Military Review

Expert Alexei Khlopotov told how to protect Russian tanks from Spikes and Javelins

139
Expert Alexei Khlopotov told how to protect Russian tanks from Spikes and Javelins



Every military conflict and almost every armed clash has at least something different from the previous ones, has its own specifics and therefore requires a separate and careful study. The recent aggravation of the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh is no exception. Some conclusions from what happened to the "Bulletin of Mordovia" said an independent military expert Alexei Khlopotov.



- In the general information flow, few people paid attention to the peculiarities of this conflict in tactical terms. And they, of course, were. For example, the losses in the armored vehicles from the Armenian side are relatively high in such a short time. What were they caused by? First of all, by the fact that the army of the unrecognized Nagorno-Karabakh Republic was represented on the front line of defense by outdated models - T-72А of release of the end of 1970-s of the beginning of 80-s. Their age is 30 and older. At the same time, they were absolutely not protected from high-precision weapons - they did not even have dynamic protection installed. Although, for example, Azerbaijan carried out such modernization - it Tanks T-72 Aslan, at least, can withstand RPGs and other light anti-tank weapons. But this is not the main thing.

The main thing is that the Azerbaijani side in this conflict has massed the NLOS Israeli-made Spike ATGM. This is one of the most modern and powerful anti-tank systems. Armenian tankers practically had no opportunity to protect themselves from it.

In this regard, the situation with the majority of Russian tanks is no better. In the long run, only Armata can resist Spike. And what about the rest? Go to battle as a slaughter?

In fact, there is a recipe for countering. This is an installation on the tanks of active protection complexes. After all, the same "artifact" "Afghan" can be mounted on the machines of previous generations. Nothing prevents this, except that the high cost of such individual protective systems. The second, and, in my opinion, more rational and promising option is the early development and implementation of the so-called "group defense systems for tank units."

Their concept was formulated even 10 years ago and voiced at the conference "Protection and Security", conducted by the Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences. It was written by specialists of the armored industry research institute - VNIITransmash from St. Petersburg and the designers of the Ural Transport Engineering Design Bureau - people who created such masterpieces as T-90, BMPT and Armata.

The concept of individual-group protection involves the distribution of the entire composition of funds into two interrelated and complementary complexes:

- a group protection complex (KGZ), placed on a separate specialized carrier, which includes an intelligence system that collects information about the threat of attack of protected objects, a set of protection tools and an information management system (ICS) with a secure communication subsystem and satellite top secret;
- an individual protection complex (KIZ) installed on each of the protected objects, including on the KGZ carrier, and consisting of a set of onboard means of reducing visibility, optical and electronic countermeasures and information exchange units with the KGZ control system.

At the same time, I & C KGZ is given a key role in the organization of protection, namely, in terms of integrating information flows coming from protected tanks, attached to them by CIZ and external sources of information (district air defense, observation posts, etc.), conducting information exchange with ICS of higher hierarchical level and means of fire counteraction (anti-aircraft rocket-artillery complexes of short-range, etc.), as well as the choice of the most rational protection algorithm.

It is assumed that the KGZ should promptly identify and analyze threats, issue commands for countermeasures, both individual and own, mounted on a KGZ carrier. Specialists tank builders believed that to ensure the invisibility of the protected armored vehicles would be quite enough by rejecting the attacking ammunition (guided projectile or missile) outside the contour of the tank.

However, electronics specialists went even further in this direction. The research and production enterprise Radar-Mms, together with the St. Petersburg Higher Military School of Radio Electronics, proposed and conducted preliminary studies on the use of ultrashort but powerful microwave pulses for group protection of tank units. Usually modern systems of the WTO have in their structure rather complex complexes of electronic equipment to perform the tasks. The more complex the equipment, the easier it can be given to FPD (functional suppression) and FPR (functional lesion). With pulsed exposure, both options are possible. At the physical level, the breakdown and destruction of semiconductor elements, the complete destruction of processor technology and any radio elements. In the presence of current-carrying parts, wires, antennas, location, optical and other equipment, a complete destruction and equipment decommissioning occurs. In the presence of closed current circuits (closed metal shielding), thermal effect occurs, which leads to irreversible destruction of internal systems, forced disruption of combat units, fuel tanks.

To solve the problems posed by the functional managed lesion, R & D "Solaris" has already been carried out with the creation of an experimental sample. The aim of the work was the creation and testing of an experimental model of a super-power controlled source of electromagnetic radiation intended for the functional suppression of radio-electronic devices, including computer equipment, telemetry systems, electronic and electrical ignition systems of internal combustion engines, electronic systems and complexes, including those in service. As a result of this research, an experimental sample was created that passed field tests and showed the promise of using the corresponding complexes in practice.

However, at the moment the continuation of this work for unknown reasons has not received proper development. But the creation of such equipment, its placement as part of the KGZ could be a real breakthrough in ensuring the protection of armored vehicles from the defeat of the WTO. I consider it necessary to initiate and work in a forced pace to create KGZ equipped with microwave emitters.

The Armata platform is best suited as the carrier of such a complex. Placing the KGZ on it will ensure the unification of the fleet of equipment in the future. Well, if we talk about the present, then the optimal chassis for accommodating KGZ compounds consisting of T-90 and T-72 tanks, I consider the E300 chassis, developed at the Uraltransmash enterprise using the T-90 platform.

I hope the Russian Ministry of Defense will pay attention to the problems that have emerged during the short-term Karabakh conflict, and this will spur development in these areas.
Originator:
http://vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-15765.htm
139 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Abbra
    Abbra April 12 2016 10: 54
    +2
    Not the topic:

    In the Homs region (Syria) Mi-28N attack helicopter crashes from the Russian air group. This was announced on Tuesday, April 12, the Ministry of Defense, reports TASS.

    The car crashed at 1:29 Moscow time on April 12. “According to the report from the crash site, there was no fire impact on the helicopter,” the military department said, adding that the reasons for the crash are being clarified.

    Both pilots died their bodies were evacuated to the Khmeimim air base.
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock April 12 2016 10: 59
      0
      Quote: Abbra
      The car crashed at 1:29 Moscow time on April 12. “According to the report from the crash site, there was no fire impact on the helicopter,” the military department said, adding that the reasons for the crash are being clarified.

      In vain, the Mi-28H and Mi-24 are used in Syria. It would be better if they sent the Ka-52. They have at least some chance of escape (the blades shoot back and the pilots eject). But on the Mi-24 and Mi-28N, especially when you consider that ours fly at extremely low altitudes, it is not possible to be saved in the event of equipment failure.
      1. Velizariy
        Velizariy April 12 2016 11: 16
        +7
        Why sent? why didn’t they hang something, it would be better if something else ... What are the slogans again pouring? From what height can the Ka-52 be ejected? But sometimes there are planes with an ejection system that fight and the pilots die ... Now what, you need to change everything to drones, is there only if a nervous breakdown in the operator is possible?
        1. Lt. Air Force stock
          Lt. Air Force stock April 12 2016 11: 28
          +11
          Quote: Velizariy
          From what height can the Ka-52 be ejected?

          Ejection is possible at altitudes from 0 to 4100 m.
          Quote: Velizariy
          Why sent? why didn’t they hang something, it would be better if something else ... What are the slogans again pouring?

          Sorry, but the miscalculations of our MO are constantly seen. For some reason, after Turkey for the first time announced the violation of Turkey’s airspace by our plane, it immediately occurred to me that next time they would provoke and bring down our plane, and so it ended up. Kartopolov shook a piece of paper with an agreement on a camera on the safety of our planes over Syria. Later, our deployed S-400 and strengthened the group. Why did it occur to me, but not to the General Staff ?! That's the question. And if it occurred to the General Staff, which one did they send the 1-in Su-24 without cover to the border region?
          Here again, a miscalculation in the combat zone needs to use the best that is to minimize losses among personnel, and not experiment on lives.
          1. Absurdidat
            Absurdidat April 12 2016 13: 56
            +4
            because our downed plane is politics, my politics is not involved, it obeys politicians. you yourself answered your own question - the plane had to be shot down so that we have every reason to hammer the perdogan and his interests in Syria, after it became finally clear - the Turkish stream will not appear, he has his own plans. and Perdogan is not going to abide by those behind-the-scenes agreements that were reached long before the operation began. The entire "civilized" community did not care deeply about the fact that he simply collaborated with the igils; all of us were hung dogs. and so-card blanche and in general: they gave Peshkov, climbed into the kings. Perdogan suffered losses in money, perdogan can do nothing but speak, his Syrian project has failed completely. Politics. this damn policy. And these politicians felt sorry for the Star of the Hero to the Marine who died saving his comrades. The world is not at all the same as in films about pioneers and october.
            1. co-creator
              co-creator April 12 2016 15: 25
              +2
              Quote: Absurdidat
              Politics. this damn policy. The world is not at all the same as in films about pioneers and October.

