Takes a string of local conflicts, and, apparently, they will still have a place for a long time. But is there any assurance that the threat of all-out war (nuclear or ordinary) had completely disappeared? Severe need scientific proof at least some of the hypotheses predicting the future. This will determine how we build the armed forces and what their arm.
The development of science and technology have made it possible to create new weapons systems that can shift the focus of the conflict zone of contact specific (area of operations) in the great political, scientific and technological centers that will allow inflict irreparable harm before joining the army and navy to fight in the traditional his awareness. This option of military action is currently adhere to the United States. From time to time, but rather the danger of irreparable harm to achieve their goals before joining the military action. In this regard, the information factor has increased remarkably in the preparation and conduct of combat operations.
In addition, everything is going to, to remove from a specific area of contact person. And if that's not realistic at all, then partly solved. Back in the eighties of the last century in Russia were conducted with the use of experienced teaching remote-controlled tanks. There have been some groundwork and develop mechanized complexes. Cars with remote control performed well in eliminating the consequences of the Chernobyl tragedy.
Now let's see how in our time developing weapons system, and at first armored. After all, we are all the time up to the nearest even think tanks the main striking force of the Army.
Confrontation 2-systems led to what we have been and still remains unsurpassed armored "fist" of the T-55, T-62, T-72, T-80. Russian Alliance gathered this "fist" to fit in a single battle to pass the whole of Europe. Planning a future war, we used the fact that it was created and has been used in the second world war. After it passed almost 60 years. The nature of war and military conflict is undergoing significant changes, change a weapon of war. Now if obsolete tanks and dangerous, it is no longer the enemy, and the most of. The enormous amount of requests disposal, and means for it as there was no and no. Apart from the tanks themselves, subject to disposal and ammunition.
Because the tank — the main striking force of the army, foreign countries are at a heightened pace of development and create anti-tank missiles (ATGM). By the time the true you can already read about the 3rd generation, in which applied the principle of "fire — forget": the operator only takes aim, and making sure that the seeker (GOS) captured the target launches. With all of this are used as thermal (IR) and radar homing. These include anti-tank systems: «Maverick» AGM-65 (H, D, F, E, K), helicopter version «Hellfire L», ATGW-3/LR, «Javelin», etc. The program of development of third generation anti-tank also have European NATO countries. Namely, the joint programm Britain, France and Germany TriGat (in England — ATGW-3, France — AC3G and PARS-3 — in the Federal Republic of Germany). For example, a rocket ATRA ATGW-3/LR — IR seeker, proximity fuze in the nose and 155mm tandem warhead. Mass anti-tank — 40 kg, and the shooting range — 5 km. It is able to storm the top of the tanks. Proximity fuse can overcome a great staff and modernized types of reactive armor.
Tools are being developed that are affecting the power system motor fuel and air tanks are deprived of mobility.
And that's just special antitank weapons, but in fact one of the main means of combating tanks — is the enemy tank. All tankoproizvodyaschie country do not stop the development of armored vehicles and upgrading existing, including our own. The same is done and our former allies — Slovakia, Czech Republic, Poland.
Modernization and re-equipment of tanks into other cars in Russia were engaged not so long ago. Examples are the BTR-T on the T-55, BMPT — based on the T-72, upgraded T-72M1, T-80UM1 "Bars" and "Black Eagle." But this is only the initiative of plants and so far only experienced the standards, which could lead to the fact that it was in the Soviet Union: how many plants — so many tanks and other armored vehicles, without any unification or (T-64, T-72, T-80, BMP 1, 2, BMP-3, BMD-1, 2, 3).
Against the use of tanks artillery, missiles, bombs, anti-tank mines, including remote mining, and all this is constantly evolving and improving. There are new ways of influencing the tank and its systems. As can be seen, virtually all countries with a modern army, does not rule out a further meeting with the enemy tanks, well, for their own armies prepare or buy armored vehicles.
Therefore the question arose whether the need is now, and more importantly — in the near future, tanks, and if needed, what? On it are two completely opposite point of view.
Some they say that the tanks — an instrument of the past, and in the proximity of war, they are not necessary. It would seem that it is clear that most of the tanks will be destroyed is still far beyond the frontline, because they do not provide the information and protection against modern distant lesions.
Second world — and armored vehicles will need to contact war. After all, the ultimate victory of need strength general purpose, one way or another, but entering into a specific contact with the enemy. The main instrument of contact battle for the coming years is armored vehicles, capable of acting on the front edge and the owner of firepower and modern defense. And later — a nuclear war has not been canceled. And in its criteria for the tank — the most secure military machine.
So what's the armor for? This is required to understand.
Modern tanks were created 20 years ago, when virtually all of antitank weapons (TCP) affected the tank in a "head-on". Because of strongest booking of the tank — a head. Now, and even more in the future, an increasing number of PTAs affects tank top, and yet it is the horizontal section is huge. The traditional scheme of the assembly does not allow to have a decent protection from above, from the sides, and bottom of the well. Virtually all tanks — a mass limit. It does not enhance protection against ordinary building armor. In the competition "shell — protection" in the first place, in fact constantly — funds defeat. Yet while low survival and security of the crew: it is placed in one compartment and along with ammunition, the amount of which is designed for long life of fighting, and fuel.
Despite the higher firepower of modern weapons of the tank, he can not fight with the air means defeat and high-precision weapons systems, especially in the upper hemisphere.
With the ability of our tanks hit targets from a cannon — guided missile launcher at a range of up to 5.5 km visibility of these purposes at any time of year and day is not always achieved due to the lack of modern means of reconnaissance and surveillance.
Management armored divisions in the criteria for when to make a frisky dispersal, and then take battle order in a particular place, is difficult because of the low mobility command. There is no means of obtaining and displaying disk imaging of gallakticheskih and air navigation and exploration. As there is no high-quality communication.
