Military Review

The project of the additional protection armor "Mantiya"

22
In the context of the development of armored vehicles of particular importance is the issue of additional means of protection. The features of recent armed conflicts, such as fighting in cities and the wide distribution of light anti-tank weapons, do not allow one to rely only on armor of combat vehicles. To enhance crew safety, various systems of dynamic and active protection are offered. In addition, multifunctional systems are being developed that allow not only to protect armored vehicles from attack, but also to reduce the likelihood of their detection. It was for this purpose that the Mantiya system was developed.


The project of a promising protection system for armored vehicles was developed by the Steel Research Institute (Moscow), which is part of the Tractor Plants concern. It is reported that the establishment of its specialists engaged in the institute M.O. Alekseev, A.M. Kimaev, M.V. Khokhlov and D.G. Kupryunin. As a basis for the project, the existing system of a similar purpose was taken, which was supplemented with a set of new elements. The result was a complex "Mantiya", which is a means of protecting equipment and weapons from detection and attacks using anti-tank grenade launchers or other similar weapons.

The project of the additional protection armor "Mantiya"
General view of the sheet of the system "Mantle"


As a basis for the “Mantle”, the “Cape” armament protection kit, already well known to specialists and the public, was taken. The kit consists of a set of sheets of special heat-insulating and radio-absorbing synthetic material. Cut sheets of appropriate patterns are invited to cover the protected equipment. This dramatically reduces the visibility of armored vehicles for infrared and radar detection systems. As a result, the probability of detection and destruction using modern guided weapons is reduced.

The new project "Mantle", as follows from the available data, means equipping the "Cover" with a set of new elements. After such a revision, the finished system allows you to mask the protected equipment, as well as reduce the likelihood of its destruction by anti-tank weapons.

According to the Institute of Steel, the proposed system of additional protection has a fairly simple structure. To protect against anti-tank grenades, it is planned to use a basic screen, borrowed from the “Cape” project, which should be equipped with a so-called. discrete volume protective elements. Due to this, it is claimed that integration of the lattice screen technology into the “Cape” set is achieved, which makes it possible to effectively protect equipment from anti-tank grenade launchers.


Diagram of the installation of the "Mantiya" screen


The published photograph of the “Mantiya” system depicts a sheet of the proposed basic radio-absorbing and heat-insulating material stitched to form a checkered quilted structure. In the centers of the resulting "cells" are discrete protective elements. Each such element is a small hexagonal prism that looks like the head of a conventional bolt. Due to the correct location, shape and size of such elements should lead to the destruction of enemy ammunition and thus save the protected equipment from destruction.

Sheets of the “Mantle” system are proposed to be used as additional screens installed at some distance from the armor of the base machine. According to the developer, the distance between the armor and the sheet can vary from 50 to 1500 mm. This provides protection against anti-tank ammunition, as well as partial protection against detection by available surveillance equipment.

The principle of operation of the system "Mantle" is as follows. When a new anti-tank grenade hits the screen, such as PG-7В or similar, it mines or breaks through the soft base, which prevents the fuse from operating. In addition, when it hits the screen, the grenade interacts with one or more metal elements. The distance between the latter is calculated taking into account the dimensions of the existing anti-tank ammunition. In other words, the grenade in any case will encounter one or more protective elements.


Interaction scheme of grenades and screen


The interaction with the protective element leads to deformation of the grenade body, as well as damage to the cumulative funnel and other parts of the ammunition. As a result of such an impact, a regular undermining of a grenade is rendered impossible, or the correct formation of a cumulative jet, the power of which does not allow to cause appreciable damage to the armored vehicle, does not occur. It is argued that in terms of the effectiveness of protection against cumulative grenades, the proposed system "Mantle" hardly differs from traditional lattice screens. This parameter is at the level of 0,5-0,6, i.e. "The mantle" can stop or neutralize up to 50-60% grenades.

The Steel Research Institute published a photograph of an anti-tank grenade used during the tests. As expected, in a collision with a relatively soft screen, equipped with rigid discrete elements, the body of the ammunition deformed and made it impossible for the triggering of the fuse to occur, followed by the defeat of the conventional target. From the body of the PG-7В grenade, formed by two cones, there remains a crumpled piece of metal in which it is impossible to recognize the existing weapon.

The promising system "Mantle" has several characteristic advantages. The first is the ability to protect the basic technique from detection inherited from the base “Capes”. Due to the correct installation with a minimum amount of gaps, it is able to protect the equipment from infrared and radar detection systems. At the same time, the probability of detecting and capturing an infrared homing head is reduced by a factor of 2-3. The probability of detecting a radar seeker drops at least six times.


The remains of PG-7В grenade, stopped by the "Mantle" screen


The mantle's masking capabilities make it possible to reduce the likelihood of finding an armored vehicle, as well as increase its survivability on the battlefield in the event that the enemy uses guided weapons. In the case of the use of light anti-tank weapons, "Mantle" has discrete protective elements designed to destroy or damage flying grenades. Thus, it is possible not only to disguise the armored vehicle, but also to protect it from shelling.

