In the 80s - early 90s, the leading tank-producing countries - the USSR, USA, Germany, France - were actively developing a promising tank. At the same time there was active search decisions on the layout, crew composition and distribution of its tasks. Improving the characteristics of the tank could be achieved by reducing the crew by installing an automatic loader; this decision was made in all promising developments of Western countries. This made it possible to reduce the internal volume of the tank and strengthen the armor without a significant increase in weight.
The development of electronics and automation made it possible to go even further in the development of the layout, reducing the crew to two people. Reducing the crew to two people allows us to solve a number of problematic issues: increasing protection, duplicating the work of the crew, better meeting ergonomic requirements, reducing the weight and dimensions of the tank. At the same time, a number of unresolved issues arise related to crew overload and unit management.
The choice of tank layout and crew composition was a very pressing issue, both in the USSR and in Western countries, and the final point on this issue has not yet been set.
The material examines a number of concepts for the layout of a promising tank in the United States, studied in the late 80s and early 90s by the tactical and technological directorate of the agency for the development of advanced projects DARPA and their comparison with some well-known developments carried out in the former. THE USSR.
Tank variant with a crew of 2 and an uninhabited turret
A tank with a crew of two has high mobility and a low silhouette. The ratio of the length and width of the body along the tracks in this version is close to the ideal 1.5:1, which ensures good agility.
The tank is made according to a six-wheel chassis design. The height of the turret corresponds to the height of the turret of the Abrams tank, but its area is reduced by 50% in the front projection and by 40% in the side projection. Reservation of the front part of the uninhabited turret provides high protection for the crew compartment from ammunition attacking from above (if the turret is turned forward), in addition, there are additional anti-fragmentation screens above the crew seats.
The center of mass of the tank is shifted forward (between the 2nd and 3rd rollers), since the bulk of the armor (about 9 tons) is located in the front of the hull. The total predicted weight of the tank is 50.3 tons, which is when installing a 1500 hp engine. will provide high specific power (27 hp/t).
The hatches are designed in such a way that the crew can leave the tank even with the gun down. The hatches have electric and manual drives and are equipped with glass blocks for traveling. In the bottom under one of the seats there is an emergency exit hatch, which is used in case of damage to the hatches and emergency situations. The crew compartment is quite cramped, with 70 cm of width allocated for each crew member.
The air intake of the filter ventilation unit is carried out behind the left crew hatch; the FVU unit is located in the bow of the tank in a niche in the lower frontal part of the hull. Purified conditioned air is injected into the area of the crew's feet and then enters the niches of the electronic units.
The total capacity of the tank's fuel system is 1250 liters, the fuel is partially located inside the hull in front of the engine, the rest is in fuel tanks on the fenders at the rear of the hull.
Comparison of the side projection of the M1A1 tank and a promising tank with a crew of 2 people with an uninhabited turret.
Comparison of the frontal projection area of a tank with an electromagnetic gun, a promising tank with a crew of 2 people and an uninhabited turret, and the M1A1 Abrams.
For the first time, developments to create a promising tank with a crew of two people were undertaken at the A.A. KMDB. Morozov in the 70s, the work was continued by E.A. Morozov. A prototype of a promising tank with a crew of 2 people was manufactured by KMDB.
A project of a promising tank with a crew of 2 people, close to this ideology, was developed in Russia by Spetsmash OJSC in the 90s. At the same time, a front-engine layout was implemented, largely due to the use of a gas turbine engine. A running chassis mock-up was made.
Tank variant with a crew of 3 people and an uninhabited turret
The next tank layout option being considered is a more conventional version with a crew of three. When creating this option, American experts proposed two solutions:
The first involves placing 3 crew members in a line. With this option, it is possible to maintain the dimensions of the tank with a six-leg chassis design, and the crew is accommodated in fairly comfortable conditions. But at the same time, it is not possible to provide sufficient protection for the onboard part of the crew compartment. Even with a reduction in the width of the space allocated for each crew member from 70 to 60 cm, the ability to provide protection when fired into the side areas is minimal. At the same time, railway dimensions do not allow increasing the width of the hull.
In the USSR, this option was proposed as part of the development of a promising medium tank by A. A. Morozov in the second half of the 70s.
The second option is to place two crew members in front and a third behind them (placing one of the crew members in front is not rational to ensure equal armoring).
This option allows maintaining a sufficient level of protection for the hull sides and satisfactory comfort conditions for the crew. Although the conditions are worse than in the first option because... the legs of the third crew member are placed between the two in front. The freed volume on the sides of the third crew member can be used to accommodate food supplies, a dry closet, etc.
At the same time, the length of the hull increases by approximately 80 cm, the weight of the tank increases by 5 tons. The tank is made according to a seven-leg chassis design with an estimated weight of 55.3 tons.
The ratio of the length and width of the body along the tracks in this version is 1.7:1. Reservation of the frontal part of the uninhabited turret provides less protection for the crew compartment from ammunition attacking from above due to the lengthening of the hull by 80 cm.
The T-95 tank project, close to this ideology, was developed by the Russian JSC UKBTM in the 2000s.
Tank version with a crew of 3 people with a classic layout and automatic loader
All proposed options with crew placement in the front part of the hull have a number of disadvantages. Foreign experts call one of the most significant of them the lack of all-round visual observation capabilities for the commander. On tanks with crew accommodations in the hull, the viewing angle with open hatches is no more than 270 degrees.
