Armata tank - tank or patriotic star misunderstanding?

[HainanWel.com(e)!]

In the "Independent Military Review" published an article entitled "New bright after the presentation. It is inadmissible to conceal the objective disadvantages of weapons systems under a layer of jingoism "(" IEE "number 3 from 01.29.16). Author - Sergey Vasiliev. As he signed - reserve colonel, PhD, professor at the Academy of Military Sciences).
The whole article is devoted to criticism of the new Russian tank T-14 "Armata". Author hits backhand, his accusations are tough, impulsive and emotional. The arguments, however, somewhat paler. Their weakness is visible even a person who is not enthusiastic history of tank development, its products. However, the affected subject is so important for Russia's defense capability, which requires further reflection and analysis.

In this regard, to comment on the author's arguments and protest, if any possible, we turned to the retired colonel Sergey Viktorovich Suvorov - one of the leading Russian experts in the field of armored vehicles. He graduated from the Kharkov Guards Tank Command School with a gold medal, Academy of Armored Forces, postgraduate Military Academy. MV Frunze. He served in the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany and the Trans-Baikal Military District, ranking consistently as commander of a tank platoon commander, deputy commander of a tank company on arms, tank company commander, deputy commander of a tank battalion - the chief of staff, commander of a training tank battalion. Candidate of Military Sciences (dissertation on the theme "Improving the fire control motorized infantry and tank units"). In adjuncture and after doing a lot of research and practical tests related to the study of the combat capabilities of the various models of armored vehicles. He taught at the Military Academy. MV Frunze at the Department of combat effectiveness.

After his discharge from the Armed Forces he worked as chief editor of two magazines of military subjects, in the "military-industrial company", now - Automobile chief specialist of the Moscow representation of "Ural". Engaged tests wheeled armored vehicles and then transfer to the reserve. With Tank theme does not leave my entire adult life, as well as work related to the participation in international military exhibitions, constantly improving their knowledge of modern foreign samples of armored vehicles, is familiar with many of their creators.

As our interlocutor issues columnist "NVO" Nikolai Poroskov quoted excerpts from Sergei Vasilyev's article, and at the end of the conversation - and some other domestic and foreign detractors news Russian defense industry, has named the main tank of the XXI century, the flagship of Russia's modernization and even starry tank.

- Sergey Viktorovich, the author, in particular, wrote: "After the presentation during the Victory Parade held in Nizhny Tagil arms exhibition RAE-2015" Armata "humbly stood behind fences."

- I got the impression that this person is far from tanks theme. Yes, the car stood outside the fence, because the "classified" with it have not yet been removed. It was not there alone, it was still BMP T-15 on the same platform, self-propelled howitzer "Coalition-SV". The people crowded near the fence so that the word "modest" did not fit the situation. People go to this place only if it was necessary to take seats in the stands to see the demo show. At this exhibition to the "Armata" came many foreigners. Was Christopher Foss - editor in chief of "Janes" in armored topics. I even photographed with him and asked about his impressions. Foss said he had long wanted to see this tank. Came my German friends, just for one day to see the T-14. There was a familiar specialist from Geneva.

- Continue quoting: "The uninhabited tower operating in automatic mode - not just a design feature, this new ideology is now in the domestic tank building. But why is the world tank manufacturing spared this ideology attention? "

- The world tank manufacturing work on this problem. As it turns out, something not. To say that the time they do not, then we do not need, or wrong is not entirely correct: they do not have much of what we have. When we have a Diesel T-34, all of them went to the petrol tanks. The first automatic loader they appeared 25 years after its appearance here in 1966 on the T-64, that is, around 1990 - the French to "Leclerc". This work on the "Leopard" is not gone. Jordanians made automatic loader on an experimental machine - on a modernized "Challenger." By the way, in space no one did not fly to us, but that does not mean that we did not have to fly.
- "Booked volume of foreign tanks historically done much more than we, put the whole crew in the body is not much of a complex technical problem. Just consider it wrong to deny the possibility of direct tank commander Omnidirection - electronics electronics and perfect eyes nothing. The T-14 commander of the machine body has a direct visual review only in the sector of 140-160 degrees (and asymmetrically with respect to the longitudinal axis of the machine), the rest of it has to "see" through various detectors and sensors. However, these sensors are placed in a separate turret on the roof of the tower, which is protected not as a bronekapsuly and also raises the overall tank height of almost three meters. That is, one lucky shot from a small-caliber gun, and the "Armata" half-blind. And besides, effective means of destruction of electronic equipment (REO) in the world abound - from universally used jammers to the latest microwave generator - an electromagnetic pulse. "