              At last. That's exactly it. Amerikosy sink their ships, expose entire bases (Pearl Harbor), their symbols (twin towers) under attack.
              We are our planes, our peacekeepers (Ossetia), our people (Donbass).

              Politics are the same everywhere.
          2. Alekseev
            Alekseev April 12 2016 15: 24
            +1
            Quote: Lt. air force reserve
            Why did it occur to me, but not to the General Staff ?!

            That was, unfortunately, always.
            You see, "before that" it never occurs to anyone, sometimes even to the General Staff, and after that it comes to everyone. request
            Of course, on the one hand, "there is no war without losses."
            But on the other hand, any loss is a stern warning to the cap-tale attitude observed, in particular in HE, among some civilians.
            Let's hope that the military does not have such a mood and they will take all possible measures to exclude losses.
            And the pilots Eternal memory ...
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 16: 29
        +2
        And what about the Ka-50 and Ka-52 there were no fatal accidents? There were quite a few unfortunately !!! Here we need to figure out the reasons and eliminate them ... Mi-28N has fallen more than once due to equipment failure and not in combat conditions ... I hope this time we will figure it out and the causes of the fall and equipment failures will be found out and eliminated ...
      3. 16112014nk
        16112014nk April 12 2016 21: 18
        +1
        Quote: Lt. air force reserve
        It would be better if they sent the Ka-52. They have at least some chance of escape

        March 12, 2012 in Torzhok crashed Ka-52. The pilot crew and navigator died. So not everything is so simple. And in Syria, the Ka-52 is, 3 or 4 helicopters.
    2. Abbra
      Abbra April 12 2016 11: 11
      +2
      Is this minus to me for voicing sad and tragic information?
      1. Lt. Air Force stock
        Lt. Air Force stock April 12 2016 11: 13
        +3
        Quote: Abbra
        Is this minus to me for voicing sad and tragic information?

        Always did not favor messengers with bad news, nothing personal.
        (I didn’t minus you)
      2. evgenii67
        evgenii67 April 12 2016 11: 29
        +11
        Quote: Abbra
        Is this minus to me for voicing sad and tragic information?

        this is a minus for being off topic and for the fact that everything is already in the know.
      3. vitaliy.rnd
        vitaliy.rnd April 12 2016 11: 29
        -4
        Quote: Abbra
        Is this minus to me for voicing sad and tragic information?

        Unfortunately, there are such not quite adequate people here.
        1. vitaliy.rnd
          vitaliy.rnd April 12 2016 22: 46
          0
          laughing Yes, who would doubt it. Five were noted. How so predictable.
      4. Sharapov
        Sharapov April 12 2016 11: 32
        +6
        Off topic BECAUSE. Yes, you are not ITAR TASS.
      5. ARES623
        ARES623 April 12 2016 11: 52
        +4
        Quote: Abbra
        Is this minus to me for voicing sad and tragic information?

        No doubt sad news. However, this news is discussed in another article. You took the discussion away from the stated topic. Do not arrange on the resource "Muir and Merliz", follow the rules. Minus is not mine, but I agree.
      6. Pavlik_
        Pavlik_ April 12 2016 13: 33
        0
        minus not personally to you, but for the sad news
    3. max702
      max702 April 12 2016 11: 57
      +4
      Nothing prevents this, except for the high cost of such individual protective systems.
      Digit! Number sister! (c) How much exactly does it cost? And is it that expensive? We consider a tank worth about 3 million / ye crew with training insurance and other 1 million / ye, the task that the tank was supposed to complete how much does it cost? And how much did it cost to disrupt the rest of the participants (weakening the attack / defense, with the loss of other participants) of the DB? And now back to the figure for "Afghanite" .. Maybe not so expensive?
      As for what the author suggests .. It's a good thing, but very little feasible .. Firstly, it is still paper, and secondly, after how many years (tens) will it be in the troops? And most importantly, if the same "Afghanite" can be screwed to each tank and it will not go anywhere from there (with minimal desire for that), then the proposed system in reality will not be stupid where it is needed! Again fantasy in the spirit of tank avalanches and everything connected with the organization of this! Let's face it, EVERY BT unit needs protection, not the hope of a mythical universal defense machine on a separate chassis ... How addition to all YES as the main bet on this type of BT is categorically NO!
      rs: You forgive me for seemingly like another order to get a piece of defense pie ..
  2. Teberii
    Teberii April 12 2016 10: 58
    +1
    A good idea, but with the advent of a new defense, means of overcoming will be developed. And so on ad infinitum.
    1. Wasiliy1985
      Wasiliy1985 April 12 2016 20: 43
      +1
      Shield and sword. It seems to me that I have not said anything new.
  3. Dam
    Dam April 12 2016 10: 58
    +2
    There is very little time. Conclusions need to be drawn from any war.
  4. Lanista
    Lanista April 12 2016 11: 00
    +2
    Collective defense of a tank unit is a good topic. You can even do it in several levels (platoon-company-battalion), but do not forget about the individual protection of each tank. There is a risk that the failure of the collective defense machine will jeopardize the entire unit.
    1. Alekseev
      Alekseev April 12 2016 16: 12
      +1
      Quote: Lanista
      Collective defense of a tank unit is a good topic.

      And not only tank.
      It is well known that without the deployment of an effective electronic warfare aircraft can not perform the tasks in the presence of a sufficiently strong air defense.
      Nowadays the question arises on the ground and on the edge.
      EMP, aerosols, fumes, infrared flare, dust are other tankers. BUT the best friend is a howitzer with shrannel ammunition and attack aircraft and army helicopters. wink
      This is far from news.
      In the years of World War II, the shell also had a significant advantage over armor, the loss of tanks during an unprepared attack on a strong defense amounted to hundreds ... Although there were no Javelins. But there was no DZ, Curtain, composite armor.
      But with a comprehensively assured offensive, quite the opposite.
      The most striking example is the onset of 2 SS CC and 48 German TCs on a seriously prepared defense of 6 Guards A, 7 Guards A and 1 Guards. TA of the Voronezh Front.
      After all, the Germans, thanks to a well-established interaction, reached Prokhorovka, actually breaking through the defenses, where they had to meet with a counterblow of the strategic reserve of 5th Guards and 5th Guards A.
      Unfortunately, this counterattack was not quite organized and thought out by the command. Naturally, this led to huge losses of tanks of 5 Guards. TA.
      Materials work state. commissions on the analysis of this counterattack are still secret.
      PS
      And the Armenians should have at least DZ then hang on the tanks, but from ambushes, from ambushes more.
  5. Magic archer
    Magic archer April 12 2016 11: 04
    +3
    The expert said nothing new. The installation of KAZ KAZ Afganit on T-72 is generally ridiculous. We still don’t have it, and Mr. Khlopotov offers the Armenians to supply it. And what's the point of putting an expensive system on an old tank ?! Then Arena, which Although not new, at least it was placed on the T-90 and the dimensions of which are about the same as those of the T-72.
  6. NordUral
    NordUral April 12 2016 11: 05
    +3
    Individual protection is more reliable and will give greater confidence to the crew. A collective can be strengthened and the protection and confidence of the crews and units as a whole.
  7. kolexxx
    kolexxx April 12 2016 11: 06
    .
    Helicopter Mi-28N VKS of the Russian Federation crashed in Syria
    Two crew members were killed. According to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, no one shot at the car.
    1. Wasiliy1985
      Wasiliy1985 April 12 2016 20: 56
      0
      In the know already ..

      In nighttime. There are currently no signs of fire from the ground. The bodies of the pilots were delivered to the Khmeimim air base. (C) from publicly available sources.

      From myself: let them rest in peace.

