RF is useful not 500 or even 1,000 new armored vehicles, and much more
Tanks — a very special type of weapon. In the public mind, they are synonymous with some of the military power in general, which is largely true. After retiring in the past battleships and cruisers languid no other military equipment does not have the highest level of security. But, as it paradoxically, specifically tanks in contrast to other samples of AME constantly predicted the imminent "death."
Doubly paradoxically that "bury" these armored cars just because of the very large Tipo vulnerability on the battlefield, no other "charges" they are not established. But for some reason no one (even the defenders of tanks), does not notice the profound internal contradictions in the statements of "predictors".
Who are preparing to wage war?
Indeed, the development of anti-tank weapons, of which there are now a majestic huge amount invested billions of dollars. Yet at least some other class of military technology to one or two orders of the vulnerability of our "hero." If a tool ensures destruction of the tank, it will kill even before any other standard ground AME (as airplanes and helicopters on the ground, missiles on launchers, etc.).
On the other hand, is not too far away each facility, the ability to "combat death" APCs, infantry fighting vehicles, self-propelled guns, and even more so, and winged rotorcraft in the parking lot, you get to do it with the tank. If it is "out of date" because of the vulnerability means a ground war now lead in general can not be that you can hardly open a discussion seriously. Though the people living on earth, not in the air and in the water. Therefore the ground war in the long run will always be the main type of armed conflict (consider this version of the reign of peace in the world will not, because of its obvious absurdity). And nothing comparable to the tank from the standpoint of a combination of firepower, mobility and protection, and not unlikely to emerge in the foreseeable future.
Discussions about the "funeral" of the tank began after the October War of 1973, when a huge number of armored vehicles of the IDF Arabs was hit by an RPG and anti-tank systems. It is interesting that the Israelis themselves from the tanks for some reason have not given up, though, it would seem, specifically the IDF had to take this decision at first. On the contrary, releasing 1.5 thousand most secure in the world, "Mercan," the Army of the Jewish country to this day remain in service with two thousand old car, including the "Centurions", M48 and captured T-55 production of 50-ies.
The tanks Americans in 2003 for two weeks got to Baghdad. Using tanks, in August 2008, Georgian troops invaded South Ossetia and a Russian army tanks knocked out fostered by Saakashvili's army. Even in counterinsurgency operations, as the experience of Chechnya, Iraq and Afghanistan, tank very useful, but in a traditional war he was, is and will be the basis of the striking power of not only the Army, and the armed forces as a whole.
A degree of development of the tank fleet of the country — specific indicator of whether its management is considering the possibility of doing a harsh war. Israel is just one of the most striking examples of this more as the adjacent Arab countries. For example, Egypt, which has 3.5 thousand tanks, including the above thousands of "Abrams", procures another hundred M1A1. In Syria, there are more than 4.5 thousand cars of this class, including not least 1500 T-72. Jordan's army has almost 1,200 tanks, among which 390 "Challenger 1". At the disposal of the sun 6 monarchies of the Persian Gulf in 1100 only third-generation tanks: 533, "Abrams" (315 Saudi, Kuwaiti 218), 38 "Challenger Mk2 '(Oman), 388" Leclerc "(UAE), 150 M84 (the Yugoslav version of the T- 72 in Kuwait). To them must be added a thousand tanks of early generations. So Makar, 10 Middle Eastern countries have almost 15 thousand tanks. However, only Israel makes these armored vehicles on their own projects, and Egypt — under American license. Other countries are one hundred percent dependent on imports.
U.S. declare that it has an in the Army and Marine Corps 6.3 thousand "Abrams". Of them a little more than 1500 — more modern versions M1A2 and M1A2SEP with very massive armor and control systems adapted to the requirements of network-centric warfare. Other 4,8 thousand — changed M1A1, with a lower level of security and the lack of a complex command and control FBCB, providing network-centric. In addition, it seems, are stored in warehouses before 2300, "Abrams' very first modification M1 with 105-mm gun, a weak armor and primitive by today's times OMS. In principle, they can be upgraded to the next modifications, although it is quite expensive and probably not worth the trouble, because without that the United States has junk, regardless of the value of regular air force and navy, a powerful tank park. However, the fact whole it focuses on the areas of the USA, with both South American armored divisions stationed near the border with Mexico.
