Tank, which has not yet seen. A brief analysis of the «raids» on «Armata»

Tank, which has not yet seen. A brief analysis of the
New main battle tank (MBT) on the platform «Armata» will not be shown to the public in September, as previously planned. Showing machines would be a closed character. Told journalists Dmitry Rogozin.

The news that the latest car on exhibition in Nizhniy Tagil see only the management of the country, caused a wave of criticism … No, not criticism unnecessary secrecy that accompanies all developments in the military sphere. Hurricane spacing exposed himself a new tank. More precisely, what little of it is understandable. In other words, the situation looks almost anecdotal — anyone find fault latest Russian development try to catch as quickly as possible, while it is impossible to look at a living product. Approximately the same was the case with the Russian fighter fifth generation. People tend to speculate that «it will not fly,» that «we can not do such a thing,» that «all this hype» and generally «drank and kickbacks.» But since that time, as the PAK FA and its flight tests was maybe watch firsthand — critics disappeared somewhere. They instantly forgotten what amicably assured the public not so long ago, and their languages ​​have found a more appropriate use.

Yet, critics have not shown «Almaty was» worthy of attention. In 1-x, since according to some technical aspects presented to the public «only correct» point of view. And for those who are interested in the new Russian tank, it is useful to know that expounded opponents «Almaty was» not the only point of view. And since developers «Almaty was» still can not openly show the newest car — it does not mean that it can be used, «throwing» his criticism unanswered.

In-2, it is necessary to understand, that it was more difficult later exposer to forget his words and continue to pretend as if they are always right.

So, try to deal with what will be a «Armata» in the version of MBT. And what are its properties challenged opponents.

Type the new tank is known in general terms. Its main armament will be oversized tank gun 2A82. It has the previous caliber 125 mm, but the new ammunition with projectiles increased length and more than strong propelling charge. On its energy features it has significant an advantage over most perfect even at the moment of the German Rh 120/L55.

But the choice of this instrument — one of the subjects of criticism. Indeed, a significant increase in the firepower of the new tank could be the installation of more powerful 152-mm smoothbore gun 2A83. She also passed the tests and has a set of advanced munitions similar 2A82, only performed in larger caliber. This gun was supposed to be installed on and not put into service the layout of the tank — «to 195» (image), which is popularly known as the T-95.

But increase the firepower of the most common infections (increasing caliber guns) and have negative traits. Abroad also began experimenting with tank cannons huge caliber, when it became clear that the standard NATO 120mm gun Rh-120 does not provide defeat Russian T-80. The main increment tried caliber 140 mm. But the caliber of the guns western tanks remained unchanged. Why?

There is a wrong perception that this was a prerequisite for the collapse of the USSR, which supposedly eliminated risk of collision in battle with the new Russian tanks. In reality, the Western experiments simply have not met with success. The increased energy shots mnogokalibernyh guns does not achieve the required accuracy of fire. Besides powerful weapons and ammunition, which increased the volume of its own, immensely increased the weight and dimensions of the already languid and big Western cars (with a large silhouette, as follows, is a good target). And only the best western experience increase the power of tank shells became German gun Rh 120/L55, which, as well as the Russian 2A82, has maintained its own previous caliber.

Upcoming increase in firepower is not necessarily be associated with bolshennymi calibers. One of the most promising areas is the development of so-called elektrotermohimicheskih guns (you can read more here and here). Such studies are underway and we have. But at the moment to improve the main tank should not adopt the geometrical dimensions, and quality management systems and ammunition.

Thus, the «Armata» will get to own guns whole new line of ammunition, including adjusting the line of motion, with remote detonation, as a new set of guided missile weapon. This ability to increment «Almaty was» against enemy armored vehicles as well as for other purposes. Including with scattered on some areas and in the air (with the aircraft). On the properties of gun control system (FCS) «Almaty was» it will be possible to judge when that information becomes more open. But judging by the interviews recognized professional in the industry armored Murakhovski Viktor Ivanovich, it will meet all modern requirements:

«Basic principles of modern OMS tank clear: multichannel, composite picture based on the synthesis of channels, it is a digital ballistic path, integration with external ASUV target designation (in other words the ability of the extended mode» Hunter — Shooter «),» Augmented Reality «, the issuance of ammunition in the field management of external sources of MSA and so on … From the design point of view like no problems. I listed features as in our times, and KB were born. I think ASC (automatic target tracking) — the desired item. It eliminates human error since the capture target. It’s worth it, because in combat, under enemy fire exposure, the reaction time and accuracy gunner actions fall into a couple of times in comparison with terms of range. «