      And the MO would not forget relatives !!!
  8. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 12 2016 11: 10
    +1
    Azerbaijani side in this conflict massively used ATGM "Spike" NLOS Israeli production

    But this is already starting to strain. Where armed conflicts arise around the perimeter of Russia, Israeli weapons and other weapons always appear. As an example of 2008, Georgian tanks are equipped with Israeli guidance ... I can immediately predict the answers that Russia is selling weapons. But then maybe we should provide excellent anti-tank weapons and MANPADS to those whom Israel considers its enemies? At the diplomatic level, one thing, and as soon as it concerns armed conflicts, a certain confrontation immediately emerges.
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 11: 16
      +4
      This is life ... Our weapons also opposed and are opposed to Israeli technology ... And now what ?! IT IS NECESSARY TO DO NOT OTHERWISE TO GO, AND IMPROVE YOURSELF ...
      1. rotmistr60
        rotmistr60 April 12 2016 11: 27
        -1
        IT IS NECESSARY TO DO NOT OTHERWISE TO GO, AND IMPROVE YOURSELF ...

        I wonder if you are reading or are you drawing conclusions from yourself? First of all, I didn’t "hayal" Israeli weapons, as you put it. Secondly, before making such categorical statements, you need to think with your head.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 14: 26
          +5
          You are outraged that Israeli weapons are present in armed conflicts around and against Russia ... So? But why be indignant if Russian, Soviet weapons are generally present in every conflict in the world ... And Israel is often fought against our very Russian weapons ... It’s stupid to be indignant that Israel sells weapons to Georgia or Azerbaijan (we sell to Azerbaijan ourselves including the T-90), we must rejoice that they do not impose for free))) ... Just do not consider me an enemy after that ... I also served the homeland and not in the suburbs ... And about the fault - here I generalized a little, this, as I understand it, is a feature of most of those who are on this resource ... Often there is no objectivity, if ours means the best, if Ukrainian, Israeli, Americanos completely sucks ... This is not necessary ... Our defects and errors, and we have them, in order to eliminate, we must first admit ...
    2. rotmistr60
      rotmistr60 April 12 2016 11: 32
      0
      Immediately felt the appearance of the opposite side. I begin to blush, although they should blush for their words and for the deeds of their state. request This lobby is not only in the United States, but also distributed on this site. I have been convinced for a year and a half.
    3. Lincoln
      Lincoln April 12 2016 11: 45
      -4
      Quote: rotmistr60
      this is already starting to strain. Where armed conflicts arise around the perimeter of Russia, Israeli weapons and other weapons always appear. As an example of 2008, Georgian tanks are equipped with Israeli guidance ... I can immediately predict the answers that Russia is selling weapons. But then maybe we should provide some excellent anti-tank weapons.

      Where to ship? Already put hezbollah cornets in 2006, hezbollah and Syria rockets so they would be silent in a rag. I’m not talking about deliveries from 300 to Iran, although there was an agreement to freeze the deal.
      For reference, Russia supplies weapons to all parties to the conflict, read where the legs of the T90 of Azerbaijan grow from ....
      1. rotmistr60
        rotmistr60 April 12 2016 11: 50
        +6
        In a rag, I advise you to shut up, especially since under the American flag.
        I’m not talking about deliveries from 300 to Iran, although there was an agreement to freeze the deal.

        May bow before you also? By the way, your nickname is a noble Linkoln - do you all believe in the American dream?
        1. Lincoln
          Lincoln April 12 2016 11: 59
          0
          Only and. Di- believe that someone on the Internet does not use proxy servers. This is about the flag. But essentially have something to say something foolish?
      2. Lopatov
        Lopatov April 12 2016 12: 09
        +8
        Quote: Linkoln
        Where to ship? Already delivered hezbollah cornets in 2006

        Lies.
        They supplied weapons to Syria. And the Israelis themselves claim that they are at war with them. So the headquarters of Damascus had every right to dispose of the complexes as they needed.

        Well, about the S-300 ... This is clearly defensive weapons? Or not? Something I'm confused myself, it seems it depends solely on who supplies and to whom. "Patriot" in the immediate vicinity of the Kaliningrad region - "purely defensive", S-400 in the Kaliningrad region "purely offensive"
        1. Professor
          Professor April 12 2016 13: 01
          -3
          Quote: Spade
          So the headquarters of Damascus had every right to dispose of the complexes as they needed.

          Not. An arms supply contract involves certification of the final recipient (or something like that). Ksati Putin then tearfully swore that Hezbollah did not have any Cornets, but only empty boxes left by the Syrian army.

          Quote: Spade
          Well, on the S-300 ...

          And here is even easier. Gentlemen's agreement. You do not supply S-300 to Iran, Israel does not supply weapons to Georgia. Israel keeps its word, but ...

          Quote: Spade
          Is this obviously a defensive weapon?

          Spikes are also clearly defensive weapons. To deliver them to Ukraine, Georgia and other neighbors? wink

          The main thing is that the Azerbaijani side in this conflict massively used the Israeli-made Spike ATGM NLOS

          What is your evidence?
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov April 12 2016 13: 14
            +2
            Quote: Professor
            Not. An arms supply contract involves certification of the final recipient (or something like that).

            So what? Let me remind you that Hezbollah is not a state.

            Quote: Professor
            And here is even easier. Gentlemen's agreement.

            Yeah 8)))
            Everything is much simpler - your toad will strangle someone to deliver something for free. And Georgia, after the August defeat, could not pay anything but Russophobia. Like Ukraine now. 8)))


            Quote: Professor
            Spikes are also clearly defensive weapons. To deliver them to Ukraine, Georgia and other neighbors?

            Put it. Is free. Boo-ha-ha!
            1. Professor
              Professor April 12 2016 13: 23
              -5
              Quote: Spade
              So what? Let me remind you that Hezbollah is not a state.

              Right. Russia and Syria are states that have not fulfilled their obligations and the weapons turned out to be terrorists.

              Quote: Spade
              Yeah 8)))
              Everything is much simpler - your toad will strangle someone to deliver something for free. And Georgia, after the August defeat, could not pay anything but Russophobia. Like Ukraine now. 8)))

              You are not up to date. Israel didn’t even deliver to Georgia the weapons that Georgia had paid for at that time, which hit Israel’s reputation. And even now, Israel does not supply weapons to either Georgia or Ukraine. Neither for money nor for free. It turns out in vain.

              Quote: Spade
              Put it. Is free. Boo-ha-ha!

              There are many options. You can borrow, you can kind, you can for American money. It would be a desire. wink
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov April 12 2016 13: 33
                +5
                Quote: Professor
                Right. Russia and Syria are states that have not fulfilled their obligations

                Russia has completed. Putting a weapon to Syria. And Syria has every right to use any means against the aggressor state.

                Quote: Professor
                You are not up to date. Israel did not supply Georgia even with the weapons that Georgia had paid for

                Fairy tales.

                Quote: Professor
                There are many options. You can borrow

                Slid under the table ...
                1. Professor
                  Professor April 12 2016 13: 40
                  -1
                  Quote: Spade
                  Russia has completed. Putting a weapon to Syria. And Syria has every right to use any means against the aggressor state.

                  Apply- yes, transfer to third parties- no. Russia is also responsible for this. This is how it works.

                  Quote: Spade
                  Tales

                  So both the Georgian and Israeli media are lying. Israel is lying and the penalty is paid in vain. It happens. laughing

                  Quote: Spade
                  Slid under the table ...

                  I was glad to amuse you, but for now some companies have turned to the Israeli Defense Ministry to lift the ban on arms exports to Ukraine. Looks like private traders decided at a loss for themselves to trade with Ukraine.
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov April 12 2016 19: 23
                    +1
                    Quote: Professor
                    Apply- yes, transfer to third parties- no.

                    And why did Israel decide that these are "third parties" and have nothing to do with Syria?

                    Quote: Professor
                    So both the Georgian and Israeli media are lying.

                    Of course they lie. In order to describe their unparalleled worldwide sacrifice, due to which Russia is simply obligated to ensure that Israeli aviation does not have a disarming first strike against Iran.

                    Quote: Professor
                    Israel is lying and the penalty is paid in vain.

                    In more detail, and with links. If the penalty is less than $ 4,2 billion, you can not look.

                    Quote: Professor
                    I was glad to amuse you, but for now some companies have turned to the Israeli Defense Ministry to lift the ban on arms exports to Ukraine. Looks like private traders decided at a loss for themselves to trade with Ukraine.

                    They decided to see ... Boo-ha-ha ...
                    1. Professor
                      Professor April 12 2016 19: 46
                      -1
                      Quote: Spade
                      And why did Israel decide that these are "third parties" and have nothing to do with Syria?

                      This is something new in international law: "relevant". Do you remember what was written on the boxes? Sender and recipient. Hezbollah was not there.