European NATO countries now have a total of least 12 thousand tanks (including those that are in storage). It's like a lot if forget about the fact that 20 years ago cars were three times more. In addition, more than 40 percent of the residues of the armored fleets owned by two states — Turkey and Greece, which have been intensively preparing to wage war among themselves.
Reductions are not only outdated, and totally modern tanks. For example, Germany, the Netherlands, Greece and Spain have made for their own needs three thousand "Leopard 2" all modifications currently in service is two thousand of these tanks, with their share of the sale lasts. In England, for the army of Her Majesty made the 420 "Challenger 1" and 408 "Challenger-2", now in the British army first — 6, second — 308. France has not only left with 406 "Leclerc", although 150 of them transferred to the reserve, and Paris is very willing that any should buy these machines. Belgium and the Netherlands it is taken out of the tanks and combat units put up for sale.
No matter how magnificently from all European NATO nations highest-quality tank now has a fleet of Poland, all 900 members of his machines belong to the third generation of 128 "Leopard 2A4", 540 T-72 and PT-91 232 (local conversion of T-72 ). In the Bundeswehr has 749 "Leopard 2" (A4 and A6) and 299 "Leopard-1" (the latter is not in combat units.) Curiously, Romania almost 1,1 thousand tanks, but they are all of the T-55 and their local variants. Tank establishment in Europe of a hundred percent minimized.
So Makarov, the army 10 Middle Eastern countries have a total of almost 15 thousand tanks and their number grows (for example, Saudi Arabia wants to buy more than 200 "Leopard-2A6," and even the A7, which are still in general not supplied), and the Armed Forces of 28 countries — members of NATO — about 18 thousand, a figure without annoying decreases.
Nowhere is there so much …
But in South and East Asia have focused a great tank capacity.
So, Pakistan has 2,500 tanks, including 320 T-80UD and more than 300 "Al-Khalid", which are being built in the country by the Chinese license (all will be made more than 600 such machines). They are opposed by four thousand armored vehicles in India, where mass-produced two tanks — licensed Russian T-90 and its long-suffering "Arjun". By the way, even after the write-off of obsolete T-55 and "Vidzhayanta&qu
ot; Indian tank fleet will remain at 4 thousand units, and will include approximately 250 'Arjun', 1650 T-90 and up to 2000 the upgraded T-72.
Another place is the power of concentration Tank Korean peninsula. North Korea has more than 3.5 thousand tanks, however, that the T-55, T-62 and their local derivatives. In the Republic of Korea Armed Forces, there are about 2.8 thousand armored vehicles, including 80 T-80 and 1.5 thousands of its own K1 — variants on the theme "Abrams". South Korean K1 (1,027) is similar to the M1 of early (with a 105-mm gun) K1A1 (484 units) is approximately equal to the M1A1. Is meant to build more than three hundred K2, similar to the M1A2.
Japan through its own insular position requires less tanks than the continental countries. But it has acquired 333 new machines Type-90 and 490 stores of old times Type-74. Means the creation of the tank to deploy Type-10 (significantly improved Type-90).
But apart from the competition, obviously, China.
If the European NATO countries in the last 20 years for one new tank have written off more than 15, then the substitution of the Celestial old car to the new mode is actually one-to-one. Number of tanks in service with the PLA is measured at 8-10 thousand. Just 15 years ago, it was only a machine, made on the basis of Russian T-55. Now they are coming to replace the tanks Type-96 and Type-99 with its own base in the T-72, but with a very huge borrowing of Western technology (eg for Type-99 bought in Germany over 300 diesel engines, which are then copied the Chinese).
At this point in the PLA Army has thousands of 2.5-3 Type-96 (more than half of them — significantly improved Type-96A) 600-800 and even more advanced Type-99. Found in some sources the number of "1.5 thousand Tour-96 and 200 Type-99" refers to the years 2005-2006. Vpribavok the creation of both the tempo of the machine lasts more than 200 a year (maybe 400-500), which is greater than that of all other states combined. To whom it may collapse armored horde — a rhetorical question.