- Place in a tank crew and all the necessary equipment - always a problem. By the way, even the western designers admitted to me that in matters of the tank layout are behind us. I agree that the optical channel monitoring is important. I looked up a few new developments without the optical channel and asked the developers to the same question as the author of the article. They said they spent a lot of research and testing before choosing this option. Note that one channel electro-optical observations of other strife. There have been many complaints from the Americans against remote-controlled unit "Kronberg" Norwegian production: many of its shot down in Iraq. But we must take into account that now many sighting of optoelectronic devices complementary image: color TV camera and a high-resolution thermal imager, which gives a picture in black and white. In this case, a picture with the details that the human eye is not able to determine. To all this, we (and Vasiliev) do not know what else is there to "Armata".

And to get a good shot, how much should be failed! For this turret, hosts sighting and observation complex, from small-caliber gun to shoot from a distance should be not less than two kilometers away, or the tank out of you will make a pile of metal before your shot. The tank is enough to make one "bad" shot high-explosive shells, even if it falls close to BMP or BTR with an automatic gun were destroyed. To cite one example. In BMPT "Terminator" is about the same turret. During the tests it was subjected to fire various types of ammunition, including small-caliber. Two shell hit the target, but after that it worked: the TV camera and thermal imager. With some flaws, but it worked well. Not so simple as it seems at first glance. All this amateurish antics - oh, I'm here now ... Strelna

Now interference. Do they affect the signal quality when transferring it to the screen, which is shielded by the armor of the tank, but still braided cables? What Vassiliev meant a nuisance? Is that the EMP - electromagnetic pulse. We have since the invention of nuclear weapons in all the tanks, since the T-55A, all electrical equipment is shielded from the light of the possible impact of electromagnetic radiation.

With regard to the scope of the reserved and comfortable crew position they write, who had never been in the import tanks. I, fortunately, had a chance to sit in the "Leopard", and in the latter - "Leopard 2A7 + '. Even in the T-72 on-site commander, I felt comfortable. Placement of the crew in "Leopard," that "Abrams": three people sitting on each other freely in only one loader. But he had to rush back and forth with a shot length of one meter and a weight of 30 kg - loading manual. Who never in my life not charged tank gun staff artvystrelov when the tank is moving, he will never understand what it is necessary to charge.

- "A feature of the 125-mm gun 2A82 is the infamous wall, carousel automatic loader, type, so that a direct hit in the turret and armor piercing ammunition undermine imminent. But there is a caveat - the safety of the crew at undermining the ammunition "Leopard" and "Abrams" is provided by the challenge of explosive energy up or to the side at the expense of expelling panel, for which the ammunition is placed outside the reserved volume in lightly armored "bait" of the tower. But the T-14, an explosion occurs inside the tank! So the role of expelling panel ugotovlena multi-ton tower dorogushchim equipment (unless, of course, the case will stand). "

- What does the autoloader? The gun itself, or it can be with an autoloader or without it. What machine gun to the police officers, the case designer. And the gun, which is now in the "Armata", not calculated under the floor-boring machine loading, and automatic in the niche of the tower (Zaman), both from the same French. There is a new armor-piercing shell, long for this gun, which is boring machine "will not go".

It seems that Vasilyev is not quite as ammunition is placed on the "Leopard" and "Abrams". The Zaman them is only part of the ammunition - 50-60%. But to destroy a tank, only one shot that explodes inside. Expelling bar they have, but it is not a panacea. There have been cases in the "Abrams": when the ammunition exploded, Bouncer and partitions. We at T-90MS also have expelling panel. I think, for the "Almaty was" taken all the best that is in the previous models. On the "Armata" crew is surrounded by uniquely ammunition. Even if you tear off the tower, the crew will be saved.