                      Quote: Spade
                      Of course they lie.

                      Well then, the Israelis just suckers once paid a forfeit. lol

                      Quote: Spade
                      In more detail, and with links. If the penalty is less than $ 4,2 billion, you can not look.

                      And $ 4.1 will not suit you anymore? Not money now? wink

                      Quote: Spade
                      Looks decided ... Bu-ha-ha ..

                      You are in a blow today. Israelis were twice convicted of their inability to trade. References mean you are not interested? Well, okay. Why should I seek and spread them in vain. Let it be your way. hi
                      1. Foofighter
                        Foofighter April 13 2016 13: 33
                        0
                        American and Israeli international law still do not know that.
                        It happens that there was an Armenian or a crest there - the Jew has nothing to do ... laughing
                        Quote: Professor
                        And $ 4.1 will not suit you anymore? Not money now?

                        Well, if only goyim, then $ 4,2bn is not money ... bully
                      2. The comment was deleted.
              2. alicante11
                alicante11 April 12 2016 15: 09
                +1
                Right. Russia and Syria are states that have not fulfilled their obligations and the weapons turned out to be terrorists.


                But the West ISIS created and armed, so what?
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Ratmir_Ryazan
            Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 16: 34
            0
            Of course, I could be wrong, but Israel itself unilaterally stopped the supply of arms to Georgia after Georgia attacked South Ossetia, starting to shell at 0:04 Tskhinvali and the positions of Russian peacekeepers from artillery and MLRS ... We are certainly grateful to you for this .. But it is not necessary to present this as an agreement between Russia and Israel, where Russia does not comply with any conditions ...
            1. Professor
              Professor April 12 2016 19: 25
              -1
              Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
              Of course, I could be wrong, but Israel itself unilaterally stopped the supply of arms to Georgia after Georgia attacked South Ossetia, starting to shell at 0:04 Tskhinvali and the positions of Russian peacekeepers from artillery and MLRS ... We are certainly grateful to you for this .. But it is not necessary to present this as an agreement between Russia and Israel, where Russia does not comply with any conditions ...

              Hmm ... And which Israel will unilaterally give up profits and markets? request
              1. Ratmir_Ryazan
                Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 20: 00
                0
                Well, I think the Israeli leadership at that time decided not to arm the Georgian military further with their weapons, after they began to use it against the civilian population of South Ossetia and peacekeepers ... This would do more harm than bring profit for Israel ... Another reason is that Israel was afraid that other types of weapons might be taken as Russian trophies ... I think Professor you also understand this ... You are far from being a stupid person ... But somehow it’s not logical to get Israel armed Georgia armed with drones, modernized a large number of tanks, and then suddenly remembered that Russia could supply something to Iran and decided to conclude an agreement, such as no more tanks or drones for Georgia, and you no Iran, which Russia nevertheless violated treacherously? ))) And what prevented you from first concluding an agreement with Russia? And not after they put a few squadrons of drones and upgraded several tank battalions ... Maybe something else ...
                1. Professor
                  Professor April 12 2016 20: 30
                  -1
                  Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                  Well, I think the Israeli leadership at that time decided not to arm the Georgian military further with their weapons, after they began to use it against the civilian population of South Ossetia and peacekeepers ...

                  The "peaceful" population of Georgia was bombed there by both. There is still no list of victims, I am generally silent about the investigation of the circumstances of their death. The "peacekeepers" were there without a mandate, at their own discretion.

                  Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                  It would do more harm than profit for Israel ...

                  For example? It was after this war that Russia purchased drones from Israel. Other countries have something else.

                  Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                  Another reason is that Israel was afraid that other types of weapons could be taken as Russian trophies ...

                  Israel did not sell anything secret. Pay you and sell it to you.

                  Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                  But somehow it is not logical that Israel armed Georgia with drones, modernized a large number of tanks, and then suddenly remembered that Russia could deliver something to Iran and decided to enter into an agreement, like there’s no more tank or drone for Georgia, and you nor Iran, which Russia nevertheless treacherously violated? )))

                  I didn’t suddenly remember. It was Russia that suddenly realized that such a weapon under its side is not such a trinket. Now, apparently, relations with Iran are most important. Foreign policy of the Kremlin IMHO has almost reached its minimum. They quarreled with everyone with whom they could. So hold on to Iran, and China.

                  Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                  And what prevented you from first concluding an agreement with Russia?

                  Israel tearfully begged Russia for this for many years.

                  Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                  And not after they put a few squadrons of drones and upgraded several tank battalions ... Maybe something else ...

                  And only then Russia (more precisely Putin) decided to listen to us.
                  1. Ratmir_Ryazan
                    Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 22: 08
                    +1
                    Quote: Professor
                    The peaceful "population of Georgia was bombed there by both. There is still no list of victims, I generally keep quiet about the investigation of the circumstances of their death. The" peacekeepers "were there without a mandate, at their discretion.

                    The Russian army in Ossetia did not bomb civilians ... But Georgia staged genocide in Ossetia in 1992, and tried to do it again in 2008, starting the offensive with shelling in Tskhinvali ... Professor has already suffered the wrong way ... what peacekeepers were there at their discretion? There were Sochi agreements between Russia and Georgia, and both our and Georgian peacekeeping battalions were serving there ...
                    Quote: Professor
                    For example? It was after this war that Russia purchased drones from Israel. Other countries have something else.

                    After the war, Russia could not only not buy anything from you, but also give someone a lot of things for free ... Is such an example understandable?
                    Quote: Professor
                    Israel did not sell anything secret. Pay you and sell it to you.

                    Everything that relates to armaments is considered secret ... Or what do you want to say that you will sell us everything that we buy? ))) As far as I read, drones you sold not the first freshness, probably not because we did not have enough money ... So, right?
                    Quote: Professor
                    e suddenly remembered. It was Russia that suddenly realized that such a weapon under its side is not such a trinket. Now, apparently, relations with Iran are most important. Foreign policy of the Kremlin IMHO has almost reached its minimum. They quarreled with everyone with whom they could. So hold on to Iran, and China.

                    Russia on the fifth day of the war was already near Tbilisi and was not occupied at all with your arms deliveries ... Then, on command, all the US vassals started screaming that it turned out Russia attacked Georgia))) ... Nits are corrupt ... It's not we quarrel with them, it’s they under the control of a country that wants to destroy us ... But India and China are already half the world))) ... Not so little))) ...

                    Quote: Professor
                    Israel tearfully begged Russia for this for many years.

                    What and when did Israel plead for? Under Medvedev, fulfilling the UN resolution in 2010, the decision to supply S-300 to Iran was canceled, although such a delivery did not contradict the resolution ... And where does Israel? What did you refuse? From deliveries of another 10 tanks of Georgia and 10 drones? ))) Where is the equivalent exchange, if after the events in Ossetia, as you say, Putin has withdrawn that your weapon is not so useless and concluded some kind of agreement with Israel? We don’t need to make an evil empire out of us, but to represent ourselves as the angels of the world ... It's not like that ... We all defend our interests ...
                    1. Professor
                      Professor April 13 2016 08: 38
                      0
                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      The Russian army in Ossetia did not bomb civilians ...

                      Georgia and many other countries have a completely different opinion. What were the conclusions of the international commission with which Russia actively collaborated?

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      . And Georgia staged genocide in Ossetia in 1992, and tried to do it again in 2008, starting the offensive with shelling of Tskhinvali ...

                      "Genocide" recognized by the court in The Hague or so said Kisilev?

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      Professor you already suffered in the wrong direction ... At what discretion were there peacekeepers? There were Sochi agreements between Russia and Georgia and both our and Georgian peacekeeping battalions served there ..

                      1. I do not need to poke. We are not friends.
                      2. 8.8.8 the Russian troops on the territory of Georgia did not have a mandate, and therefore it does not matter what color their helmets were.

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      After the war, Russia could not only not buy anything from you, but also give someone a lot of things for free ... Is such an example understandable?

                      No, not clear. Russia already supplies weapons to our enemies.

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      Everything that relates to armaments is considered secret ... Or what do you want to say that you will sell us everything that we buy? ))) As far as I read, drones you sold not the first freshness, probably not because we did not have enough money ... So, right?

                      Is Kalashnikov secret? But he refers to weapons ... laughing Israel sold what Russia asked. Would not be offended by Elbit and asked Hermes, then Israel would have sold Hermes.