The layout with the placement of the commander and gunner in the turret and the driver in the hull allows for an all-round visual overview of the commander. In addition, placing the gunner in a rotating turret eliminates problems with disorientation, and it is also possible to eliminate a number of delays when firing.
This arrangement is closest to the French Leclerc tank, during the development of which a number of options with crew accommodations in the hull were also considered; in the end, a more traditional option with a low-profile turret was chosen.
The disadvantage of this layout for a promising tank is the large mass of frontal armor, restrictions on providing protection from above, and a large frontal projection area. Another design disadvantage is the impossibility of using a carousel-type automatic loader due to the requirement for separate placement of the crew and ammunition.
When creating this option, two solutions were proposed:
The first involves divided placement of ammunition, ready-to-use shots are placed in the automatic loader, additional ammunition is placed in an isolated compartment in front of the engine compartment.
The second option involves placing all the ammunition in a single volume of the automatic loader located in an isolated compartment behind the turret. This option will require a fairly large and wide tower. This ideology was implemented in a Russian tank developed by OKBTM OJSC in the 90s and called the “Black Eagle” (object 640).
In this version of the layout, a 360-degree view of the tank commander is implemented while maintaining the lifting-mast devices with observation systems for the commander and gunner.
In this case, to ensure all-round visibility, the commander must rise above the level of the tower to the waist. As the theorist noted combat use tanks R. Simpkin, a tank “halfway to heaven” (i.e. very vulnerable to enemy fire). The view is hampered by the roof of the central part of the turret, which is raised to provide the required descent angles for the gun.
The possibility of mutual access from the control compartment to the fighting compartment has been implemented (with the gun positioned forward). Both crew members in the turret, the commander and the gunner, can provide all-round visibility by raising their heads above the level of the turret roof.
Due to the larger volume in the body, it is possible to use armor materials with lower overall efficiency, as well as a more powerful FVU due to the increased internal volume.
As in other options for the layout of a promising tank, the problematic issue remains the implementation of the required angles of descent of the gun, associated with the structural weakening of the turret.
The estimated weight of the tank version with a manned turret was 67.4 tons.
Tank version with a crew of 3 people, with the commander located in the turret
This layout option provides a good overview for the tank commander, while it is possible to use a carousel-type automatic loader in the hull. Like all variants of the presented layouts, it is not without its drawbacks. Among them are unsatisfactory conditions for placing the commander, the impact on him of the recoil impulse of the main weapon, the need to duplicate the FVU, PPO systems, etc.
In this version of the layout, the ground pressure is increased by 34% compared to the version of the tank with a crew of 2 people and an uninhabited turret, while the turret is 74 centimeters wider and 20 cm higher. The estimated weight of this option is 67.7 tons.
Firepower
When DARPA modeled the layout options for a promising tank, the requirements were set to increase the muzzle energy from 9 MJ for the M256 to 20 MJ and the initial speed to 2 km/s.
The mass of the active part of the BPS with the master device is 10 kg, the mass of the core is about 5 kg. The length of the BPS with a ballistic tip and tail is 750 mm. To achieve the required characteristics, a powder charge weighing 20 kg with a volume of 17 liters is required. The chosen caliber of the 135 mm gun required the use of separate loading shots.
The caliber of the main weapon used to analyze promising developments was chosen based on data available in the United States on the development of a tank with weapons of this caliber in the USSR.
In the USSR, the development of a tank with a crew of 3 people with a remote 130 mm caliber gun (the commander and gunner were located to the left of the gun) was actually carried out, but subsequently (since 1984) a 152 mm caliber was adopted for the promising tank.
Loading is carried out by a carousel-type automatic loader with a shot placed in a container. Container dimensions 850x160x340 mm. The main charge (BPS) is placed in one cell, the projectile with an additional charge is in another. The AZ carousel contains 35 cassettes with separately loaded rounds.
When modeling various tank layout options, an automatic loader from Ares Inc was chosen, consisting of a carousel mechanism in the turret “basket”. The lifting mechanism lifts the container to the dispensing line, after which the projectile is sent, the container is lowered to dispense the charge, after which it is dispensed.
These solutions for the automatic loader of a promising tank are similar to those adopted for the automatic loader of a promising tank of JSC UKBTM.
Diagram of an automatic loader with a shot feed mechanism. Considering the dimensions of the system and the peculiarities of its placement, the possibility of manually duplicating the work of the AZ is not provided.
The automatic loader is replenished with separate loading rounds in cassettes in automatic mode through a hatch in the rear of the turret. This is a step forward compared to manual loading of ammunition, reducing the existing labor intensity of maintenance.
The gun's descent angles are -10, elevation angles are +20 degrees. To ensure the required angle of descent of the gun, it was proposed to implement a retractable version of the turret roof.
The controlled hydropneumatic suspension, by changing the trim of the vehicle, allows you to increase the gun pointing angles in the vertical plane by another -6/+6 degrees.
Secondary weapons include a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun with 10,000 rounds of ammunition. It was planned to install an additional 7.62 mm machine gun with independent guidance on one of the lifting-mast devices with an ammunition load of 3400 rounds
Fire control system
The fire control system was considered to ensure a high probability of hitting a target (2 m high) at a distance of 4000 m. For this, the shooting error should be no more than 0.2 mrad. The requirements for the possibility of hitting low-flying helicopters require turret guidance drives that provide rotation at a speed of 60 deg/s. The developers proposed installing modules with sighting and observation systems on lifting mast devices with circular rotation. Each module includes a thermal imaging, daytime television, and laser ranging channel. In addition, it is planned to install acoustic sensors and, in the future, millimeter-wave radar. In addition, an auxiliary sight can be installed on the turret. Information transfer was planned to be carried out via fiber optic channels.