In Vietnam, only 1,300 tanks, of which the most "modern" — seven 10-s T-62. India to send tanks into problematic, since they are unlikely to pass through the Himalayas (although China is already concentrated in Tibet before hundreds of Type-96A). About Taiwan with its tank fleet, including the least thousands of American cars of old times, just funny read. With all of this it should be noted, if the Tour-96 has arrived in the neighborhood of all military PLA, the more massive Type-99, the Chinese themselves declared the best tanks in the world, go to the Beijing, Shenyang and Lanzhou BO (focus on Trans-Baikal, Far East Russia and Kazakhstan, respectively). And with working the deepest teachings of offensive operations on land in recent years, the PLA conducts certainly not against Taiwan.
Discussions about the poor quality of the Celestial tanks completely unfounded. Type-96 and Type-99 are in the same "weight class" with "Abrams", "Challenger", "Leclerc", "Leopard 2", C-1, "Merkava" Type-90 and Type-10 K1 and K2, T-72, T-80, T-90, T-84 and PT-91, including numerous modifications of these machines. TTX betrothed samples are very close. Neither one of them has such an advantage over the other analog, so shoot him, as at the landfill. Finale real fight will be determined by a specific tactical situation, crew training, mobility, and that is very important — quantity. Some lag in quality, even if it in fact is, the Chinese are simply offset quantitative The advantage of. In addition, their tanks just on the physical level is newer Russian and Western, as produced later.
In general, Asian armies armed with a 45 thousand tanks (more than in all other parts of the world put together), while the figure rises inexorably.
Obviously, neither of which the "abolition" of tanks is not out of the question. But, of course, the coming of their development is associated with significant neuvvyazkami.
Options for improving
The prevalence in the current wars of "low intensity", in other words, counterinsurgency, to create lightweight and therefore a cheap versions of many classes of equipment. This applies to armored vehicles, artillery, and even the Navy and Air Force. For example, in the United States created by attack aircraft AT-802 Air Tractor, which essentially looks like a tractor with wings. It is made on the basis of agricultural aircraft. To combat formations that have no defense, it will come down completely.
With the tank so it will not turn. The main advantage of aircraft that are flying. Because under certain circumstances it may be necessary and the tractor if it is able to climb into the sky. The main advantage of the tank — the highest degree of protection. Weakening it for the sake of cheaper essentially buries tank, because he has ceased to own the primary use.
That's why growth is an important problem of the masses of tanks (due to constant increase of armor protection), which reduces the tactical and even strategic mobility in the main, and as it should, the scope of the introduction of these machines. They are difficult to use for significant distances from their area (transfer of a huge number of tanks over long distances is a very long process, and overhead). The introduction of composite materials for the substitution of iron armor only partially solves the problem.
Second important quality of the tank, which also does not realistic not only to cancel but even reduce — firepower. But higher-caliber guns leads to a reduction of ammunition (or to increase the volume and, as it should, mass). This contradiction is not yet likely.
The problem of the missing view from the inside of the tank would be likely to be eliminated by the use of UAVs, including drones, which are received by each crew (such option being worked in China). In general, the implementation of the concept of network-centric warfare tankers information will be available from around the world. It is entirely possible that the tanks will equip except mnogokalibernyh guns and other air defense facilities.
Since simplification and cost reduction of tanks do not work, the small European countries will turn away from them at all. In Asia, the same tank parks will only grow. In large countries — at the expense of its own production or purchase of new machines zabugornyh, more feeble — as a result of purchasing a used but fully multi-tanks the third generation in the West and in the post-Soviet countries.
Our homeland in accordance with the tradition of state rushed from one extreme to another with 63 thousand tanks from the Soviet Union left the army in 2000 (in all huge area!). True, up to 10 thousand vehicles were in stock. Russian companies have new tanks Defense Ministry does not acquire. In light of the availability of nearest neighbors in China is obviously totally unacceptable. On the other hand, continue to pursue an endless line of T-64 — T-72 — T-80 — T-90, perhaps, and really does not make sense: Russian army to a fundamentally new product.
Our military leaders have repeatedly announced by the creation in the coming years the family languid machines "Armata" which includes not only the tank, and infantry fighting vehicles, BMPT, SAU, Bram is conceptually completely correct thought. Except one "detail" — to realize a plan into action. That's right — at first in quality, and then the number. RF is useful not 500 or even 1,000 new tanks, and much more. With all of this will have to endure the cries of "excessive military spending" and "mossy generals preparing for the last war."