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      Russia on the fifth day of the war was already near Tbilisi and was not occupied at all with your arms deliveries ... Then, on command, all the US vassals started screaming that it turned out Russia attacked Georgia))) ... Nits are corrupt ... It's not we quarrel with them, it’s they under the control of a country that wants to destroy us ... But India and China are already half the world))) ... Not so little))) ...

                      So it was. Russia attacked Georgia, and not vice versa. If you think that everyone wants to destroy you, then this is the exact definition of paranoia.

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      What and when did Israel plead for?

                      I begged to conclude an agreement, but yours were in no hurry. Links to search for you or take a word?

                      Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
                      What did you refuse?

                      From the supply of weapons to Georgia, but why did you refuse for our sake? wink
          4. sivuch
            sivuch April 12 2016 22: 05
            +3
            What is your evidence?
            -----------------------------
            And why is evidence needed? Was Israel obligated not to supply arms to Azerbaijan?
            1. Professor
              Professor April 13 2016 08: 39
              +1
              Quote: sivuch
              And why is evidence needed? Was Israel obligated not to supply arms to Azerbaijan?

              In order to determine that Spikes were applied. Their presence does not mean automatic use.
          5. Foofighter
            Foofighter April 13 2016 13: 14
            -1
            Quote: Professor
            Spikes are also clearly defensive weapons.

            Adhesions were used in the offensive. APU defend against whom?
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. kill the fascist
        kill the fascist April 12 2016 12: 23
        +6
        When troops were withdrawn from a united Germany, they say that promises were made that NATO would not expand and that the bloc would not come closer to Russia's borders, and that’s how it turned out. Again, according to rumors, there were no direct deliveries of Hezbollah cornets. By the way, between whom were the agreements on the refusal to supply 300x to Iran?
        1. kotvov
          kotvov April 12 2016 12: 41
          +3
          By the way, between whom were the agreements on the refusal to supply 300x to Iran ?,
          Duc, the Israelis and Amers agreed. The car decided that we were one gang.
    4. dima9990
      dima9990 April 12 2016 12: 14
      +2
      captain, look on the expanses of Runet than the Arabs merkava burn. you may find the answer to the question.
    5. karpah
      karpah April 12 2016 12: 37
      +3
      This is how you supply. Hezbollah has an abundance of Cornets and a lot of our guys died from their use in Lebanon in 2006. However, after equipping the Quartet with a "windbreaker", all the cornets were intercepted before reaching the tank. In addition, the windbreaker gave out the coordinates of the launch site and the health of the Cornet's calculations deteriorated sharply)))
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 20: 03
        0
        Why should Russia supply weapons to Hezbollah? What is the point you can explain?
        1. Kaiten
          Kaiten April 13 2016 06: 34
          +1
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          Why should Russia supply weapons to Hezbollah? What is the point you can explain?

          Inflating the conflict on the BV-> the rise in oil prices-> profit to the countries selling oil.
          Suppose we put weapons in the amount of 10 million, and received a profit on the lard.
          Plus international weapon advertising
          Plus, checking new models in combat conditions far from their own borders.
    6. Kaiten
      Kaiten April 12 2016 20: 43
      +2
      Quote: rotmistr60
      But then maybe we should provide excellent anti-tank weapons and MANPADS to those whom Israel considers its enemies?

      As if from 1955 doing this.
      1. Professor
        Professor April 13 2016 08: 22
        -2
        Quote: Kaiten
        As if from 1955 doing this.

        Czechoslovakia supplied weapons to the Arabs until 1948.
        1. Kaiten
          Kaiten April 13 2016 11: 22
          0
          Quote: Professor
          Czechoslovakia supplied weapons to the Arabs until 1948.

          Well, formally, until 1948 there was a bourgeois government in the ChS and as if it were independent, although of course without a go-ahead from Moscow not a single cartridge would have got into the BV.
          1. Professor
            Professor April 13 2016 12: 40
            +1
            Quote: Kaiten
            Well, formally, until 1948 there was a bourgeois government in the ChS and as if it were independent, although of course without a go-ahead from Moscow not a single cartridge would have got into the BV.

            We are often told that it was precisely Stalin who delivered weapons to us through Czechoslovakia, but they do not like to remember that the Arabs were supplied with the same way.
            1. Foofighter
              Foofighter April 13 2016 12: 45
              +2
              This was later, when someone under the USA crossed over, then they traveled in English and French, if they had one at all.
            2. The comment was deleted.
  9. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz April 12 2016 11: 12
    0
    The microwave will suppress both the alien and its electronics, maybe this is the problem?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 12 2016 12: 24
      -2
      Watching how to apply. This is not an EM pulse of a nuclear explosion. However, even the equipment can be perfectly protected from it.

      And in general
  10. Termit1309
    Termit1309 April 12 2016 11: 18
    +5
    For example, the relatively high losses in the armored vehicles of the Armenian side for such a short time. What were they conditioned by?

    For example, what kind of losses, we will find out later when the passions subside. According to the Azerbaijani chants, yes high. Armenian - no.
    The main thing is that the Azerbaijani side in this conflict was massively using the Israeli-made Spike ATGM NLOS.

    That artillery hit them, MLRS all by. Crocodiles flew - they didn’t shoot. And then Spike came and said, LIFT ME AGAIN!
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 12 2016 11: 26
      +4
      "artillery hit them, MLRS went by. Crocodiles were flying - they were shooting all by" ////

      Exactly. A tank (especially in a trench) can only be hit directly
      hit and only in a vulnerable place.
      And this is the difference between howitzer shells, MLRS and NURs of helicopters -
      and precision missiles with GOS SPIKA.
      All tanks were hit in the tower from above. One rocket per tank.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov April 12 2016 12: 11
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        And that’s the difference between howitzer shells

        Krasnopolye. UAS, in fact, is designed to destroy such targets.
  11. Verdun
    Verdun April 12 2016 11: 27
    0
    Spike is a dangerous weapon. Joint development of Russian and American engineers who immigrated to Israel. All jokes aside, to counter this complex it is necessary not only to equip tanks with protective systems. It would also be nice to identify the basing sites in a timely manner and destroy them before the use of tanks.
  12. hhhhhhh
    hhhhhhh April 12 2016 11: 28
    0
    Quote: Abbra
    Is this minus to me for voicing sad and tragic information?

    This is sadness (((((
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. dFG
    dFG April 12 2016 11: 33
    +1
    The article is certainly entertaining, but ..... collective protection of tanks is a promising topic, but has not yet been embodied in the design and technological documentation, the thing is new experimental, and protection is needed now ... so where is that famous arena that has been shown countless times at different exhibitions ?? Are mass losses of tanks with crews cheaper than a couple of hundred sets to begin with ??
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 12 2016 12: 13
      +3
      Quote: dfg
      collective protection of tanks is a promising topic, but has not yet been embodied in the design and technological documentation

      "Infauna"
  15. Termit1309
    Termit1309 April 12 2016 11: 36
    +6
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Exactly. A tank (especially in a trench) can only be hit directly
    hit and only in a vulnerable place.
    And this is the difference between howitzer shells, MLRS and NURs of helicopters -
    and precision missiles with GOS SPIKA.
    All tanks were hit in the tower from above. One rocket per tank.

    I will tell you a terrible secret. On some helicopters, besides NUR, they also put guided anti-tank missiles. Yes! And from above they can also get into the tank. And MLRS missiles are sometimes equipped with anti-tank cluster warheads.
    By the way, I see in the subject - how accurately was the Armenian tanks knocked out, namely Spike?
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 12 2016 12: 30
      +2
      Thank you, I am in the know. There are accurate artillery shells, and mortar mines,
      or special, or with nozzles for accurate shooting.
      But not in the area.

      Hit by Spike can be determined by the absence
      around the tank any funnels or damage from impacts or
      fragments.
      So it was before, when Spikes kicked howitzers in Syria
      or Hezbollah firing points in Lebanon. Everything around is whole - the technique is broken.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov April 12 2016 12: 35
        +1
        Quote: voyaka uh
        But not in the area.

        ?
      2. Winnie76
        Winnie76 April 12 2016 14: 55
        0
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Hit by Spike can be determined by the absence
        around the tank any funnels or damage from impacts or
        fragments.

        Eva how. In Chernobyl, mountains of technology are also probably Spike wink
      3. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 12 2016 15: 06
        +2
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Hit by Spike can be determined by the absence
        around the tank any funnels or damage from impacts or
        fragments.

        Such a pattern is characteristic of the use of any guided or homing ammunition, not just Spike.

