When developing the Armata tank, Russian designers paid special attention to the invulnerability of the machine, writes TNI. This tank is a formidable weapon in the battle with the Abrams, the authors admit. He can successfully resist the favorite of American anti—tank complexes - TOW ATGM.
A lot has been written about the new Russian T-14 Armata, which is called the supertank. For the sake of clarity, it should be said that the T-14 is only part of the Armata universal tracked platform. It includes the T-14 main battle tank, the T-15 heavy infantry fighting vehicle, the T-16 armored recovery vehicle and a number of other vehicles.
The first reports of the new tank indicate that it has great capabilities. But how will this machine behave on the battlefield? Will she defeat her opponents or will she turn out to be a paper tiger?
Comparison with Abrams
In this regard, an obvious question arises: how does the T-14 look against the background of America's best tank, the popular M1 Abrams? Will Abrams be able to defeat a new Russian car in a fire fight? Or will Moscow prevail?
And there is also the question of how the new Russian tank will behave in confrontation with various types of anti-tank weapons, for example, with the TOW missile system.
To answer these questions, we have combined the latest articles by Dave Majumdar and Sebastian Roblin on this topic, which were published several months ago, and now we present them to the reader. So, let the debate begin.
***
With the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the specter of the armored leviathan of the Red Army breaking through the Fulda Corridor sank into oblivion, but Russia continued to develop new tanks and armored vehicles. Meanwhile, the United States continued to rely on upgraded versions of the M1 Abrams Cold War tank and the Bradley combat vehicle.
The Russian Armata family of combat vehicles differs from the rather simple, inexpensive, but well-suited platforms that were developed in the Soviet Union. In fact, Armata exists in many versions, and in this regard it has many similarities with the now-canceled program of the US Army called "Future Combat Systems". The family includes a tank, an infantry fighting vehicle, a self-propelled artillery installation and many other options. The most notable of these is the T-14 Armata main battle tank.
Difference from Soviet models
The T-14 is completely different from previous Soviet and Russian tanks, which were developed based on the experience of the Red Army gained in battles with the Wehrmacht during World War II. Soviet tanks were quite simple, very durable, and they were produced in large quantities. At the same time, the main focus was not on matching the characteristics of Western tanks one by one. The emphasis was on the possibility of mass production of new machines. The calculation was that they would defeat the enemy in numbers. The survivability of the combat vehicle and the safety of the crew were in second place. All Russian tanks, including the T-90, were created according to this basic design principle.
Apparently, the designers of the T-14 abandoned the traditions of Russian tank building. Instead of a fairly simple design, the T-14 boasts some of the most modern features that no existing tank in the world has. Moreover, for the first time, the Russian military has given priority attention to the problem of crew survival. This may be the result of Russian efforts to switch to a professional army, as well as the decline of the population in the country.
The tower as a guarantee of crew survival
First of all, the Armata is distinguished from other tanks by an uninhabited tower. Its advantage is that the crew compartment is separated from the ammunition. Further, the tank is equipped with passive multilayer armor in combination with dynamic armor and an active protection complex. KAZ Afganit presumably has millimeter-wavelength radars that detect and intercept incoming projectiles. Taken together, such Armata defenses ensure the survivability of the crew to a much greater extent than any other Soviet/Russian tank. However, there is an important condition: it is necessary that all systems work normally.
Although the uninhabited tower significantly increases the survivability of the crew, it has several disadvantages. To monitor the situation and aim weapons at the target, the crew has to rely entirely on instruments and sensors. Actually, this is not a very big drawback, but if a projectile hits the tank or its electronics are disabled, problems may arise. This means that even a glancing blow to a tank turret can disrupt the execution of a combat mission, since the machine will retain control, but will not be able to shoot accurately.
If you compare the T-14 with the upgraded M1A2 SEP v2 or with the next model M1A3, there are many questions about which tank is better. Abrams has a proven and reliable design, and it is constantly being upgraded. The M1A3 being created will be a little lighter and more mobile. The army also plans to replace the 120mm smoothbore M256 cannon with a lighter version.
The sighted one wins
The new guided projectiles will allow the Abrams to hit targets at a range of up to 12,000 meters. However, Russian tanks are also equipped with anti-tank guided missiles, which are launched through the main gun. In such a situation, the main question is who will see the enemy first. In many ways, Armata's actions on the battlefield will depend on what success Russia has achieved in developing tank detection devices and data transmission networks. The tank that first notices the enemy almost always wins the battle.
Armata has a new design, and problems will inevitably be found in it during operation. Next, the question should be asked whether Russia will be able to produce this tank in large quantities. There are serious doubts here, given the state of the Russian economy. But ultimately, the T-14 can become a formidable weapon.
In the fight against anti-tank complexes
And now it's time to find out the capabilities of the new Russian favorite, the Armata tank, against the favorite of American anti—tank complexes, the TOW ATGM.