Protection
The calculated armor dimensions were 1300 mm for the upper part of the hull (700...380 for the lower part). 1300 mm for the frontal part of the turret and embrasure protection, a barbette was assumed in front of the junction of the hull and turret, etc. At the same time, the frontal protection of the turret also protects the crew compartment from attack from above.
Mobility
In promising tank projects, it was assumed that a compact MTO with a gas turbine engine with a power of 1500 hp would be used. The MTO was developed by the company under the Advanced Integrated Propulsion System (AIPS) program; the gas turbine engine version was developed by General Electric; the version with a diesel engine was Cummins. The main requirement for the new MTO is a reduction in weight from 6400 (M1A1) to 5,000 kg, volume from 7 to 5.9 m3. The MTO under the AIPS program was developed to modernize the M1A1 Block III tank and heavy infantry fighting vehicle. The name of the General Electric MTO, created under the AIPS program, is the LV-100 gas turbine engine.
conclusions
Based on the analysis of various layout options, it turned out that each has both advantages and disadvantages. The choice of one or another version of the tank ideology depends on the planned features of its use. American developers (DARPA) presented an overview of possible layouts, showing the advantages and disadvantages of each of them.
It is noted that a tank with a crew of two people has the best indicators in terms of mobility, visibility, and cost.
At the same time, research on the development of a tank with a crew of two, carried out in the 80s in the USSR, did not show solutions that would provide tank control to units with such a crew. If the gunner performs the functions of commander of a tank unit from platoon to battalion, his tank will be unable to fire. An analysis of the workload of the tank crew also testified in favor of a crew of three.
At the same time, a crew of three provides the ability to simultaneously fire, search for targets, conduct communications and control the battle of a tank unit. An advantage in this case is the possibility of simultaneous firing from additional weapons - a remote-controlled machine gun or a small-caliber cannon.
Sources
1. The problem of reducing the number of main tank crew. Yu. M. Apukhtin, A. I. Mazurenko, E. A. Morozov, P. I. Nazarenko. Bulletin of armored vehicles." No. 6, 1980.
2. An Exploration of Integrated Ground Weapons Concepts for Armor/Anti-Armor Missions. Randall Steeb, Keith Brendley, Dan Norton, John Bondanella, Richard Salter, Teriell G. Covington. RAND, NATIONAL DEFENSE RESEARCH INSTITUTE, 1991.
3. THE LAST BREAK OF SOVIET TANK BUILDERS (diary of a participant in the development of the Boxer tank). Yuri Apukhtin. Kharkov – 2009 http://btvt.narod.ru/bokser/bokser_0.htm
4. R. E. Simpkin, Human Factors in Mechanized Warfare, Brassey's, New York, 1984.
Tanks still remain an important figure on the battlefield, capable of turning the tide of a battle. Some countries are using the reserves left in tanks since the 80s of the last century - such as the M1 Abrams or Leopard 2, others are creating new combat vehicles that best meet the requirements of military or external customers (South Korea, Turkey and China did this), or they are designing fundamentally new tanks (Russia).
MVT-3000 (China)
Photo: MVT 3000 China widely exports not only cheap household appliances, but also weapons, in particular tanks. And here Russian T-90SM tanks pose serious competition to Chinese combat vehicles. The MVT-3000 main battle tank is designed to surpass competitors in the arms market in terms of price-quality ratio. The protection of the frontal projection of the tank of the Chinese armored vehicle is a multi-layer combined armor barrier and is comparable in thickness to that of the German Leopard 2. In addition to this, the tank is equipped with mounted dynamic protection.
The main weapon is a cannon - a 125 mm caliber launcher capable of firing guided missiles at a distance of five kilometers. The MVT-3000 is equipped with a 1,300-horsepower diesel engine, which accelerates the 51-ton tank to 71 km/h, with a cruising range of about 500 km. The creators have provided for the possibility of boosting engine power to 1500 hp. The combat vehicle is equipped modern systems aiming and observation. For example, the driver has a third-generation uncooled thermal imager at his disposal. The development of MVT-3000 began in 2012, and production is planned for 2016.
ROTEM K2 (South Korea)
ROTEM K2, better known as K2 Black Panther, is a promising Korean battle tank, mass production which was started in 2014. The tank is armed with a powerful 120-mm smoothbore gun with a barrel length of 55 calibers, which was created on the basis of a German gun from Rheinmetall.
The gun's ammunition capacity is 40 shells, 16 of which are placed in the mechanized stowage of the automatic loader, the remaining 24 in special stowage in the fighting compartment of the tank. The gun's rate of fire is 15 rounds per minute. The gun's ammunition includes a KSTAM projectile with homing warheads. Such ammunition is fired at a range of 2 to 8 km, the projectile is automatically adjusted in flight, and submunitions are capable of hitting enemy equipment in the most unprotected part - the upper hemisphere.
The frontal armor of the tank protects against the 120-mm APFSDS armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile, which is widely used in the West. The tank has an advanced fire control system capable of independently detecting, identifying, tracking and firing at targets without operator participation.