        Pomnitz, the Baron also wrote off the first killed T-64s on the "Krasnopoli".
  16. the finish
    the finish April 12 2016 11: 37
    +5
    Spike by spike, but the Karabakh akop infantryman by the Russian Bassoon, also 70 produced, knocked out 5 advancing Azerbaijani tanks. Knowing people, please tell me, for comparison, the cost of Spike and Bassoon.
    1. Lincoln
      Lincoln April 12 2016 11: 49
      -1
      Can we compare the cost of the tank and spike? fellow
      1. the finish
        the finish April 12 2016 11: 57
        +2
        So if with skillful use there is no difference so why pay more.
        1. Lincoln
          Lincoln April 12 2016 12: 04
          -3
          No difference? Spike is able to hit the target accurately up to a distance of 25km, is there really no difference?
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 April 12 2016 12: 14
      +3
      Do you have pictures of these wrecked Azerbaijani tanks?
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 April 12 2016 15: 15
        +1
        Do you have pictures of these wrecked Azerbaijani tanks?


        And there are so many fakes. "Why pity them, bastard - write more." For some reason, the severed head of an Armenian is a fake, but it is not clear how the destroyed tank is a reality. Yes, it's not a problem at all to drag a few old 72-ks from the Kharkov plant and snap them in different angles. You don't even need to drag far. And then make an ad "spike". If Tripoli was "taken" on the screen of Al-Jazeera a few days before the real fall of the city, then such a setup is not a problem at all.
        I personally consider only losses recognized by both parties.
      2. MACCABI-TLV
        MACCABI-TLV April 12 2016 22: 16
        +1
        Will this fit?
    3. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 14: 17
      +1
      You can protect the DZ tank from Fagot, skillful maneuvering of the crew, reduced ammo, lack of fuel in the upper tanks ... There is practically no protection from Spike and Javelin ... That's the problem ... You need to at least put DZ, lattice screens and on the roof tank and around the perimeter and cover everything with a net like "Leshy" or a regular "Cape" ... But this was not done, although the Armenians I think they knew that Azerbaijan had Spikes ...
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 12 2016 23: 38
        0
        The crew will not even be able to maneuver even see the ATGM flying into the tank.
  17. black
    black April 12 2016 11: 43
    +1
    The article is written as an advertisement for the KGZ. I believe that the KGZ idea is outdated and not economically viable. Where will it be optimal? At the link of the company battalion. The last time a tank battalion was in the offensive and defense was seen in the 90's during regimental exercises. And during the fighting, I did not see. In modern combat conflicts, tanks operate in groups until a platoon. The microwave idea is interesting, but there are technical difficulties. Compact installation, power supply and radiation directivity. It’s easier to tactical nuclear ammunition and to ensure EMP, and other pleasures. And then, rattling fire, sparkling with the brilliance of steel ...
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 12 2016 12: 30
      +2
      Quote: black
      And during the fighting, I did not see. In modern combat conflicts, tanks operate in groups until a platoon

      In modern conflicts, tanks do not work separately at all. And a tank platoon is usually "attached" to at least an infantry platoon, and more often an infantry company. And this is at least 10 more cars.

      So collective defense against the WTO is a promising topic. Especially when you consider that with the same success as with VTB, such systems will be able to deal with enemy UAVs
      1. black
        black April 12 2016 13: 12
        0
        Oh and expensive fantasies you have. The Pentagon smokes nervously on the sidelines. So KGZ also for each motorized rifle company? By power. Then you don’t need to learn to use the terrain, maneuver, we forget everything. We put KGZ and at the speed of a pedestrian we will go to the enemy. The main thing is that we are not afraid of ATGMs. Artillery will miss, the enemy will be scared, and hand grenade launchers are generally guano.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov April 12 2016 13: 25
          0
          Quote: black
          So KGZ also for each motorized rifle company?

          For each platoon.

          Quote: black
          Oh and expensive fantasies you have. The Pentagon smokes nervously on the sidelines.

          "The women still give birth to peasants, but they have paid for the horses in gold!"

          Quote: black
          We put KGZ and at the speed of a pedestrian we will go to the enemy.

          Why at the speed of a pedestrian? Any religious prohibitions on the installation of stabilized optics and a stabilized antenna microwave installation?

          Quote: black
          The main thing is that we are not afraid of ATGMs. Artillery will miss, the enemy will be scared, and hand grenade launchers are generally guano.

          That's it!
          And ATGMs are not terrible, and artillery will not be able to use UAVs for guidance, and military-technical cooperation for destruction, and even with hand grenade launchers, the enemy will have problems. Only "old school", without any electronics.
          You also forgot about such "trifles" as communication problems.
          1. black
            black April 12 2016 13: 53
            0
            You know. There were two episodes to come to my senses in my practice. Once with my Arkharovites I pulled spotters to a distance of 250 meters to enemy positions, without an UAV. And another time, the MLRS fire corrected the field telephone. The first volley plugged two batteries of self-propelled guns. Opponents, and it was night, they started to launch lighting rockets, they thought that I was somewhere nearby. And I sat at 5 km. With captured night binoculars, the truth is of domestic production. So my truth is practice, as a criterion of truth. And your grandiose and very expensive fantasies, it is still necessary to see. By the way, about ... women give birth ... For the entire service, I did not have irrevocable losses of personnel.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov April 12 2016 19: 26
              +1
              Uh ... Fairy tales are not for me. Especially about "correcting MLRS fire on the field telephone." And in general about adjusting artillery fire.
              1. black
                black April 12 2016 20: 02
                -1
                Indicate time and place? Or can you give examples from your military practice? It will be interesting to compare.
              2. black
                black April 12 2016 21: 10
                0
                As I understand it, you soldered a minus to me, instead of an answer. I understood you. All combat experience gained in tanks while playing. Actually, this is a site for adult uncles.
    2. kov123
      kov123 April 12 2016 12: 40
      +1
      Americans in Iraq and more battles fought. BUT! They crushed any possibility of organized anti-tank defense in advance. If we consider the battle as a pair of tank-ptur (PTO), then either the tanks end or the shells. The commissioning of even a tank platoon should be provided by reconnaissance, interaction with infantry, artillery, aviation, electronic warfare equipment, etc.
  18. Vadim237
    Vadim237 April 12 2016 11: 53
    -1
    You can also put a laser emitter on the tank, which will simply burn flying missiles with a powerful impulse.
    1. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh April 12 2016 12: 35
      +1
      About this, by the way, in Israel it’s very
      are thinking. It may be cheaper than Trophy.
      Plus - the laser can sometimes even replace a machine gun
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 12 2016 15: 28
        0
        The Chinese have such a laser system installed on a Type 99 tank - only it destroys optics and blinds ATGM operators.
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 14: 40
      +2
      Bullshit! Which laser? I’m certainly not a physicist, but from what I read the conclusions I can make that a huge amount of energy is needed for a powerful laser, and where to get it on a tank, the generator is clearly not enough, it’s not a light to shine on the road - this is time, and secondly, solar and clear weather, because in the fog or during precipitation there is no sense in this laser, it will scatter and weaken, and thirdly - it’s both fantastic and fantastically expensive!
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 12 2016 15: 25
        -4
        It’s quite realistic to install a 25-50 kilowatt generator on a tank, instead of an auxiliary power unit, and to destroy a rocket, a laser and a distance of 50-100 meters will be more than enough with such power, even the strongest fog will not hurt.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 16: 51
          0
          The laser acts on the principle of a lens, focusing the rays at one point and heating the surface of the object ... It’s one thing to heat the body of a cruise missile that doesn’t fly very fast and its body is thin, it itself collapses with a hole in the skin ... So these lasers are huge and consume a large amount of energy ... And how were you going to destroy with a laser in 25 - 50 kW)))) a projectile or rocket-propelled grenade? ))) The maximum that can be done with such a laser is to light a bonfire to heat the dry and then from dry branches))) ...
    3. Winnie76
      Winnie76 April 12 2016 15: 02
      +2
      And the power supply to the laser on the centipede MZKT to carry after the tank. Nice little wink
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 12 2016 15: 18
        -3
        One battery with supercapacitors is enough, and its dimensions are like ZIP boxes on a tank.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 16: 53
          +1
          But we don’t need about these batteries on supercapacitors))) We had enough E-mobile))) ... It’s good that there wasn’t government money ... In the USSR there was even a laser tank, but the maximum that he did was blind the enemy and apparently not very effective, since the project was not developed ...
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 April 12 2016 21: 06
            0
            Since the days of the USSR, technology has stepped far ahead in supercapacitors in both lasers and generators, and you can light a fire using a conventional laser pointer, of which there is a wide selection for sale, such lasers described above already exist
  19. iouris
    iouris April 12 2016 11: 56
    +3
    The sight of an affected tank, a downed helicopter that did not cause damage to the enemy demoralizes the infantry and enhances the morale of the enemy.
    Without active protection from anti-tank systems, a tank on the battlefield can no longer be used. It’s impossible to fight without it. Protection should be individual and group, i.e. complex, but how much does it cost - the tenth question. Science should minimize costs.
  20. Horn
    Horn April 12 2016 11: 59
    +1
    The eternal struggle of armor with weapons. Armor ALWAYS loses, because it is always forced to catch up with it.
  21. RuslanNN
    RuslanNN April 12 2016 12: 08
    +1
    Quote: finish
    Spike by spike, but the Karabakh akop infantryman by the Russian Bassoon, also 70 produced, knocked out 5 advancing Azerbaijani tanks. Knowing people, please tell me, for comparison, the cost of Spike and Bassoon.