Yes, TOW is sold all over the world, but America, in its romantic love for anti-tank systems, is now looking at another candidate. Since the American army began adopting Javelin anti-tank missiles in the mid-90s, striking from above, it has been distributing them like cocktails at a bachelor party, arming everyone. Now almost every infantry squad can boast that it has its own Javelin.
On the other hand, outsiders are not allowed to attend this party. Ukraine was shown the door, and the Syrian rebels were asked not to even think about it.
TOW and Javelin: which is better?
That's why the rebels of the Free Syrian Army receive TOW ATGMs from some not-so-mysterious benefactor. TOW has one big plus: its range is about 50% longer than the basic version of Javelin. However, with the arrival of the new version of Javelin in the army, the situation will soon begin to change. But for now, you can relax and enjoy the fresh air, sitting on top of the mountain with your TOW and soaking up the panoramic views of those videos that are posted on YouTube.
So how does the decrepit TOW complex look in the fight against the mysterious Russian supertank Armata, which is rumored to be actually a transformer robot that can fly? Let's compare TOW's characteristics with Armata's defense capabilities and see which one of them wins the battle.
Veterans of anti-tank warfare
The BGM-71 TOW (heavy anti-tank missile system with wire control) is a very respectable American means of fighting tanks at long range. The ATGM began to enter service in 1970, and now it can be found in a variety of versions: with radio control, with a tandem warhead, with an overhead strike, a concrete-cutting complex. Weapons for all tastes! Let's skip the first-generation variants (sorry, ITOW!) and focus on the last two models: TOW-2A and TOW-2B.
The TOW-2A still uses a wire control system. When the TOW rocket is fired from the launch tube using the launch engine, a wire connecting it to the launcher is pulled after it, and the calculation uses it to give commands to the rocket in flight. TOW uses a semi-automatic line-of-sight command guidance system, that is, the operator directs the missile by aiming an optical sight at the target, and the system automatically corrects the flight path. TOW-2A can hit a target at a distance of up to 3,750 meters. However, the rocket needs time to reach it. Since its average speed is 180 meters per second, it takes 21 seconds to hit a target at maximum range. An attentive tank crew has the opportunity to make an evasive maneuver... if they spot a missile.
The advantage of the wire control system is that it is protected from almost all types of electronic jamming. However, the shooter must remain in place, aiming the missile throughout the flight until it hits the target. Countermeasures that make it difficult to see the target, such as a trivial old-fashioned smoke screen, can interfere with the operator.
Shaped charges
When the TOW-2A hits the tank, an anti-tank shaped charge explodes. In a conventional projectile, kinetic energy (a combination of speed and mass) is used to penetrate armor. But to fire such projectiles, heavy guns with powerful recoil are required, and they lose energy over long distances. And a rocket with a shaped charge, upon impact at high speed, emits a stream of metal elements. Larger shaped projectiles penetrate deeper into the armor, but the velocity of the projectile or missile does not affect penetration. They don't need a long barrel and a powerful carriage to dampen recoil, which is why most missiles use shaped charges. The TOW-2A 15-centimeter shaped charge is capable of piercing rolled homogeneous armor with a thickness of 900 millimeters.
But in the 1980s, designers began to make tanks that are protected from cumulative warheads. Western tanks used Chobham composite armor. Soviet anti-tank missiles during the Persian Gulf War inflicted the same damage on the Abrams and the Challengers as a ball of chewed paper hitting a behemoth. The Russians, for their part, used active-reactive armor, or dynamic protection. These are bars of explosive that explode when a rocket approaches, diverting the rocket's shaped charge jet away even before it approaches the tank. Such dynamic protection is a bit more capricious than Chobham armor, but cheaper to manufacture and lighter in weight.
Active-reactive armor could negate all the advantages of TOW. Therefore, the TOW-2A ATGM with a tandem warhead appeared. There are two warheads in it: the first is designed to prematurely activate the dynamic protection on the enemy tank, and the second penetrates into the hole and penetrates the tank armor. Tandem charges are now used in many deadly infantry anti-tank systems, such as the RPG-29, Kornet and Javelin.
However, the tandem warhead is not very reliable, and therefore we will move on to the TOW-2B and TOW-2B Aero complexes (the latter has increased the range to 4.5 kilometers). The designers of these samples abandoned wire control, preferring a wireless control system over a radio channel with a hidden frequency. Yes, they are not protected from electronic countermeasures, but at least here the operator is no longer literally tied to the rocket. TOW-2B can perform an outlandish pirouette, soaring into the sky as it approaches the target and striking from above with two impact cores. This is a very effective system, because the upper part of the tank armor is much thinner than the frontal and side. There is also a wireless version of TOW-2A.
Where can I find the TOW ATGM? In the American army, they are in service in anti-tank platoons, and very often they are installed on modified light vehicles (Humvee, Stryker, M113, LAV), as well as on M2 and M3 Bradley infantry fighting vehicles, and on AH-1 Cobra Marine attack helicopters. This system has been adopted in thirty countries around the world.
