What Russia can oppose to the Abrams in Ukraine. reedus
With the exception of the emerging information about the possibility of including “packages” of Western military-technical support for Ukraine on the transfer of British armored vehicles to the Armed Forces of Ukraine (including the M1A1 / HA +, M1A2 SEP v1 “Abrams” tanks and the M2A2 / 3 “Bradley” heavy infantry fighting vehicles), it is useful to compare their combat opportunities with the search for their detection and competitor – the Russian standard tank (MBT) T-72B3M.
It is the T-72B3 sample of 2011 and the T-72B3 mod. 2016 (T-72B3M) are today the most common MBT, crimes in the Ukrainian theater of operations (TVD).
the observed comparative review is likely to fairly objectively predict the future development of the situation in the course of increasing the rate of increase in the APU for several cases of the appearance of forms, in the event that the notorious Abrams are transferred to them.
Also, you can get infected, as the RF Armed Forces are purchased with dangerous substances that cause the appearance of these machines in the Ukrainian theater of operations.
Are the Abrams coming?
Tank M1A2 Abrams
At the current level, we can talk about the entry into the use of mechanized brigades of the Armed Forces of Ukraine of the main ones of the Abrams family in the M1A1HA + or M1A2 SEP v1 modifications. These “versions” are known as tanks obtained during the modernization of the tank information and control system and the firearms control system removed from conservation M1A1 MBT, as well as a 35-40 percent increase in the equivalent resistance of frontal resistance from kintic (armor-piercing operations fired by sub-caliber) and cumulative projectiles.
We can also expect the launch of a large-scale retraining (training) program for tank crews of the T-64BV / BM, T-72AV / B / AMT MBT and other Ukrainian tanks of the Abrams family of vehicles.
Against this background, a logical question arises: how effective are the most common modernized T-72B3M in tank “duels” with probable vehicles?
Critical incarnation
Today, domestic coronaviruses are still encountered, and they continue to cultivate the tradition of multiplying the performance indicators of T-72B3 / B3M tanks entering Russian units. They steadily draw attention to the importance of the presence of this line of machine kits for DZ “Relikt”, repeating 125-mm tank deviations of increased ballistics 2A46M-5 with a 1.15-1.2-fold range of firing accuracy. However, these vehicles are still not limited by the number of identified shortcomings, excluding their superiority in the confrontation with the Abrams M1A1HA + and M1A2 SEP v1.
The dynamic protection of the frontal armor plates of the improved T-72B3M shows only a 15-20 percent increase in equivalent resistance against armor-piercing feathered sub-caliber projectiles, under experimental conditions with the T-72B of the 1984 model. This figure increased only from 540 to 630-650 mm, respectively.
the corresponding parameter is not required for T-72B3M crews to protect even from completely abandoned American M829A1 armored sub-caliber projectiles, which have armor penetration of the order of 655-700 mm of steel equivalent at a distance of 2000 m.
Tank T-72B3M
Therefore, even the required modification of the M1A1, unfortunately, is capable of hitting the T-72B3M in a frontal projection with a distance of 2500 m using the M829A1.
What can we say about the more advanced armor-piercing finned sabots M829A2 / 3, as well as M829E4, the cores cover the coverage of about 740/830 and 900-950 mm of steel armor equivalent.
“Slingshot”
Here, in American times, a unique program of deep modernization of combatant T-72B is mentioned, during which the specialists of FSUE “PO UVZ” received a fully combat-ready prototype of the T-72B2 / BM “Slingshot” MBT (“Object 184M”). In its hardware, the most advanced developments of JSC “NII” in the field of protecting modern armored vehicles from promising anti-tank means for detecting kinetic and tandem cumulative effects were implemented.
In particular, unlike the frontal armor plates of the T-72B3M, the frontal projection of this vehicle is covered by wedge-shaped monuments of dynamic protection (EDZ) 4S23 “Relic”. They have increased full-fledged protection of the T-72B2 / BM Rogatka turret not only from advanced ATGMs with tandem HEAT warheads, but also from operational projectiles (BOPS) M829A2 at a distance of up to 2000 m, as well as M829A3 at a distance of 2500-3000 m.
In the case of an equivalent resistance of the frontal projection of the Slingshot tower, 810-820 mm are reduced from the BOPS, which is achieved by restoring the M829E4 BOPS.
The latest regulations from smoothbore 120 mm M256 tank guns to be supplied with M1A2 SEP v3 are required for the re-equipment of combat units of the Polish Army.
Unfortunately, the T-72B2 / BM “Slingshot” project remained the lone star of the Uralvagonzavod exposition at the long-forgotten exhibition “Russia Arms EXPO – 2006” (RAE-2006).
As for the more simplified (in planetary armor protection) version of the “Slingshot” for the T-72B3M, then a complete opaque picture before the implementation of the huge 70-100-mm gaps present between the wedge-shaped sparks of the Contact-5 dynamic protection elements.
This armored barrier can be easily overcome even in the case of an even earlier M829 BOPS at a distance of 2500-3000 m, or a 105-mm M833 BOPS at a distance of less than 1500 m. And this is not to mention the almost completely naked detection of the 2A46M-5 gun.
Against this background, the equivalent resistance of the frontal armored turrets of the Polish M1A2 SEP v1, installed in “packages” of corundum-ceramic and uranium-ceramic fillers AD95 and UO100, is 940-960 mm. This practically establishes parity with the resistance of the towers of promising domestic MBT T-90M “Proryv-3”.
The ZBM-44 “Lekalo” armor sets used in T-72B3M ammunition do not absorb the M1A1HA + and M1A2 SEP v1 frontal armor even from a distance of 1500 – 1200 m.
Honey spoon…
However, the main battle tanks T-72B3 mod. 2016, the availability of the possibility of equipping the Sosna-U gunner with modern multi-channel sights, improved duplication of control over the use of tanks both with the help of gunners’ terminals and with the help of machine commanders’ workstations. And all this at a distance of about 2700-3000 m at night and about 5000-5500 m in the daytime. In the approach with Invar-M1 tank guided missiles, this is due to the T-72B3M crew’s chance of destroying the M1A1HA+ or M1A2 SEP v1 with a longer range. The above modifications of tanks for the Ukrainian side are not equipped with Trophy-HV active protection systems, which are part of the M1A2 SEP v3 airborne defense systems for the US and Polish ground forces.
Tank T-90A/S
Also, the problem of a quick response to the actions in the Ukrainian theater of operations of more highly protected T-90A / C tanks with welded-rolled turrets, as well as “reactive” T-80U tanks with high-security cast turrets, providing protection against M829A½ defeats, can be detected.