The hydropneumatic suspension of the tank deserves special attention, which, thanks to the presence of the ISU system, provides automatic individual control of the suspension units of each road wheel, allows the tank to “squat”, “bend down”, tilt in any direction and eliminates vibration when driving over rough terrain.
Altay (Türkiye)
Altay is intended to become the main battle tank of the Turkish army, although it is positioned as an in-house development, this is not the case. 60% of the components and assemblies of the Altay were borrowed from the Korean K2 Black Panther, and in appearance the vehicle is very similar to the German Leopard 2. The tank has been in operation since 2015, so far only four have been built, but the Turkish military plans to receive at least 1000 of these combat vehicles .
According to the main contractor of the project, Otokar, the Altay weighs about 60 tons. The tank is armed with a modified cannon from the German company Rheinmetall with a barrel length of 55 calibers. A German diesel engine with a power of 1500 hp is responsible for the mobility of the tank.
Altay is equipped with a remotely controlled module with 12.7 mm and 7.62 mm machine guns and is protected combined armor. The crew of the tank is four people.
TARIQ AB9C4 (South Africa-Jordan)
The Jordanian design bureau King Abdullah II Design and Development Bureau, together with South African specialists, developed the fourth generation tank TARIQ AB9C4. The main highlight of the tank was the uninhabited Falcon turret with a small front area. True, specialists from the above-mentioned countries were unable to create such a module on their own, so the main work was done by Swiss and British companies.
The 120 mm CTG smoothbore gun, capable of firing all types of modern Western ammunition, was chosen as the main weapon. The gun was created by the Swiss company RUAG Land Systems; in terms of the maximum tensile load of its steel - 1300 MPa - it significantly exceeds the 120-mm smoothbore gun from Rheinmetall, whose value is 1030 MPa.
The gun is equipped with an automatic loader, which houses 17 shells, the rest of the ammunition is located in the inside of the turret. The TARIQ AB9C4 crew consists of two people, who are located in the hull closer to the turret. All weapons are remote controlled. This is an experimental tank, work on which has not yet been completed. Whether it will go into series is still unknown.
T-14 "Armata" (Russia)
The T-14 "Armata" is the only tank accepted into service today with an uninhabited turret. Its multi-layer combined frontal armor is capable of withstanding hits from any modern and future type of anti-tank shells and missiles.
The tank's crew - three people - is housed separately from the ammunition in a special armored capsule, which significantly increases its chances of survival. The bottom of the T-14 is covered by V-shaped armor; in addition, the tank is equipped with remote mine detectors connected to the mine destruction system.
The Armata is equipped with the Afghanit active system, capable of destroying cumulative grenades, anti-tank guided missiles and sub-caliber projectiles on approach.
The first copies of the tank were armed with a 125 mm smoothbore gun - launcher, in the future, production vehicles will receive a 152 mm gun. The shells of this gun, designated 2A83, can penetrate a meter of homogeneous armor at a distance of 5100 meters.
The 12-cylinder, four-stroke X-shaped engine is responsible for the mobility of the T-14. diesel engine with a power of 1500 hp, and the active suspension eliminates swaying when driving. The tank has been in operation since 2015.
In recent decades, tanks have been buried more often and more persistently than any other type of weapon. IN last years, marked by a sharp reduction in the tank fleet of most developed countries compared to the times of the Cold War, the question of the future of the tank has once again become one of the most discussed among specialists and amateurs. In Russia, interest in the problem especially grew after the reduction of the tank fleet in the first half of the 2010s from 23 to approximately 6-7 thousand units, and the demonstration in 2015 of the first vehicles of the new Armata family. Tank units of many other armies are also undergoing radical reductions along with attempts at modernization.
Thus, in Germany, the tank fleet, which numbered more than 2000 vehicles at the end of the 80s, was reduced to just over two hundred units, the number of tanks in service and in the reserve of the army and corps Marine Corps The USA dropped from more than 10 thousand units to just over 5 thousand, a number of countries abandoned tanks completely.
At the same time, despite the radical reduction in the number of tanks in general, the leading military powers do not intend to abandon them altogether. This is where looking at cuts can be a bad joke, much like someone looking at the dramatic reduction in the number of aircraft carriers in the US and British navies after the end of World War II and declaring that those ships would soon be retired.
In the case of tanks, based on the experience of recent conflicts, the current level of equipment of the armed forces of developed countries, as well as what can actually be achieved in the foreseeable future, it can be argued that, at least over the next 3–4 decades, the main combat will retain their importance as the main striking force of ground forces units and formations. Tanks, being objectively the most protected, survivable and heavily armed combat vehicles on the battlefield, will continue to determine the combat stability of ground forces units in most types of combat operations.
Only fundamental discoveries and inventions in the field of physics can move the tank from this place - say, the creation of anti-gravity engines, which will make it possible to create combat vehicles of a completely different level - but so far nothing foreshadows such epoch-making changes.
Or, what is more realistic, a leap in the development of IT and robotics, which will make it possible to create robotic combat vehicles with perfect artificial intelligence. Such machines, unlike existing and future robots, will not depend on extremely vulnerable to modern electronic warfare communication lines and will be able to operate completely autonomously, displacing traditional tanks and other equipment. However, this task, taking into account the level modern technology and promising developments also seem intractable for now, and, in addition, even in armies of robots, heavily armored multi-purpose combat vehicles with powerful weapons, which will become the successors of tanks, will probably remain.