Despite the embarrassment
And what about the new T-14 Armata, which has become a legend because it survived the rehearsal of the Victory Day parade with only one out of order car? If only the infamous F-35 could boast the same success!
But the T-14, which was embarrassed during its debut, has better protective characteristics than its predecessors. "Armata", like a lady from the Victorian era, is dressed in several layers of protective skirts, which are designed to reflect unnecessary attention.
First of all, this is the Afghanit active protection complex, which destroys or neutralizes enemy strikes with the help of four or five modern panels of an active phased array antenna in the millimeter range, which cover the tank from all sides and corners, warning the crew about incoming projectiles.
The means of neutralizing the target are designed to take the missile in the wrong direction. There are four multispectral devices for setting smoke screens. They not only create a visual veil that surrounds the tank, but also hide its infrared characteristics, as well as block lasers and radar guidance of the enemy. The second does not matter for a TOW with optical control, but if the operator does not see the tank, there is every chance that he will miss, especially when the car is in motion. Theoretically, such countermeasures can interfere with missiles attacking a tank from a height, especially if they are not manually operated, like TOW.
Shoot down a striking missile
Next, we talked about destroying the target. We are talking about those active means that strike at those daring missiles that clearly threaten the tank. The Afganita radar automatically turns the tank's turret towards the incoming projectile and activates active destruction systems. Five anti-projectile mortars on the sides of the tank can shoot down incoming missiles. The Afganit system has not been tested in real combat, but other Trophy-type active protection systems have shown their effectiveness against missiles in combat.
And as for missiles attacking from above, such as TOW-2B — well, the Afghanite does not seem to shoot up.
If the destruction and neutralization systems do not help, then Armata gives the false impression that the enemy managed to knock out the tank. The dynamic protection "Relict" explodes. The Armata radar undermines the active-reactive armor unit immediately before a missile or projectile hits, neutralizing tandem combat units. How does it work? There's only one way to find out. Rebels in Syria have filmed a Syrian T-90 that withstood a TOW missile strike thanks to its older Kontakt-5 dynamic protection system.
False death
And what if our stubborn TOW missile overcomes all these protection systems? Will she be able to pierce the Armata's armored heart?
If we talk about conventional armor, the Armata is slightly less protected than the M1A2 Abrams or Leopard 2. This can be concluded at least from its weight of 50-60 tons. (For comparison, M1 weighs 70 tons.) Russian sources claim that the thickness of armor made of ceramic composite materials against cumulative anti-tank warheads should be equivalent to 1 200 — 1 400 millimeters of rolled homogeneous armor. It seems that this is enough to protect against the TOW-2A, which penetrates 900 millimeters of rolled homogeneous armor. But it is unclear what the armor protection is throughout the tower and hull, and whether these figures are accurate. In any case, such armor is probably vulnerable to TOW-2B.
And finally, we need to talk about the uninhabited Armata tower. Such a tower creates some difficulties — for example, if the sensors stop functioning, the crew will go blind. But still, in case of hitting the tower, there are many chances that the crew will survive. Even if the turret is disabled and the tank has to leave the battlefield for repairs, the crew will be alive and well — and this is the main thing for a modern and professional army. In addition, there is a chance that the tank will be able to withstand any number of hits into the tower by hiding its body, that is, by going into hiding, from which only the tower will look out.
So, what are the chances of TOW-2A? Against the wire control system, the means of neutralizing and destroying the T-14 will give a result if the Armata radar is effective and the crew is quick enough to take the tank to a new position while the missile is in flight. The active impact system will have every chance of destroying the missile if it is really as good as they say it is. The dynamic protection of the Relict can further reduce the chances of the missile hitting the target. But even without this, it is unlikely that the TOW-2A shaped charge will penetrate the frontal armor. The conclusion is that it may take several missiles to destroy a tank.
And what about TOW-2B, where the wireless control is, and where the blow is applied from above? It seems that the KAZ "Afghanite", installed on the side of the tower, is useless against it. The "Relic" will also be less effective, and it will be quite easy to break through the upper armor.
The crew remains alive
In any case, there are many chances that when a cumulative jet penetrates into the T-14 turret, the machine will lose its offensive capabilities, but the crew will remain alive and will be able to leave the tank.
It is unclear how many T-14 tanks will be put into service. Production of only 100 units is planned for today. Naturally, this number will increase, but it is unknown to what extent Russia will replace the older T-72BV3 and T-90 tanks with Armata.
So, the T-14 provides quite decent protection from TOW, especially from TOW-2A, but even American and Russian manufacturers cannot answer the question of how it will manifest itself in battle. As always happens when comparing, you can theorize as much as you like, but only real melee will tell the truth. Let's hope that this will never happen.