- "Decrease the already meager designed for the crew, free reserved amount. Crew members have virtually no possibility of an elementary move and ergonomically their position is the same as a sprat in the bank. So it is not clear what the crew will leave the car in an emergency. "

- The expression "deprived of elementary move," reminds me of a passage of one Western expert on the Soviet armored vehicles, who wrote: "Inside the Soviet tanks very closely, there can not be closed hatches to stand up." What is it for? I wrote to him: in the "Mercedes-600" class "luxury" I, too, could not stand up at the closed hatch, but no reason not to say that this car is uncomfortable. Vasilyev also want to ask, you were in the car to be able to write about the "sprat in the bank." I, too, was not within the "Almaty was" but was in previous models.

Critic many talks with enthusiasm about Western tanks, but says that "Leopard" one personal hatch in the loader, and through the second should get out three men: commander, gunner and mechanic, because the mechanic through his hatch to get out can not - only the head can stick. And in the "Armata", as the developers say (and it eventually will be possible to check) hatches become more diminished projections for which you can accidentally catch on during the landing. To judge this, it is necessary to try to get out, preferably in a suit, preferably in winter.

- "The crew is actually isolated from each other, which prevents their mutual assistance in case of trouble."

- How they are isolated if, according to the author, are in the same capsule, "a sprat in the bank?"

- "The presence of a powerful bronekapsuly, combat weight" Almaty was "in 48 m (" Leopard "," Abrams "," Merkava "- 60 m) on the 46.5-ton T-90 can only mean the simultaneous reduction of body armor and combat motor -transmissionogo car offices. A disarmed or stop in a battle tank, though, and with the rescued crew, lost a tank. "

- We have a "great" writer (I will not name him) - writes about the tanks, although the tank was never, the tank itself had only seen on TV. He believes that in the West everything is super, and we ... But we must not forget that our tank dimensions is always less than the competition. And each additional cubic meter tank volume - it's up to five tons of weight gain. I had occasion to talk with chief designers and the "Abrams" and "Leclerc". And even they say the Russian school of tank is remarkable that no one in the West still can not build the tank so tight, so well, as do Russian. Indeed, since the T-64 was packed so that all squeeze the minimum volume of the tank. At the same competitors impressive size of the engine compartment. This increase in weight of 10-15 tons. And say, once we have 48 tons, and they have 60, we have less protection, is fundamentally wrong.

- "Significantly increased the size of the tank (about 3 m mentioned above). Moving the commander and gunner in the housing behind the driver at the same tower chase (after gun with automatic loader same) inevitably leads to an increase in the length of the hull; also known as "added" here the motor-gear unit with the new 1500 horsepower engine. And the breadth tank clearly increased due to continuous protivokumulyativnyh screens. At the same combat weight of 48 tons of the increased size of the tank is obviously even more reduced the overall level of body armor. "

- And here it is, on the contrary, accuses developers of T-14 that increased the size of the tank! The height of 3 meters, but have two feet - the same turret, weighing no more than 200-250 kg. With the increased size of the tank in the desert Tower. Outside her - a sort of "tin". It's like a light and strong body in the submarine. I will explain to the candidate of technical sciences, that hung from protivokumulyativnyh screens that have increased the size of the machine, the weight has not increased, the air which is located between the tank body and the screen, as a rule, does not weight gain.

- "Increasing the size of the tank and, accordingly, booked amount, the developers and not lift a finger to increase the free volume to increase crew amenities (even, on the contrary, to reduce it to bronekapsuly size, where the crew members are deprived of mobility and occupy the position of" reclining ")."

- Let the author of the film looks very informative television program "Military Acceptance", which shows that in the "Mercedes" more closely than in the "Armata". I was surprised by the fact that the creators of the tank was allowed as a detailed survey of the machine inside.
- The author quotes the tank developers: "The unique angular shape of the tower" Almaty was "" reduces the visibility of the car in the heat and radar observations of the spectra. " And then I went to the criticism: "On protection from thermal radiation - patriotic nonsense. The source of heat is the engine of the tank body, not the tower. also something wrong with the radar radiation. The idea is that "a broken" the surface must "reject" him away from the axis of the emitter device. But for such a surface that does not have a "pocket" - concave cavities essentially corner reflectors that give the opposite effect. A T-14, according to the image, they are present in abundance. About protection against laser radiation, which is the basis of most anti-missile systems targeting system (ATGM), we do not say a word. "

- Heat sources in the tank but the engine still running gear (heated rollers), shock absorbers, a tower in which a lot of electronics, shooting a gun, finally, cooling system, air conditioner heat exchanger. When viewed thermal signature, it can be seen - the entire body is heated, in different places in different ways. Corner reflectors have always been a means of jamming enemy radar. Now, about the laser radiation. More on the T-90 sensors detect the laser irradiation were delivered. Then automatically fire back aerosol grenades, creates an aerosol cloud for 1-2 seconds (for Western tanks - only 5-6 seconds).