Obviously, among the machines that will operate on the battlefield 25-30 years later, there will be a lot of familiar names. Modernized T-72 and T-90, Leopard-2, M-1 Abrams, Merkava, Challengers and other achievements of design thought of the 70s, improved in the 80s, modernized in the 90s and those that continue to improve now, mainly in terms of filling and body kit, will continue to be in service with the armies of fully developed countries. Less developed countries also have older vehicles: T-55, early T-72, numerous modernized (and not so modernized) products of the Western tank industry: from the M-60 to the early versions of the second Leopard.
Heir to the T-34
Of course, new vehicles will also appear on the battlefield, but there will be very few of them, and literally only a few countries among those that today produce main battle tanks will be able to boast of new products. In this case, the first sign, which is already obvious, will be the Russian machine known as the T-14 “Armata”.
"Armata", created as part of the development of an entire family of vehicles on a unified platform, is built on a new layout with an uninhabited turret and accommodation of a crew of 3 people in an armored capsule, separated from the turret and automatic loader. This arrangement, firstly, sharply reduces the frontal projection of the tank, especially in its most vulnerable upper part, which makes the vehicle difficult to hit, and secondly, it significantly increases the crew’s chances of surviving in the event of an effective hit. Thirdly, the uninhabited turret makes it easier to equip the tank with a large-caliber gun. Currently, the Armata has a 125-mm gun, but it is known that, if necessary, it can be equipped with a 152-mm gun, which was created for the promising T-95 tank, which was not adopted for service due to excessive cost. The placement of such a weapon on a tank was studied back in Soviet times(for example, Leningrad “object 292”).
The increase in the caliber of the main armament is dictated by the need to ensure reliable destruction of both existing and future enemy armored vehicles, including taking into account their possible modernization, however, given the cessation of the development of most of the new tank programs in Western countries, the military found it possible to make do with the modernized 125-mm cannon.
All ammunition for the main gun is planned to be placed under the turret. Looking ahead, we note that this gives the T-14 a fundamental advantage over promising Western projects, in which it is planned to retain the placement of ammunition in the rear of the turret, which increases its size compared to the T-14 turret and increases the likelihood of instant destruction of the tank if it hits the compartment ammunition.
The tank’s protection, in addition to traditional combined armor protection and built-in dynamic protection, is provided by the Afghanit active protection complex, capable of destroying or knocking off course projectiles approaching the tank.
The capabilities of the fire control system have fundamentally increased. Taking into account the new layout, the crew has lost the ability to have a 360-degree view of the battlefield with their own eyes through the periscopes, and a significantly greater load falls on the detection and target designation systems. The detection and target designation system has optical, thermal imaging, and infrared channels. In addition, it will include a laser rangefinder and radar, and information about the situation will be displayed on screens that will create the effect of “seeing through armor.”
The T-14, despite its greater weight compared to modern Russian vehicles (more than 50 tons versus 46.5 tons for the T-90), has no less mobility. The tank is equipped with a 1,500 horsepower diesel engine, which provides an energy output of almost 30 horsepower per ton of weight and excellent mobility characteristics. In general, if the designers manage to fully realize their plans, then the T-95 can become for the new, fifth generation of combat vehicles what the T-34 became in its time - a role model.
What do they have?
Surprising as it may be in today's environment, Russia is currently the clear leader in the development of the latest battle tank. Most other developed countries prefer to modernize existing machines. The United States also followed this path, after the global economic crisis forced the richest country Western world abandon the ambitious Future Combat System (FCS) program, within which various combat vehicles were developed, including the main battle tank. The fact that none of the FCS tank projects provided radical superiority over the possible modernization of the M1 tank, which would justify a sharp increase in price, also played a role.
It should be noted here that the United States, in principle, was somewhat luckier than Russia. Argue about comparative characteristics Soviet vehicles of the later generation and the Abrams can make you hoarse, but one advantage of the American remains undoubted - a much simpler modernization, which allows, in fact, to build a new tank on an existing basis. The same can be said about other modern Western tanks.
As a result, in 2009 it was announced that in the coming decades the US armed forces would be equipped with the M1A3 tank (for now having the “experimental” E3 index). The new vehicle will have less weight - within 55 tons versus today's 62. This reduction will be achieved due to a new turret with an automatic loader, modeled after the French Leclerc tank. The tank is also expected to be equipped with a diesel engine, the latest fire control system and, possibly, a new gun/launcher developed as part of the FCS program. These tanks, which are planned to be built on the basis of the M1 and M1A1 vehicles located at the storage bases, will be in service at least until the 40s in parallel with the M1A2 tanks.
The crisis also affected the plans of other countries, which led to another round of unification of efforts.
In Germany, at the beginning of the 2010s, the “Neue Gepanzerte Platforme” (NGP) program was frozen, where, just like on a promising Russian vehicle, it is planned to place weapons in an uninhabited turret. The successor to the Panthers, Tigers and Leopards was supposed to be armed with a 140-mm smoothbore gun/launcher.
France, which currently has one of the most modern main battle tanks, the Leclerc, created in the 80s and 90s, also plans to modernize it in the coming decades - mainly by installing a more powerful gun and more perfect system fire control.
However, the appearance of the Armata forced European tank builders to think about creating a promising vehicle. In the summer of 2015, it became known that two European manufacturers of armored vehicles - the German company Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) and the French Nexter Systems - agreed to create a joint concern on a parity basis.
