehensible - how is it? Throws off radionuclides from itself? Well, the radio-absorbing one personally raises questions for me: it always seemed that the tanks were searched mainly in the infrared range, it was heated well and brightly.
    1. beer-youk 15 October 2015 16: 50 New
      • -3
      • 0
      -3
      With modern EW tools, the effect of radio absorption is an expensive and completely useless gadget.
      1. Kasym 15 October 2015 17: 19 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        To reduce the visibility of the object, paint was still in the USSR and was used on airplanes. Radio absorption is unlikely, but you can scatter radiation (reduce the power of the displayed radiation). Metal “shavings” were added to the paint in the form of tiny, small, flat plates such as rectangles (nanotechnology). When applying paint, the “shavings” lie chaotically (at different angles to the surface), and when radiation hits the surface, such shavings scatter the images displayed in different directions. hi
        It is interesting how long such paint on various techniques is.
      2. Manul 15 October 2015 17: 24 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Quote: beer-youk
        With modern EW tools, the effect of radio absorption is an expensive and completely useless gadget.

        Is radar related to electronic warfare?
        1. beer-youk 30 November 2015 18: 03 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          With the quality work of electronic warfare, radar stupidly does not work.
    2. Manul 15 October 2015 17: 22 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Kalmar
      Well, the radio-absorbing one personally raises questions for me: it always seemed that the tanks were searched mainly in the infrared range, it warms up well and brightly.

      Apache and Chrysanthemum are looking in the millimeter range.
    3. dvina71 15 October 2015 20: 14 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: Kalmar
      The decontamination effect is incomprehensible - how is it?

      The main problem of radiation for BT is not radiation itself .. for armor, you can enter the epicenter in an hour. The problem is then to wash off dust and dirt, the main storage of radioactive particles. The paint, with all its brilliance, has a surface on which dirt is easily trapped .. the mass of car washes is proof of this. Therefore, anti-radiation paint a) does not retain dust and dirt b) it is easy to clean without special tools.
      1. Kalmar 15 October 2015 21: 36 New
        • -2
        • 0
        -2
        Therefore, anti-radiation paint a) does not retain dust and dirt b) it is easy to clean without special tools.

        Those. in this context, "anti-radiation" - is it "dust-repellent"?
        1. dvina71 15 October 2015 21: 48 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Kalmar
          Those. in this context, "anti-radiation" - is it "dust-repellent"?


          Most likely .. You ask chemists out there .. what is the disinfection procedure .. They will tell you about deactivation posts, deactivating solutions and other events. How and why paint on the armor to work as a shield .. I do not see. Armor in itself is one of the best anti-radiation materials.
          1. Manul 16 October 2015 08: 09 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: dvina71
            Most likely .. You ask chemists out there .. what is the disinfection procedure .. They will tell you about deactivation posts, deactivating solutions and other events. How and why paint on the armor to work as a shield .. I do not see. Armor in itself is one of the best anti-radiation materials.

            Why didn’t the term please him so much? If this paint (as I understand the antistatic effect) does not have to deactivate the machine after irradiation, then why not call the paint like that?
        2. Manul 16 October 2015 08: 01 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Kalmar
          Those. in this context, "anti-radiation" - is it "dust-repellent"?

          And the term "vacuum bomb" suits you, since you are so picky?
          1. Kalmar 16 October 2015 11: 09 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            And the term "vacuum bomb" suits you, since you are so picky?

            Normal term. The ODAB-500 standardly charges 145 kg of high-pressure liquefied vacuum, so I see no contradictions.

            But seriously, I don’t quibble, I’ll just clarify whether I understood correctly the main essence of the anti-radiation coating: repel (not accumulate) dust, including infected dust. Maybe there are some other chips provided.

            Relax, in general :)
  6. APS
    APS 15 October 2015 16: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Well what can I say, great! And when it passes all the tests and all our tanks are painted with paint, it will be even better!
  7. Denis DV 15 October 2015 16: 50 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Is that trolling? Does the coating cover the thermal circuit of the tank?
    1. kil 31 15 October 2015 17: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Denis DV
      Is that trolling? Does the coating cover the thermal circuit of the tank?