- "The world tank building has 100 years of experience, which shows that for a modern tank is enough guns and two or three machine guns, and towered, heavily armed monsters are gone even before the Second World War, not so much because of its size, how many because of the impossibility of effective management of firepower. For any upcoming fight "Armata" may be needed as auxiliary weapons, managed a maximum of two people who frankly do not understand. "

- Let the list the "extra" weapons on the T-14. Or he wants to do that we have?

- "SAZ" Afghani ". It is, in fact, a munition fired into the side flying to the tank or anti-tank RPG grenades and destroying the latest by detonation. Imagine the result of applying the SAZ, if the tank in combat acts surrounded by his infantry. No wonder the western tank builders, if not terribly complex technical devices which SAZ avoid its widespread use. ATGM and RPG grenades - relatively slow flying, that is, from armor-piercing projectile (BPS) and ammunition, operating on the principle of "shock core" SAZ not save. Location mortars "Afganita" horizontally under the tower shows that in the upper hemisphere tank completely covered SAZ and defenseless before the helicopter ATGM "Hellfire" anti-tank and top attackers "Dzhavellin". To apply SAZ need radar, which include a tank helpfully finds himself on the battlefield. "

- If our critic really a colonel, he was supposed to pick up the "Field Manual", which is painted as acting in conjunction with infantry tanks. What does it mean tanks surrounded the infantry? During the Great Patriotic War, it happened, as the landing infantry sat on the tanks. Now this is not. After the first shot from a tank gun infantry with tanks will blow. In my own experience: we put on zeroing tanks close to each other, to be able to step from one to the other. I leaned out of the hatch in place gunner when a tank fired nearby. It feels like a boxer drove me in the forehead! In the eyes sparkle. I flew down and began feverishly to think what had happened. In accordance with the "military regulations", infantry running behind the tanks at a distance of 50-100 meters.

With regard to the impact on. We still tanks earlier designs dynamic defense, even the first generation is very well established in the protection against impacts from above.

With regard to the detection of the tank when the radar is enabled SAZ. Generally, they are firing at the tank when it is found. Accordingly, if the tanks are not masked and firing, they detected the enemy radar and active protection systems include no one will. When will the battle tanks firing their guns one way or another find themselves better than any radar enabled. Well-military man with a degree must be understood as such a thing!

- "On" innovation "," Almaty was "as a unified track platforms do not even want to comment. Ancient as the world, the way - remember, if only domestic self-propelled artillery units (SAU) wartime SU-76 and SU-100 on the basis of T-60 and T-34, respectively, post-war 122-mm self-propelled guns 2S1 "Carnation" on the basis of MT-LB armored personnel carrier, or even modern "trends" - BMPT "Terminator" and TOS-1A flamethrower "sun" on the basis of the T-72. "

- No one says that it is the first platform in the world. Innovation in its modular design, there is another chassis, the layout. These critic of the system, as unsuccessful, built on the T-72. Where this platform just is not used! And the application of experience (which is more than 40 years) is very good. I think that this platform will serve for a long time.

- Now the "arguments" of other critics. In the media, they write, flashed information about what "Armata" made by western development three decades ago. One German newspaper wrote about the "Armata": it is a variant of the tank was developed in Germany in the 90s to replace the tank "Leopard" -2, and his Russian copied.

- Firstly, the western development of thirty years ago with us no one shared. Secondly, at the same time, in the late '70s, not knowing about these western development, we have carried out on the landfill Solnechnogorsky tank testing without any crews. A tank platoon "fought" without crews! They shoot, hit the various targets. However, for various reasons, then in its final form to realize this development did not happen. So still do not know who copied whom.