The new company will be called KANT (KMW and Nexter Together), and the concern's headquarters will be located in Amsterdam. The deal will be completed by January 2016, both participants will receive a 50 percent share in the project.
The merger was one of the largest such transactions in the EU defense market and creates a new strong player in the sector of weapons for ground forces. The resulting concern has an order book of 9 billion euros, with general level annual sales of more than 2 billion euros. About 6 thousand people will work at its enterprises.
One of the reasons that prompted the companies to merge, according to the French military department, was the desire to strengthen the export direction of both companies. In Nexter's sales structure, the share of deliveries to foreign customers is 56 percent; in KMW's sales structure it reaches 80 percent. In a number of tenders for the supply of ground forces equipment (say, for the Baltic countries or Qatar), companies until recently acted as competitors.
Krauss-Maffei Wegmann is a German engineering concern, major shareholders which are the Bode family (Wegmann group) and the Siemens corporation. Sales in 2014 amounted to 747 million euros. The main types of products include, in particular, Leopard 2 tanks, Puma infantry fighting vehicles, Boxer armored personnel carriers, and PzH 2000 self-propelled artillery mounts.
A month earlier, information appeared about the desire of the Germans and the French to jointly create a new combat vehicle, as reported by the newspaper Die Welt.
The new tank should be created by 2030 - by this time the service life of the Leopard-2 tanks, which are in service with the armies of several European countries, will expire. “The technical requirements for the system have already been presented and determined within the framework of German-French cooperation,” said Markus Grübel, Secretary of State of the German Ministry of Defense. According to him, within three years - from 2015 to 2018 - technologies and concepts should be developed with the participation of German industry.
The publication suggests that the decision to create a new tank was preceded by a report from the Federal intelligence service Germany (Bundesnachrichtendienst, BND) about Russia’s buildup of combat power. In addition, the T-14 tanks on the Armata platform presented on May 9 at the Victory Parade in Moscow, according to German intelligence, were prototypes, but mass production of two thousand tanks will begin only in a few years.
Die Welt notes that when the development of the new vehicle is completed, it will be a very high-level tank.
In June 2016, perhaps one of the first samples of weapons for a future European tank was demonstrated. A sample of a smooth-bore 130-mm gun with a barrel length of 51 caliber was shown by Rheinmetall Weapon and Munition at the Eurosatory-2016 arms exhibition held in Paris.
A gun of this type has been created since 2015 at the company’s own expense. The sample on display was completed in May 2016. According to company representatives, testing will begin after the exhibition.
The gun is equipped with an enlarged charging chamber, the inner surface of the barrel is made with a chrome coating, and the outer surface has a heat-protective casing. The muzzle brake is not visible on the presented sample.
The gun is designed to use two types of shots: an armor-piercing sabot projectile with an elongated tungsten core and a high-explosive fragmentation projectile with a programmable detonation.
According to the manufacturer, the power of the ammunition of the gun under development should exceed the power of their analogues used in the 120-mm Rheinmetall L55 tank gun by 50 percent.
The UK has its own development of a promising tank. This vehicle is also being created in line with general trends - reducing the crew, installing a larger-caliber gun, improving the fire control system, and so on. True, according to available information, the successor tank to the Challenger, developed under the Mobile Direct Fire Equipment Requirement program (requirements for a system for direct fire on the move), is planned to be equipped with a gun with electromagnetic acceleration of the projectile. It is possible that the British will become innovators in this matter, being the first to install such a weapon on a production vehicle.
The rest of the tank-building countries either do not yet have their own programs for the development of fundamentally new tanks: the bulk of promising vehicles, be it the Turkish Altai, the Indian Arjun or the Japanese Type 10, are a combination of already known technical solutions in a classic layout. China, which has been copying Russian and Western designs for the last decades, will apparently continue to do so in the future. The countries of the next echelon have even less chance of creating their own promising car.
What are the results?
Speaking about the main trends in world tank building in general, we can highlight the following main directions:
1. The growth in the mass of combat vehicles has stopped. All promising projects, except for the modernized Merkav - special vehicles for special theaters of military operations - have a weight in the range of 50–55 tons.
2. The growth of firepower continues. It is planned to equip promising tanks with heavy guns, and in the future with their improved versions with electromagnetic acceleration and so on.
3. Without exception, all promising tanks are planned to be equipped with guns with an automatic loader, which testifies in favor of this main path of development, which the domestic tank industry embarked on more than 40 years ago.
4. Fire control systems, active protection systems, and more will play a major role in increasing the combat capabilities of tanks. optional equipment, with the help of which the combat capabilities of tanks already in service can be significantly increased.
What's cheaper?
It is obvious that the new generation of tanks, as well as the “ultimate” options for modernizing modern vehicles, will not be affordable for third world countries, while many of them have impressive reserves of old equipment, primarily the most common tanks cold war type M60 and T-72. Such a market requires the presence large quantity proposals for the modernization of these tanks, and such proposals are appearing more and more often.
One of the most recent proposals of this kind is the modernization option for M60 Patton tanks from Raytheon, better known as one of the main developers of air defense and missile defense systems. In fact, Raytheon acts as a system integrator for the program, which includes the use of developments from different companies. The key element of modernization, which received title The M60A3 Service Life Extension Program (SLEP), - increasing the combat power of the tank through the installation of a 120-mm M256 smoothbore gun, which should replace the previous 105-mm M68 rifled gun.