All this is true. But what is the best tank?
In printing, you can read that here, say, in Chechnya using older tanks T-55 and T-62, and there are new T-90. But let's see what is not satisfied with the T-55 in Chechnya?
The enemy does not have modern armed reconnaissance and destruction of tanks, and the tank is not the purpose for which it was intended destruction. Why do I use the new, expensive cars, which in our army units even if they will not give the desired effect. Here the problem lies elsewhere.
In 1994, the tanks in the stern, as well as in Moscow in October 1991, have not been imposed for the conduct of hostilities, and to intimidate the population. And if it all ended in Moscow only unrequited firing some tanks on the "White House", the rigors of — unrequited Dudayevites shooting at tanks, which led to their mass loss. In other words, it is about the dilemma of implementation. Another thing is the operation "Desert Storm", when for one flight a couple of helicopters could kill up to 15 tanks. This is a further example of the tanks can not operate without air cover. For local conflicts require other armored tools that can be made on the basis of those tanks which have a surplus. An example is the heavy armored personnel carrier (APC-T) and the military machine tank support (BMPT), which has already appeared on the arms fairs in Omsk and Nizhny Tagil.
Another thing — the military acts that may unfold in the future if it conflicts with well-armed enemy.
Wide public enthusiasm aroused another Board of the Ministry of Defence with summarizing 2002. It has been said that we are now in a state of war, and particularly from the army depends on its outcome. Even in the criteria of the war against such an enemy as the armed gangs in Chechnya and cooked terrorists, it is clear that the main problem — the moral and physical aging weapons. Army brand new equipment is needed.
The second problem — the lack of staff. During perestroika were virtually destroyed communication "school — university — creation — the science." This link tried to return the heads of the Omsk region and the Bolshoi Theatre. On their initiative in October 2002 in Omsk accomplished interregional scientific-technical conference "Multi-tracked and wheeled vehicles: design, development, operational effectiveness, science and education." This is the first conference, which gathered together representatives of the higher military schools, research organizations MO, design offices, manufacturers and customers. One of the goals of the conference — to coordinate the eyes of professionals in military science and the defense industry on the possible methods of fighting the introduction of multi-tracked and wheeled vehicles (MG and KM) in future wars and military conflicts and the likely direction of development.
This conference — a major step in bringing together all the links that create similar machines. But even such a forum drowned in the details. No place for the analysis of external threats and future means of warfare. One eye on the problem of complicated yet. But a start.
Back in the 70s at the Department of tanks in the Academy of Armored Forces was a poster, "How willing to build military tank of the future? '. So here, on the figure was depicted an object that combines a tank, which he is at the moment, a helicopter and a submarine … Analysis of modern, not only of future conflicts indicates that the tank as a combat unit ceases to satisfy the requirements of the troops. You can not grasp neohvatnoe.
In order to develop the requirements for a real tank, and in particular the future, need to find a hazard, methods of warfare, means of destruction to a painstaking analysis of the introduction of tanks in the near future conflicts.
With all the variety of views on the tank of the future — from complete rejection to leaving it as the main striking force of the Army — will have to build, not including the tank, even a whole palette of armored vehicles of equal protection, mobility, terrain and information security. Only by mastering effective reconnaissance and observation, coupled with the highest abilities of their information management (navigation, the position of the opposing forces, rapid response to danger, the accuracy of the coordinates of targets and their priority), tank units will retain their value.
From the tank with the means of warfare required overestimated protection, tactical and operational mobility, excellent maneuverability and outstanding team performance fire engagement objectives. Need a custom search for new and improvement of existing remedies, such as active, electric, dynamic, based on new materials, etc. In addition to obmyslit protection from weapons, from which he can not protect the tank. As can be seen, needed anti-aircraft guns of equal protection and mobility, and can be, and non-traditional means, allowing to find danger and "cover up" from her tank. The first time we came and tank support combat vehicle (BMPT), which must make significant changes in the strategy for the introduction of tanks and pro
tect them in the near-fire zone.
For the security and survival of the crew, while he's in the tank, it must be isolated from ammunition and fuel. Requires new layout solutions, modern equipment and crew, respectively disguise.
The highest rate of such complex machines should be in the range of 100 km / h, and the weight of the tank should not exceed 40 tonnes, which will allow to increment the operational mobility of the units and suddenly and rapidly accumulate in the right place. Apart from speed, mobility need fuel, and as it should, and the transport of its armored vehicles and fueling. Since combat actions are carried out in isolation from the rear units, the tanks must follow sanitation, repair machinery and nutrition.
The main thing in the tank — its firepower, modern funds delivery of ammunition to target profitable than our tanks are different from others. Already a destructive purpose of the gun — the launcher is more than 5 km. But the band of sight and shooting smallish arranged so that the goal to behold, and even more to aim at such a distance is virtually impossible. Apparently, you need to find the ability to pick up on the tank monitoring tools, aiming and shooting. If we add to this the modern television and thermal imaging, radar, communications and display, the range and accuracy of days and NIGHT MODE in all weather criteria will be really more than 5 km.
This also should include the problem of supplies and ammunition. Have on board more than 20-25 shots, apparently, makes no sense. Other ammunition should be in the transport and loading vehicle equal to the mobility, and can be, and security. And yet, we should seek a new non-standard means throwing projectiles and defeat the enemy.
Thus, we can conclude that, despite the significant development of anti-tank weapons, change them in the contact battle in the coming 15-20 years is nothing. Mechanized means not bad where there is a degree of certainty, but not in a fight on the battlefield, where people still do not hard.
The tanks will be needed for a long time yet the army? We want to hear the worldview of our professionals.