A new development of the Steel Research Institute is proposed, first of all, to equip promising armored fighting vehicles of various classes. However, the possibility of using the "Mantle" to enhance the protection of existing armored vehicles, such as Tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, armored personnel carriers, etc. This application is facilitated by the relative ease of installation and dismantling of a set of additional screens. Such procedures can be carried out even in the field and without the involvement of specialists or special equipment.

As follows from the available data, the system "Mantiya" has already passed tests and was tested by shelling from existing anti-tank weapons. The outlook for the new development is not yet clear. Such equipment is of particular interest and can find its place in the range of additional equipment for existing and prospective armored vehicles. However, so far the military department has not commented on the new project of the Steel Research Institute. Perhaps the system "Mantle" in the future will pass military tests and will be adopted for use, but so far there is no information about this.


On the materials of the sites:
http://niistali.ru/
http://arms-expo.ru/
http://mashportal.ru/
http://vpk.name/
Author:
Photos used:
Institute of Steel / Niistali.ru
22 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. aszzz888
    aszzz888 15 December 2015 07: 57 New
    +4
    If "Mantya" catches up to 60% of grenades, this is a good result.
    I think that our scientists "will think a little and correct the defect." And on the output, the protection indicators will be improved.
    Good luck!
    1. dobrutro
      dobrutro 15 December 2015 08: 32 New
      +8
      So it doesn’t stop only 60%, and what is even less valuable reduces the probability of pointing different types of shells several times!
  2. Alexez
    Alexez 15 December 2015 09: 05 New
    +6
    If the tank is covered by this system - where and how is heat removed? In general, our designers, as always, are harnessing - cheaply, angrily and multifunctionally))
  3. Rostislav
    Rostislav 15 December 2015 10: 10 New
    +1
    Good development !.
    Does the adversary have anything like that? They either try to invent, or steal. Try so necessary.
  4. xBoris
    xBoris 15 December 2015 11: 36 New
    +1
    Interestingly, it is not as dorgo as Ukrainian explosive reactive armor of the "knife" type.
  5. Alexez
    Alexez 15 December 2015 12: 12 New
    +7
    Quote: xBoris
    Interestingly, it is not as dorgo as Ukrainian explosive reactive armor of the "knife" type.

    Dynamic protection is a fundamentally different system. But they can be combined, which is generally demonstrated in the photo using the "Cape" system, on the basis of which this development was made. Judging by the drawing, the "mantle" is located at some distance from the surfaces of the tank, in order to allow the missile to collapse before detonation. This means that there must be a bracket system already installed on the tank or supplied with this system. But how will everything look together then ??? For clarity, a tank in a cape.
  6. alexdn
    alexdn 15 December 2015 12: 51 New
    +4
    The places of installation and fastening to the equipment itself are also very interesting. Hypothetically, for the cover of the tank (the visibility and the chance of being hit by reactive grenades are reduced), but how the active protection will work (the dimensions of the tank will noticeably grow), the joint work of "Mantle" with DZ is probably more appropriate. But since the complexes of active protection in our combat units are not very common, it is cheap and cheerful (DZ + "Mantle").
  7. Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack 15 December 2015 13: 21 New
    +1
    interesting development. Thank you for the article.
  8. max702
    max702 15 December 2015 14: 14 New
    +6
    The idea is interesting, but the practical application is in question .. For example, based on this quote According to the organization, the developer, the distance between the armor and the sheet can vary from 50 to 1500 mm. it follows that this product will work if its screen is 1000 mm or more away from the case .. You tell me what is indicated from 50 mm .. but, why then 1500 mm? Apparently 50mm is a requirement for radar protection, and 1500mm is for discrete protective elements to work .. Of course, everything works great at the stand, but how directly on the BT sample? What will a tank or infantry fighting vehicle look like with a 1.5m blanket installed on the guy wires and frame? How will this canopy behave while driving, will it survive precipitation, collisions with tree branches, contact with all kinds of obstacles in urban development? How to operate equipment with such a canopy? Many questions ... Yes, the reduction in visibility is good, but it was also in the "cape", all the innovation in hexagonal elements that should destroy incoming ammunition, but I can hardly imagine how it will look in real life .. This is how strong the "mantle" should be "so that the elements do not stupidly come off on impact and damage the attacking steel ammunition .. I will repeat at the stand it is still possible, but I can hardly imagine it on real equipment ..
    1. Kir
      Kir 15 December 2015 16: 48 New
      +1
      The same strained replenishment of dimensions at the maximum as much as 3 meters! It is interesting and if you "sew a skirt to the floor" - close and the rollers almost bringing them to ground level, how long will it stand when operating off-road and wooded areas.
      As a 3-in one solution, on the one hand, plus, and on the other, rarely universal is better, or even comparable to a special one, although ours can surprise the world.
    2. gla172
      gla172 15 December 2015 17: 48 New
      0
      Quote: max702
      but why then 1500 mm?