    Why not 10 or 20? Lying, so on a grand scale. The network is full of videos of destroyed Armenian tanks, nothing about Azerbaijan. Although if something had been knocked down, the Armenians would have screamed the whole world. Helicopter yes, they shot down.
    1. the finish
      the finish April 12 2016 12: 16
      +3
      The network also contains a complete list of dead Azerbaijani soldiers (90 people), indicating the date and place of death, as well as the date and where they are buried. Although Azerbaijan denies everything (censorship is understood ..)
    2. kotvov
      kotvov April 12 2016 12: 50
      +3
      in two days of combat, Azerbaijan lost 14 tanks and 5 other units of armored vehicles. ,,
      http://www.verelq.am/ru/node/7148
      who knows how much they burned there. Some write one thing, others write another. In general, as always, their losses are reduced, the enemy is increased.
    3. the finish
      the finish April 12 2016 13: 37
      +1
      So much for today's evidence of censorship.
      The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry has warned foreign journalists about the rules of work in Nagorno-Karabakh.
  22. the finish
    the finish April 12 2016 12: 12
    0
    But the helicopter was shot down like a gum club! from RPG ,,,,
  23. The comment was deleted.
  24. ramin_serg
    ramin_serg April 12 2016 12: 36
    0
    All that remains of the tank is the photo in the article
    look from 25 seconds


    1. the finish
      the finish April 12 2016 12: 51
      0
      http://razm.info/ru/8393 более подробный список с датами и местами на блоге азербайджанского журналиста проживающего в Германии и поэтому не находящегося под жесткой цензурой.

      http://razm.info/ru/8393
  25. raid14
    raid14 April 12 2016 13: 00
    0
    Add radar-33 to the KOEP "Shtora" to detect low-flying targets, develop a cooling system for the hull and engine using refrigerants to reduce the tank's visibility in the infrared range at the time of an attack, design trap heat grenades for ATGMs with IR seeker.
  26. black
    black April 12 2016 13: 26
    -1
    Apart from the GOS, "Spike" also has a fiber-optic communication and control channel. But the flight speed is low, 130-160m | s. Experts note that the Arena complex, DZ, and possibly multispectral smoke grenades may well solve the issue of protecting a tank from such ammunition.
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 April 12 2016 15: 31
      +2
      Spike can make a slide or attack from a great height - neither Arena nor Shtora will be saved there.
      1. black
        black April 12 2016 15: 51
        0
        So the bassoon and the competition can do a slide. The question is the skill of the operator and the distance to the goal. And these are questions of the use of ATGMs in combat conditions. Again, the question of distance and terrain. Our tankers approached the forest belt in pairs, one slightly pulled out the trunk, and the other hid behind the trees. The probability of getting an ATGM into the tank barrel is small. Into the enclosure - the trees interfere. And if you started to open fire, the second tank was connected. With this tactic, danger was only the artillery of the enemy, from 100mm and above.
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 16: 59
          -1
          What nonsense? This is how the Bassoon and the Competition can hit from above if they are guided by a laser? I’ve never heard ... And what kind of tactics is this))) when a tank from a forest shows one trunk))) and around it that trees are continuously growing, trunk to trunk? And how to fight where there is no forest? ))) Or maybe then the tank can be beaten with boards and the whole problem with Spikes and Javelins is solved? )))
          1. black
            black April 12 2016 19: 11
            0
            You have more questions than answers. Where how, why. Theorist?
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan
              Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 20: 10
              -2
              I have questions because you wrote nonsense ...
          2. black
            black April 12 2016 20: 10
            +2
            You would, for the sake of interest, go to the Internet, and see how these ATGMs are managed. Amateur.
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan
              Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 20: 47
              -1
              Well, tell a specialist, I’ve already gone online))) ...
              1. black
                black April 12 2016 21: 07
                -1
                Both ATGMs are controlled by wire in a semi-automatic mode. Cocking the handle, directing the reticle to the target. The fire. When the rocket approaches the target, slightly touch the vertical aiming handle with our fingers, the aiming mark goes up and immediately back. The rocket makes a slide and from above to the hull. Not the fact that the tower. Especially if the target is moving. I don't really believe in the effectiveness of Spike. Especially when launched from a closed firing position. The drone does not provide target detection, with an accuracy of a single armored vehicle. Weather gets in the way, camouflage. Sometimes you still need to sit and decipher what was filmed. And then the control over the fiber-optic channel. This means that the operator needs to raise the rocket higher and provide himself with a view. Again, it is not a fact that the operator will see something. The seeker turns on. And what is the likelihood that it does not politicize towards the nearest or more "attractive" source? What does she react to there? Heat, metal? Heat head protection has been solved for a long time. These are earthen mats for the engine and heat blocks.
                1. Cat man null
                  Cat man null April 12 2016 21: 12
                  0
                  Quote: black
                  engine mats

                  Chivoooo ??

                  In battle? On a working engine? Mats ??

                  I have one bed in winter I drove several kilometers with shutters closed (no mats !!) - I burned the engine ..

                  Mats, plin ..
                  1. black
                    black April 12 2016 21: 26
                    +1
                    Personnel should be taught correctly so that they monitor the temperature of the coolant. And also to be present at tactics lessons, and not to hide in the capter. I would be very upset if you also finished Kazan.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
                    2. Cat man null
                      Cat man null April 12 2016 21: 42
                      0
                      Quote: black
                      Personnel must be taught correctly so that they monitor the temperature of the coolant. And to be present at tactics lessons, and not to hide in the capter

                      - say the right words, it is pleasant to listen ..

                      And yet: what about the earthen mat? on the engine? yes ride with the breeze, kilometer ... twenty? everything is fine, right? wink
                      1. black
                        black April 12 2016 21: 47
                        0
                        If the temperature of the coolant rises, on the march, go to a lower speed and add speed. So which one did you finish?
                      2. Cat man null
                        Cat man null April 12 2016 21: 53
                        0
                        Quote: black
                        So which one did you finish?

                        Yes we spinzhaki wink

                        Quote: black
                        If the coolant temperature rises, on the march, go to a lower speed and add speed

                        - exactly. Just did not help.

                        Duc, this is ... what about ground mat? belay
                      3. black
                        black April 12 2016 22: 07
                        0
                        Who didn't it help? I remember my platoon officer was out of jackets. He always said: "Lesha, let me write something for you, and you and the soldiers like that yourself. Therefore, all the equipment worked like clockwork for me. And the mechanics of my hands did not have time to wash the oil from the oil. And I served in places of eternal lack of dryness. , where half a year is winter and -30 ° C is considered a normal temperature. I myself did not have to use mats. I will not lie. This is one of the means of protection against enemy weapons.
                      4. Cat man null
                        Cat man null April 12 2016 22: 11
                        0
                        Quote: black
                        Who didn’t help?

                        - the engine. 5TDF, you know, probably wink

                        Well, I didn’t know that he was going with closed shutters ..

                        Quote: black
                        always said: "Lesha, let me write something for you, and you and the soldiers like that yourself

                        - not about me. And in the exercises this doesn’t work anyway laughing

                        Quote: black
                        This is one of the enemy’s WTO defenses.

                        - IMHO not on the move yet. I only about it yes
                      5. black
                        black April 12 2016 22: 32
                        0
                        Tank T-64? I'm just an infantryman. If you do not believe me, then your complaints about earthen mats, address the officers of the General Staff and the Armored Academy. What can they know about this?
                      6. Cat man null
                        Cat man null April 12 2016 23: 19
                        0
                        Quote: black
                        Tank T-64?