“You have hardware made in the 1960s and 1970s. The production of many components for it has long been lost,” explains Rimas Guzulaitis, head of the modernization program, “but many countries continue to operate these weapons and need to improve them, eliminate shortcomings, increase accuracy and lethality.”
“We are taking the gun from the M1A1,” he continues. “It is significantly more accurate, much more powerful, yet it is lighter and allows the use of a wide range of ammunition produced by NATO partners.”
As Raytheon notes, the improvement of the vehicle is not limited to the new weapon. During the modernization, the M60 will receive a new diesel engine, the power of which will increase from 750 to 950 horsepower, a new fire control system with a day laser sight and night thermal imaging, an electric drive for turret rotation and, of course, increased protection - both additional armor and dynamic fire units protection.
The market is already being partially developed by Uralvagonzavod, which is conducting serial modernization of the T-72B Russian army into the T-72B3 variant, but this business is also of interest to other manufacturers. Former partners of the USSR under the Warsaw Pact offer their options - from Poland to the former Yugoslav republics, as well as the republics of the former USSR.
Improvement is taking place mainly in the same areas: improving armor protection - due to additional armor plates in the frontal part of the tank and modern versions of dynamic protection such as "Kontakt-5" or "Relict", modernization of the fire control system, installation of modern sights, in a number of cases - remotely controlled weapon modules.
Among the most notable options for improving the T-72 is the tank, demonstrated by Uralvagonzavod since 2013, with body kit for urban combat. It differs from the standard vehicle in significantly enhanced armor protection - additional armoring of the sides and rear of the turret, the presence of a bulldozer blade for clearing debris, enhanced armor protection of the anti-aircraft machine gun mount and an improved fire control system. The appearance of this vehicle right now can easily be explained by the fighting in Syria, where tanks are actively used as a means of supporting infantry, including in cities. The T-72 demonstrates high survivability even in its original version, and modernization will significantly increase the effectiveness of these vehicles in urban conditions unfavorable for armored vehicles.
The most radical option for upgrading the T-72 is to transform it into a vehicle of a fundamentally different class, a tank support combat vehicle (BMPT). Research in this direction has been ongoing since the 1990s. According to some experts, vehicles of this type sharply reduce the need for infantry escort of the tank, taking on most of the functions of destroying targets dangerous to the tank. The key advantages of the BMPT are the developed fire control system and the multifunctionality of the combat module.
Various versions modernization of old vehicles will inevitably be offered in the future - the price and development time of new generation tanks leave practically no other options for improving the tank fleet for those who are not ready to pay $5-6 million per unit and more for new vehicles. And even countries that are developing and building new generation equipment, including Russia with its new product - the T-14 "Armata" and other vehicles on this platform, will spend a very long time replacing the main part of the fleet. The result is not difficult to predict: many Cold War tanks will have to celebrate the centenary of the creation of their first version in service - it is possible that since the day of physical construction.
T-14 "Armata" The first place is occupied by the T-14 tank - the newest Russian main tank with an uninhabited turret based on the Armata universal tracked platform. Presented at the Victory Parade in 2015, it attracted the attention of both Russian and foreign military experts. It should be noted that comparison of the T-14 with other tanks goes beyond just tables with performance characteristics. The American magazine The National Interest tried to compare the T-14 and Abrams, however, noted that the T-14 has many protective technologies that are not found not only in the Abrams, but in no other tank in the world. The Ministry of Defense ordered the first batch of 100 combat vehicles from the T-14 tank manufacturer Uralvagonzavod. T-90 "Vladimir" Next in the top 5 list is the main battle tank of the Russian army - the T-90. The latest modification of the T-90SM tank is equipped with a fire control system that is superior to world analogues. The fire control system allows the crew to hit moving targets, including when the tank itself is in motion, with a high probability of hitting the target with the first shot in almost any weather conditions. In addition to the traditional artillery weapons, The T-90 has the ability to fire the Invar-M ATGM. Missiles are launched using the main gun of the tank; missiles are guided by a laser beam in a semi-automatic mode.
Between 2001 and 2010, the T-90 became the world's best-selling new main battle tank. T-72B3 Upgraded to the T-72B3 version, it occupies third place. It has a 125 mm 2A46M-5 smoothbore gun with improved ballistics and service life. Thanks to its modernization, it became possible to use new “extended” armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles of the “Svinets-1/2” type. The tank was equipped with the Belarusian “Sosna-U” sight and modern digital communication systems, as well as an automatic loader upgraded for the new projectiles. T-80U T-80 is a unique tank with a gas turbine engine. On the eve of the celebration of Tankman's Day in Russia, it was announced that a long-term contract had been signed to modernize the fastest and most maneuverable tank cars of the Soviet and Russian armies. The tank is equipped with a 1A33 fire control system, a 2A46-2 cannon, and a 902A "Tucha" smoke grenade launch system. Former Minister of Defense Syrian Mustafa Tlas, in an interview with a Shpiegel correspondent, highly praised the T-80 tank. “The new Soviet T-80 is not only comparable to the Leopard-2, but also superior to it, even according to Western observers... The T-80 is Moscow’s answer to “ Leopard-2". As a soldier and tank specialist, I consider the T-80 the best tank in the world,” Tlass said.