- The most acute critics of Chinese steel. The company "Norinco" convinced that its 52-ton main battle tank VT-4 (MW-3000) exceeds the Russian car maneuverability and firepower, as automation, fire control systems. And it is cheaper. Moreover, according to the Chinese tank builders, namely VT-4 has pushed Russia to the development of "Almaty was."

- All that we have seen and heard: the Italian armored "Iveco" surpasses armored car "Tiger" as "Centaur" is superior to the BTR-80 - until the case came to practice. Chinese products we saw during the competition, "Tank biathlon." How many engines they changed? Let's do a comparative test, and everything will become clear.

- The Chinese (and not only) remember annoying stop T-14 during a rehearsal of the Victory Parade. Chinese experts believe that the tank has broken gearbox, because the truck could not move it a few attempts.

- Tractor unit weight is less than the tank could not move him, not because the gearbox broke down - the tank was on the brake. It seems to have worked one of the locks, which stopped the tank. The fact that the on-board information and control system reacts to any crew action is not provided for the rules of operation, and blocking it wrong action. For example, incorrect transfer switching. In the case we discussed it just off the engine. If there was a broken gearbox, the tank could not start the engine and then drive on. In fact - I wound up and went. The mistake occurred because of untrained crew - just do not have time to prepare in a short time.

- Arguments domestic critics: the creators of "Almaty was" making the same mistake as the designers of the Wehrmacht, betting on heavy and expensive tanks ( "Tiger" and "Panther"). It was impossible to produce in large quantities. As "ARMATOM" - as opposed to T-90. A potential opponent in the result is greater than the tanks and in combat conditions, simplicity is often more valuable than the art of its capabilities.

- To date, it has already released a lot of T-14. And it is at the pilot plant, while not completely rebuilt the pipeline. This country has not abandoned the T-90 of various modifications and even older models. Last modification of T-90MS program "Breakthrough-2" I have personally struck by its comfort, no western tank with it can not be compared. The T-90MS changed all the electronics, space has become much car seats, steering wheel, automatic gearshift, air conditioning ... surpassed even the French "Leclerc". So that these fears were groundless.

- No bells and whistles will not protect a beautiful toy RPG-30 "Hook" produced by NGO "Basalt", say domestic Cassandras. The main advantage of "Hook" - bikalibernaya design using the simulator targets for overcoming active protection. "Hook" from a distance of 200-300 meters hit the 600-mm armor.

- Show me the tank in the world, that would be protected from the RPG-7, not to mention the "Hook." If the commander and the crew are not trained, they do not know how to fight, they slept anything - without a "Hook." Some "experts" sometimes cited an example: say, in Afghanistan spooks rifle pierced the armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles at a hundred meters. And how this turned out to be the shooter from the board of a hundred meters? What did the exploration and combat support? The shooter had to be shot per kilometer to the APC. It is the same with the tanks. They say "experts": tanks in the city is nothing to do, you can not send them there to die. And what do the infantry in the city without tanks? It simply slaughtered. Open the "Field Manual" and read the chapter on the organization of the fight and interaction. This is the art of fighting. A "hook" - one of his episodes. And the task of the commander of the crew "Almaty was" - the most of their complex weapons and prevent the enemy to effectively use his arms, the same launcher.

- The main artillery today are 152-mm shells. It is necessary to adjust their production. But this is impossible without the restoration of machine tool plant TNITI - Tula Research Institute of Technology. He is now in a deplorable state. To make the new BTS to "Almaty was" need readjustment of the production line. But our defense efforts are aimed at a slightly different direction, distressed opponents. In 2014, Russia signed a contract for the supply of 66 thousand in India. Tank shots "Mango". To do this, put the equipment, technology and organize the production of shells at the plant ... in India. And in Russia, let plants wither and the next? And who needs a cool tank "Armata" no new ammunition?

- One of the reasons, why not go to a series of "Object 195" (also known as T-95) - the car ahead of its time. As the bombers Su-100 and M-50, as the EC-7 tank and so on. T-95 "hacked" Serdyukov and Makarov company. There were other reasons.

Cannon 125 mm today solves all problems, and everyone is happy. The time will come - will deliver 152-mm gun. It worked out, tested.

And the fact that Russia supplies India, tank ammunition, so it can, for the better. Branch makes financial resources, which can improve its own production.