                        - T-64B

                        Quote: black
                        If you do not believe ...

                        - Yes, I believe .. I just honestly don’t understand how this Feng Shui can be used in practice request
      2. Dan4eG
        Dan4eG April 13 2016 08: 31
        0
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jtp7HjK0JIc
  • avg-mgn
    avg-mgn April 12 2016 13: 28
    +2
    Quote: Spade
    In modern conflicts, tanks do not work separately at all. BUT a tank platoon is usually "attached" to at least an infantry platoon, and more often an infantry company. And this is at least 10 machines.

    Here is the answer to the question about the use of a super-powerful controlled source of electromagnetic radiation - infantry in castrates, do not even try to argue. I worked enough at high microwave capacities and saw how, over 100 meters from the AFU, the gophers lay like ants and birds.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 12 2016 13: 38
      -1
      Quote: avg-mgn
      Here is the answer to the question about the use of a super-powerful controlled source of electromagnetic radiation - infantry in castrates,

      Better in zinc coffins than impotence? How interesting.

      Quote: avg-mgn
      I have worked enough at high microwave power

      Well, Duc is clearly not in the infantry. If you treat her like a consumable.
      1. black
        black April 12 2016 14: 27
        +2
        And you, excuse me, will be from "makhra"?
    2. black
      black April 12 2016 14: 26
      0
      And how much iron is hung on the foot soldiers, and if ammunition works? They won’t get anywhere. And those who survive will break everything that can be broken at the installation. And what will they do with the crew until impotence begins to progress ...
    3. Winnie76
      Winnie76 April 12 2016 15: 12
      0
      But is it possible to put your magic AFU at the entrance to the Verkhovna Rada? There it can bring many benefits to all of humanity ...
  • TOR2
    TOR2 April 12 2016 15: 43
    +1
    Quote: Verdun
    Spike is a dangerous weapon. Joint development of Russian and American engineers who immigrated to Israel

    First of all, the inaction of domestic officials makes it dangerous.
    Quote: raid14
    Add to the KOEP "Shtora" radar-33 for detecting low-flying targets, develop a cooling system for the hull

    Temperature camouflage is an interesting thing, but unfortunately very expensive. From the "curtain", the idea of ​​shooting grenades, but with a slightly different filling, is suitable. Then everything is simple. The peculiarity of "javelin-like" ones is an attack from above, even some civilian security systems can determine the presence of an object in the upper sphere of the tank. Then we shoot an interesting grenade stuffed like U-2. Simple foil and nothing fancy. We get IR and UV reflection on the one hand and the impossibility of the radio altimeter and echo sounder on the other. Add aluminum powder to the foil and blow it up as soon as the Woodwuffle is in the affected area. It will not work to create a volumetric explosion that will destroy the rocket, but it will definitely get a blow to the rudders and stabilizers, leaving on a chaotic trajectory. All this installation for the price will be quite acceptable and it will be possible to install it on any armored vehicle.
  • Former battalion commander
    Former battalion commander April 12 2016 15: 53
    0
    I personally disagree with the suggestions in the article. There is no real evidence of the EFFICIENCY of any microwave radiation for even simple suppression of electronics at distances of more than 1-2 km. I consider the introduction of the "President C" type system for tanks to be a more promising direction. It is a tried and tested system and proven to work for aircraft and helicopters. It remains only to adapt it for armored vehicles and install it en masse. Now there is a unique opportunity to COMPLETELY neutralize ALL Western achievements in the field of all kinds of GOS by suppressing them with laser radiation.
  • Strashila
    Strashila April 12 2016 16: 34
    +1
    We can only say one thing ... our specialists need to study this experience and find a solution.
  • Lugan
    Lugan April 12 2016 16: 53
    0
    The article offers a lot of interesting things, and it gives food for thought.
  • rubidiy
    rubidiy April 12 2016 17: 02
    +1
    I hope the Russian Ministry of Defense will pay attention to the problems that have emerged during the short-term Karabakh conflict, and this will spur development in these areas.

    Alas, this problem is not "revealed" now. It has existed for a long time, since the appearance of the first "smart" means of destruction of armored vehicles in the roof. Everyone knows everything perfectly. Why until now the Ministry of Defense does nothing about this is a huge question. I repeat, the count has already gone for decades, but things are still there. Information that the T14 can handle such ATGMs is also not secret. So how much T14 can we release? Does anyone, being a realist, believe that the entire park will be replaced by T14 in case of a large-scale conflict? And after all, armored vehicles are not limited to MBTs alone ... How to protect a group of "cheap" BMPs, armored personnel carriers and other transport equipment? Well, the decision about KGZ also suggests itself. Again, in reality Russia, given its deplorable financial situation, for the improvement of which there are no prerequisites, it is necessary to solve this critical task. And to solve it certainly not by the method of installing expensive personal protection for each unit of BT. Here, too, there can be no question of any super secrecy, tk. Such a group protection complex, no matter what principle it is based on, should get into all units of the ground and airborne forces. So personally, I have to admit that the MO simply does not have such a complex, and moreover, no one itches. They are sawing money for the pseudo-modernization of the T72, which, as they were vulnerable to all modern weapons of destruction of armored vehicles, have remained. Well, they will not modernize T90 to T90AM, and even save money on Afghani, and then what?
    At the same time, let me remind you that in the Russian army there are no kamikazde drones or third-generation ATGMs (both portable and for attack helicopters). This means that apart from special aviation joint venture and MLRS shots Smerch, we have nothing. But they are effective against the accumulation of a large number of enemy armored vehicles. And what to do in "everyday" battle ??? The number of modern tanks in NATO troops is only growing every year, and we still do not have tanks even with a conventional KAZ against ATGM of the 3nd generation.
    Sorry for the footcloth, but "sore". :( All this, I repeat, has been obvious for a long time. The Karabakh conflict simply demonstrated in practice what has long been understood.
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 17: 15
      0
      I completely agree!!! Too little attention is paid to the protection of armored vehicles in Russia !!! This is our eternal sloppiness ... I don’t understand there is also a new DZ Relic of the third generation that protects against tandem ammunition and can be installed on lightly armored vehicles !!! The same KAZ why not to protect against an attack from above? There is not even an elementary masking net in the IR range, neither a Cape nor a Heridka ... Of course you can make it yourself from pieces of fabric, but it takes time, material, and before the fight it doesn’t always happen ... And even make a kaz for protection from above easier than from the sides ... The shot buckshot will hit up and even if there is infantry nearby it will not suffer !!! Where is all this in the troops? Bl ... there are no words, how bitter and insulting both for Russia and for our military science and for providing our army with the necessary things and most importantly for the control and preservation of what we have ...
  • Clueless
    Clueless April 12 2016 17: 40
    0
    "Nothing stands in the way of it, except the high cost of such personal protective systems." - it's bad to know that we live in a country where the human life of tankers is valued less than paper wrappers.

    I liked how the answer of the Israeli designer (according to Discovery, if I was not mistaken was a broadcast about the mercenary) - we value our soldiers, therefore we do not save on protection.

    And we ... as usual - give birth.
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan April 12 2016 20: 22
      +3
      When do they give birth? He still needs to grow up and learn, it’s not like before in the infantry waving a bayonet, but a new tank, which is cheaper than the DZ Relic and KAZ on it? I don’t think ... There is only one reason - the distribution is Russian ... !!! Do you want my own example of another distribution ... I served in the North Caucasus Military District from 2004-2007, we didn’t have elementary fresh functioning batteries for 159 radio stations ... The old ones held a charge of 2 hours no more ... Everyone from the regiment commander to platoon poh..you no and no .. Are they worth the crazy money? No ... Do you know what happened afterwards? Then our regiment was alerted and sent to war ... It took two days to start up all the equipment (I'm not joking) ... When the Roki Tunnel passed, naturally all the batteries in the walkie-talkies died completely and communication was only by cell phones, and they were like beacons for Georgians ... Each call was monitored and the coordinates and content of the message were immediately determined ... Bl .., and what about problems with batteries in Russia ?! We don’t have a problem with normal people, one blatata around and stupid people ... The same Rogozin for a month now has not known how to justify his apartment for 500 million rubles, and his son has already been replaced by Vasilyeva ... bl ... how is this su..a for..balo ...
  • The comment was deleted.