Today, there are more than 3 thousand T-80 tanks of various modifications in storage. T-55 T-55 is one of the most popular Soviet tanks. Despite the fact that it is a medium tank, it became the world's first combat vehicle equipped with an automatic anti-nuclear defense system. The T-55 became for its time the pioneer of a new generation of combat vehicles capable of fighting in conditions of the use of nuclear weapons. The latest modernized version of the T-55M6 tank was equipped with a T-72B turret with a 125-mm cannon, and behind the turret was a container with an automatic loader for 22 rounds; built-in dynamic protection of the turret and hull; V-46-5M engine with a power of 690 hp; new system fire control. The body has been lengthened and a sixth road wheel has been added. It is possible to install road wheels from the T-55, T-72 and T-80. In total, over 20 thousand tanks were manufactured during the entire production of the T-55. More than 2,800 T-55 tanks are still in storage in Russia.
The Armata tank is rotten junk in new packaging. Episode 1
I will not go into detail about all the already identified shortcomings of this supposedly newest tank. I'll just list them. This is a weird cardboard looking armor. This is an unfinished transmission. This is an ancient smoothbore cannon. This is unfinished optical system guidance This is the presence of excessively powerful radar station(radar). This is a monstrously high price. This is a general failure of the tank to meet the requirements of the Ministry of Defense.
I will not dwell in detail on the statements of Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin that all tank-building countries (USA, Germany, France, Israel) are supposedly 15-20 years behind Russia. This enchanting nonsense has also already been commented on. Only very narrow-minded padded jackets, accustomed to believing everything that pours out on them from TV, can believe this nonsense.
The only new features of the Armata tank are the engine with transmission, radar and uninhabited turret. Here we are gradually approaching the main thing. I will touch on just one point, which, in my opinion, is the key to this “miracle”, and which makes this tank a dull piece of shit.
The automatic loader is a disposable tank.
Why did they make an uninhabited turret in the new tank? The official answer reads: “an uninhabited tower and an armored capsule in which the crew remains intact even if the ammunition is detonated.” Why should the ammunition explode? And because the tank’s designers left in it an ancient Soviet automatic loader, thanks to which the entire tank’s ammunition is located in the turret compartment. In all previous Soviet tanks with an automatic loader (T-72, T-80, T-90), the commander and gunner actually sat on the ammunition rack, and the driver sat in front of the ammunition rack. If the ammunition was damaged when hit by a shell or missile, then, depending on the degree of its damage, it either caught fire or immediately exploded. In the first case, the tank crew has a chance to survive (and the driver has a greater chance), in the second case there is no chance. That is, the crew of a Soviet tank is sitting on a powder keg, ready to explode at any moment.
How often is the ammunition of Soviet tanks damaged in battle? Look at the photographs from Ukraine, how many damaged tanks with a torn off turret on both sides. This is a standard situation for Soviet tanks. Actually, soviet tanks with an automatic loader - these are disposable tanks. They live in battle until the first (maximum second) hit. Because after the explosion of ammunition they are not repairable. During the Second World War, supposedly the best Soviet in the world medium tank The T-34 was nicknamed "Mass Grave". With good reason, all Soviet tanks with an automatic loader can be called the same. That is, all the tanks currently in service with the Russian army.
Automatic loader - Soviet/Russian exclusive.
Do foreign tanks have a loading author? Not anymore. Used to be with the French. They abandoned it, returning to the old, time-tested, manual loading. That is, the clown Rogozin can rightfully say that all Russian tanks have no analogues in the world. Only this will not be a plus for our tanks, but a minus.
For all foreign tanks, the ammunition is actually located outside the tank's turret, behind the armor curtain. The curtain opens for a short time while the loader takes the next projectile. The rest of the time, the armor curtain is closed, and the ammunition is separated from the tank and crew. In the event of an ammunition detonation, the energy of the explosion mainly spreads upward due to the specific design of the shell storage. Therefore, the maximum that happens to a foreign tank when its ammunition load is detonated is the turret getting jammed. The tank itself does not lose mobility and can independently leave the battlefield.
The disadvantages of the automatic loader cannot be eliminated.
And so we created a supposedly completely new and coolest Russian tank in the world, the Armata, with a deep problem that has been around for several decades. How did the designers solve the problem of ammunition explosiveness? They put the entire crew in a special armored capsule. This is a half solution. Yes, the crew got a better chance to survive. But the tank will still explode when a shell or missile hits it, and will turn into a pile of scrap metal, in which (or next to which) an armored capsule with the crew will lie.
Great idea! There is a battle going on all around, bullets and shells are whistling, and the crew (if they survived and were not injured as a result of the explosion of ammunition) either gets out of it during the battle and gets to their own on foot, or sits until the end of the battle in an armored capsule, and then gets there on foot to their own.
Watch a bunch of videos of Soviet tanks exploding on YouTube. Look there at the work of the American Javelin anti-tank missile against Soviet tanks. It explodes above the tank's turret, right above the ammunition, causing the ammunition to explode. Dynamic protection The tank is absolutely useless in this case. The expensive Armata will be as disposable as all previous Soviet tanks. Only many times more expensive. Who needs this kind of crap? Who will buy it in this case?
All other shortcomings of the "Almata" in comparison with the automatic loader seem ridiculous and not serious. Who even came up with and approved this insanity? Who will bear responsibility for this, and what? The case with "Armata" is another proof of the degradation of the Russian elites.