      It turns out that if the tank is increased with each side by one and a half meters, then for BOPS-well and not only, it turns out less chance of getting ...
      I don’t even know if the joke is ento or not ....
  9. tasha
    tasha 15 December 2015 14: 33 New
    +2
    The idea is more than promising. The simplest application is to have in the troops a certain stock of "Mantle" canvases of standard sizes + brackets, brackets, frames and other elements already installed on the equipment, or transported.
    For example - on a march or in a wooded area - there are no hinged screens.
    Actions in the village - special people jumped on the truck, installed screens, made a turtle out of the tank. Somewhere the same screens protect the tents of the medical battalion, somewhere they threw a kung, somewhere they covered the embrasure. Not all the same hangers on the windows of trucks and helicopters.

    It is interesting how such a screen stretched between pillars through grommets on cables will behave.
  10. Leeder
    Leeder 15 December 2015 19: 41 New
    +2
    As I understand it, it's still a cover for parking, and not for movement.
    As it is poorly imagine in motion a cloak in which 1500 mm to the tank. Just rip off a branch, or something else.
  11. TOR2
    TOR2 15 December 2015 21: 29 New
    +3
    Like it or not, you still have to develop a KAZ different from having one. If you look at the same Syria, armored vehicles operate in close cooperation with the infantry and the use of the classic KAZ is fraught for people who are close to equipment.
    Most recently, someone posted an interview with a Syrian tanker. He complained about the flimsy fastening of the DZ containers that are located above the caterpillar. It is clear that such a cloak will simply tear in such conditions, but the thing is in the position. Simple and not expensive.
  12. Cap.Morgan
    Cap.Morgan 16 December 2015 00: 59 New
    +1
    This is probably just material that can be mounted anywhere and on armor anywhere.
  13. Alexez
    Alexez 16 December 2015 12: 05 New
    +1
    Quote: LeeDer
    As I understand it, it's still a cover for parking, and not for movement.
    As it is poorly imagine in motion a cloak in which 1500 mm to the tank. Just rip off a branch, or something else.

    If it were just a cover for parking, then you should not bother with patterns for the tower and other elements - you would just make it a canvas. As for 1500 mm, most likely an error, an extra zero was added.
    Quote: Cap.Morgan
    This is probably just material that can be mounted anywhere and on armor anywhere.

    You won’t succeed anywhere and whatever, because there are a lot of moving parts + surveillance devices, active protection, weapons, smoke grenade launchers, etc.

    There is one more question for the developers. According to the data given in the article, the percentage of protection against cumulative grenades is 60%. Suppose the "mantle" did not help and the grenade got to the next level, it is quite likely that it will be a regular DZ unit and now it will work as it should, i.e. explosive will detonate and a metal plate will shoot back. The question is - what will happen to the Mantle as a result ??? IMHO will rip off a large enough piece because all this will take place under this "armored cover". By the way, it is the protection against cumulative grenades, declared by the developer, that is an indirect proof of the fact that it is the option of constant use in motion on the front line that is expected. My vision may not be of interest to the whole version cut out according to the patterns, but to the hinged blocks with already prepared fastening elements (for example, hooks or loops), which will allow replacing damaged areas or strengthening the most vulnerable spots of armored vehicles.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 16 December 2015 18: 22 New
      0
      "As for 1500 mm, most likely an error, they added zero extra." ////

      Of course. 10-15 cm - the optimal distance of the protective screen from the armor.
  14. Leeder
    Leeder 16 December 2015 14: 35 New
    0
    Quote: Alexez
    If it were just a cover for parking, then you should not bother with patterns for the tower and other elements - you would just make it a canvas. As for 1500 mm, most likely an error, an extra zero was added.

    Yeah, even 15 cm from the side, in motion, material. Use only in a field with mowed grass? smile
    1. Alexez
      Alexez 16 December 2015 15: 27 New
      +1
      I don’t think that it will break the grass, but in urban conditions where rubble of construction debris will definitely break, and in the forest it’s a trifle to lose such a cloak. But again, if you use a block design - the loss of 1-2 blocks with this matter is not critical.
  15. VIK_1961
    VIK_1961 18 December 2015 21: 46 New
    0
    I know Mikhail Alekseev, Alexey Kimayev and Mikhail Khokhlov personally from joint work on additional protection of armored vehicles. OFFER !!! As always - cheap and cheerful !!!! I note that ABSOLUTE protection of armored objects does not exist in principle (except for armor, three meters thick on all sides and the bottom, reinforced with DZ and AZ elements) - I would like to look at these "Mausov" !!!!!! Therefore, it seems to me that such means of additional protection and camouflage, in combination with the existing ones, will significantly increase the survival time of an armored vehicle on the battlefield. No matter how sad it sounds in relation to the crew.
  16. magician
    magician 22 December 2015 05: 29 New
    0
    an interesting direction for the protection of armored vehicles. good luck in further development. perhaps it makes sense to use a pneumatic cartridge, it will turn out something like an air mattress at the right time.)))