      Totally agree with you. This paint is for aviation. With an anti-icing effect completely for aviation, with radio-absorbing properties also for aviation, tanks are looking for a thermal imager, decontamination properties for technology.
    2. Manul 15 October 2015 17: 29 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Denis DV
      Is that trolling? Does the coating cover the thermal circuit of the tank?

      There are traps, there are auxiliary engines. Apache is suitable at night, when the equipment is not on the march, this is their usual tactic (I do not believe that Apache will go into an open collision). And if the tank is not wound up, masked, on an auxiliary engine, and even with such a coating (also a trap in phonite), will Apache break off anything?
      I'm not saying that this is a panacea (and even the option of a collision with Apache seems fantastic), but all protection options should be provided.
  8. ilyaches 15 October 2015 16: 52 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    So I do not understand. After field tests, did the painted technique "glow"? If not, then that's great.
    1. APS
      APS 15 October 2015 17: 00 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      “It is impossible to achieve complete absorption of any radio radiation incident on the object at an arbitrary angle. Therefore, the main goal when choosing a shape is to reflect the waves away from the emitter - thus, part of the signal is absorbed by special coatings, and the rest is reflected to the side, preventing the radio echo from returning to radar observer "<c>
      In fact, the coating should absorb, and if it reflects only to the side due to the shape of the object, it is inaccurate somehow in the article ...
  9. Army soldier2 15 October 2015 16: 53 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    Who knows what the "light range" is? New term?
    Probably, we can conclude that the coating works in the visible and radar ranges. What about infrared and thermal?
  10. A-Sim 15 October 2015 16: 54 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    We will paint in red. Here is this green paint.
  11. Mama_Cholli 15 October 2015 17: 08 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Three pounds of paint per unit of equipment is a lot. Apparently you need to paint a very thick layer, or even in several layers.

    Most importantly, all layers would be on military equipment and not on general yachts and summer cottages.
    1. Manul 15 October 2015 17: 43 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Mama_Cholli
      Most importantly, all layers would be on military equipment and not on general yachts and summer cottages.

      And also, so that the paint is not alcohol-containing winked
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. The comment was deleted.
  12. da Vinci 15 October 2015 17: 26 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    If the item is really worthwhile, you can paint it twice a year, or use it “the day before” (pah-pah). wink
  13. mitrich 15 October 2015 17: 57 New
    • -1
    • 0
    -1
    It is necessary to test and test everything new in Syria now, in a real situation. That is to say, an additional moment of our participation in the conflict.

    PySy: Islamists are sitting on the front lines, they suddenly hear the roar of engines and the clang of tracks, they jump out, nobody! And past the Syrian T-72B column with a stealth coating rushing ... laughing
  14. The comment was deleted.
  15. Army soldier2 15 October 2015 18: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Quote: Mama_Cholli
    Three pounds of paint per unit of equipment is a lot. Apparently you need to paint a very thick layer, or even in several layers.

    Most importantly, all layers would be on military equipment and not on general yachts and summer cottages.

    Well done! For 210 days 3300 wise and informative comments.
    Probably, the pilots finished the next general's summer residence, and they were released into Syria until they brought a new paint.
  16. semuil 15 October 2015 18: 51 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Why do we call our technologies the English word stealth (stealthy), is there a fashion or something like that? Is there really no defining words (stealth and invisibility)?
  17. dvina71 15 October 2015 21: 54 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Denis DV
    Is that trolling? Does the coating cover the thermal circuit of the tank?


    There are other activities for this. The T-15 in the bow has such a beak ... peculiar. So, exhaust passes through it and heat is removed from the mo. apparently this is how the exhaust temperature decreases and dissipates.
  18. sapporo1959 15 October 2015 23: 03 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    And it seems to me that this paint has been used in the Russian troops for a long time. Our neighbors Ukrainians have been at war with the Russian army for a year now, and there are still no photos. All optics are clogged with paint.
  19. Termit1309 16 October 2015 05: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    “We experience three types of paint - with an anti-icing effect, with radio-absorbing and decontamination (reducing radiation exposure) properties.

    “During the night phase, the properties of the paint were checked using reconnaissance equipment, in particular unmanned aerial vehicles and night-vision devices of foreign manufacture. Two of the three samples showed almost complete absorption both in the light range and in the infrared spectrum

    Okay, a blonde journalist with a rubber band between her ears. But the one who posted this tin, read it himself and realized what he was reading? The beginning and middle of the article simply stupidly contradict each other.