Further. About tank assembly is also understood almost everything. Powerpack compartment (ITO) is usually taken — in the rear of the hull. This naturally upset many fans of armored vehicles, hoped for a frontal placement MTO, by analogy with the Israeli «Merkava». There will have to see that, not counting the «Mercan» (intended for very specific theater) and several experimental machines, front accommodation MTO never used. Yes, the engine protects the crew from direct fire in front of the body. But the front of the machine of overweight is bad for its terrain. In fact, because all Russian and Western tanks started maneuvering for action on all soil types have with rear MTO. A sufficient protection in the front part of the housing can be achieved not only by a motor.

And then «Armata» there than brag. The crew will be located in bronekapsuly located in the front part of the body and insulated from the crew compartment. A tower of the main weapons — will be uninhabitable. Under it will be placed ammunition and automatic loading mechanisms. It is actually inevitable decision, as modern antitank weapons tend to hit a tank in less protected upper hemisphere. Increase the armor on the tank is virtually impossible. And the only best solution is to attempt to «hide» under the protection of the crew module unmanned weapons. On the turret also have to hit the bulk of the anti-tank gun direct shot. And, if the objective is to increase the survival of the crew on the battlefield, from unmanned combat compartment can not escape.

We have isolated the crew accommodation and cons. But, in my opinion, they are not quite where they try to find criticism. The effectiveness of the tank, not counting the rest will depend on how you will save the crew «sense of presence» on the battlefield, do battlefield surveillance is very high quality, and the detection of targets — spirited. Here, of course, almost everything is dependent on the monitoring devices and how much they will help show the surroundings. It seems that with the present level of technology to make information field crew rather can be fully saturated.

If crew awareness of the environment will be quite high, and the controls are not «mechanically-hand», but still modern, the problem of «tightness» in the crew accommodation bronekapsuly becomes more fictional than real. So, Alex pochetaemy Khlopotov (Gur Khan) leads outlook unnamed German professional who considered the place bronekapsuly sufficient only for drei kirgisische Zwergrabauken (three malehankih Kirghiz). Hunt immediately ask the unknown German professional: let, and when crews finish charging German tanks cannon manually It is clear that for a healthy German loader need a lot of space, so that he could carry arms projectiles of boeukladki. But here «our Kirghiz» generally do not have. Try to imagine pochetaemy German expert, at least on a theoretical level, that this operation can be done by pressing the button. I understand that it is difficult to imagine. But you see, we have automated the loading of tank guns for several decades as. And «manual charging» is simply not in a carriage. Technical progress does not stand still, but.

Another very pochetaemy and fully recognizable tank expert Andrei Tarasenko your own blog speculates that «… more and more thoughtful people interested in tank development, expressed serious apprehension in connection with sea promising Russian tank» Armata «…

Concern for the kind of «Almaty was» the Ukrainian special on armored completely understandable — Russian and Ukrainian tank-building has long been rivals on the external markets. Claims to «Armata» Andrei Tarasenko relate assembly. Prirekanie caused all the same bronekapsuly, which, views pochetaemogo professional, has a «poor performance of crew protection, poor working conditions in the cramped crew habitability criteria, the lack of static angle from the commander, even within the boundaries of the frontal hemisphere, the inability to implement the visual channel commander and gunner sights» .

To justify not a good security crew bronekapsuly «Almaty was» Tarasenko leads two other variants of assembly, he said — hypothetically (picture). Without going into flaws «hypothetical» alternatives, a look at the reservation scheme of the three layouts depicted Valery Mukhin. It clearly indicates that the security of the crew during the shelling of an instrument with a direct shot azimuth and 30 degrees in the assembly «Almaty was» the best.

What we can agree with is the inability to visual sighting. We can say that in some situations, the commander has to keep monitoring the situation specifically, leaning out of the open hatch. On the «Armata» is unreal. In general, this tank should be perfectly modern fighting machine, rather than the usual improvement of old layouts and schemes.

But to understand how it will meet the modern warfare, we have to see the conditions separately, in what will act «Armata». It also will allow more time to discuss the issue as a burning type of weapon will battle tank in the not to distant future in general. About it — in the coming days are.

Alexander Gorbenko

Rights in this material belongBut.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: