Comparison of tanks of Russia and the United States. What tanks are in service with the US and Russia?

Today, more and more often one can hear discussions about the military power of the two superpowers: Russia and the United States. Often it comes to heavy equipment, such as tanks and self-propelled guns. For example, many people consider Abraham to be the best in the world. But here do not take into account the same German "Leopard 2A7", as well as the Russian T-90. Let's make a small comparison of the tanks of Russia and the United States and we'll figure out who has succeeded in this regard, and who needs to reconsider their weapons.

Some general information

We can safely say that the T-90 and M1A1 tanks, the same Abrams, are typical representatives of Russian and Western tank-building. At the same time, the design as well as the technological ideas are significantly different. For example, "Abrams" and "Panther 2A7" compare senselessly, since they practically do not differ. Quite the other situation with the T-90.

T-72 can be called the predecessor of T-90, the latter is a deep modification of the first. The main armament is a 125-mm smoothbore gun. After the improvement, the security increased by 300%. There was a powerful passive and semi-active armor, as well as dynamic protection. All this was placed on the tank without significantly increasing the weight of the latter.

You can say that the layout of the T-90 is quite dense. This, on the one hand, is good, on the other - no, which we will talk about a little later. After they began to produce welded towers, the possibilities for increasing armor increased. As for the power plant, it is a diesel engine V92S2.

Speaking of the layout, its high density makes it possible to make a car with a low silhouette and good armor. In this case, the area of the longitudinal and cross sections is small. The disadvantage of this arrangement is that the non-automated part of the ammunition is located in the unprotected area of the tank. This makes the combat laying especially vulnerable to enemy shelling.

In brief about M1A1

We can not say a few words about the American "Abrams". This machine has participated in many combat conflicts throughout the planet and has proven itself well. Thick armor, good dynamics, impressive firepower and modern means of guidance and communication. It was for this that the American soldiers loved M1A1.

On the "Abrams", regardless of the modification, an improved German cannon Rh-120 (M256) is installed. The US combat vehicle is famous for its magnificent armor, which consists of composite plates. But whether it is so good in practice and whether it exceeds the protection of the T-90, we will deal with it a little later.

As for the layout, according to this parameter, "Abrams" is not much different from its western counterparts. For example, the booked volume is almost 20 cubic meters. At T-90 this indicator is less than twice. A key feature of M1A1, as well as an advantage, is the placement of a combat kit. The shells are placed in the tower and the body in isolation. In addition, there are knockout plates. The minus of such a decision is that the whole ammunition is in the tower, and it is the most vulnerable to shelling.

If we compare the tanks of Russia and the United States for a power plant, then the engine power is almost the same. However, the American machine is equipped with a gas turbine engine, which has a greater fuel consumption than the Russian diesel.

Comparison of firepower and fire control systems

M1A1 and M1A2 equipped with a 120-mm smoothbore gun. The initial speed of the projectile is 1625 m / s, and the rate of fire is about 8 rounds per minute. In this case, the rate of fire during movement, especially over rough terrain, is significantly reduced. The ammunition consists of armor - piercing sub - caliber projectiles. Usually these are several types of ammunition, for example, M829A1, M829A2, M829A3. The last few years, M1A1 and M1A2 are supplied with new M829A3 shells, which are the most dangerous for the Russian T-90. In general, this is a promising US tank with fairly powerful weapons. But let's see what was prepared by the Russian designers and engineers.

The T-90 is armed with a 125 mm smoothbore gun. The initial speed of the projectile's flight is 1750 meters per second, which is somewhat higher than that of Abrams. The ammunition for the most part consists of armor-piercing sub-caliber projectiles from the 1980s. For this reason, it can be said that in terms of armor penetration, Russian shells lag somewhat behind, therefore they must be replaced by new ones. However, it is quite difficult to change ammunition for new ones, because there are limitations of the automatic loading device along the length of the projectiles being installed. The rate of fire is 8 rounds per minute. In the movement - about 6 shots. Another feature of the T-90 is that it has in its arsenal KUV "Reflex-M". This makes it possible to effectively target fire at a distance of 3 km, which is 2 times more than the radius of destruction of other modern tanks. "Reflex-M" allows you to win the T-90 fight even before entering the effective fire zone.

Fire control system T-90

On the T-90, the SAM is installed with a daylight as well as a night sighting complex. The day sight has an independent stabilization along two planes. That allows the gunner to work more efficiently. The night sighting complex has a dependent stabilization along two planes. The disadvantage of such a fire control system is that it is difficult to track and fire at night on moving targets. The modification of the T-90S is equipped with an improved thermal sight "Essa", which allows you to more effectively track and fire at the target in the dark.

If we compare modern tanks of the USA and Russia (Abrams and T-90), the latter differ in that they have adders and angle sensors. This equipment is associated with the vertical and horizontal axis of the platform and the mirror reflector. This solution allows you to combine the work of two independent sights in the aiming complex. The bottom line is to make full use of the technical capabilities of each of them. Two correctors are mounted. The first is intended to eliminate the errors in the synchronization of tracking of the sighting complex, which are due to the inaccuracy of the installation. The second eliminates the error in the installation of transmission mechanisms. Another key difference from Abrams is that the commander of the T-90 has the ability to fire on ground and air targets from a stabilized machine gun.

Fire control system "Abrams"

The newest US tank M1A1 has one significant drawback, which lies in the limited capabilities of the commander in finding the target. This is especially noticeable during the movement of the car. But the flaw was detected and eliminated in the subsequent modification of M1A2. There is already installed a panoramic thermal sight. In this case, the commander can more effectively track and identify moving targets.

The JMA on the Abrams tank is more modern than on the T-90. The gunner works with the main sight, which has a thermal imager and range finder. The multiplicity of the day channel is x3 and x10, with vertical stabilization. There is also an auxiliary eight-shot sight without stabilization. In general, the fire control system on the M1A2 modification is more modern. It provides for the presence of thermal imaging cameras for the commander and gunner. The crew is completely dependent on the automatic fire control system. The electronic control unit (ECU) allows stabilizing an independent sight, the drive of the implement. In general, we can say that if we compare the tanks of Russia and NATO, then the last in terms of JMA succeeded. But the T-90 significantly wins at long distances.

On the protection of tanks "Abrams" and T-90

Agree, the effectiveness of armor plays a huge role for the survival of the tank on the battlefield. That is why security should be considered a separate item. The newest US tank M1A2 has fairly thick sheets of armor, but their efficiency is much lower than that of the T-90. For example, the tower is equipped with steel armor plates with stiffeners, between which are stacked armor packages of metal and composite. In general, the effectiveness of such protection is sufficient, but the resistance to hitting is significantly reduced. The sides of the M1A2 tower are also more vulnerable than the T-90. Experts say that the tower of the American tank, although armored, but it easily breaks through armor-piercing shells.

The T-90 boasts a semi-active turret armor. It is a three-layer system. In addition, a rational angle of inclination armor frontal part of the tower allows you to more effectively use it. Also, Russian military tanks, in particular the T-90, have a dynamic protection of the "Contact-5" type. It protects against the effects of cumulative and armor-piercing-subcaliber projectiles. Thanks to the creation of a powerful lateral impulse, the core is destabilized, which leads to its destruction even before coming into contact with the main armor of the tank.

What conclusions can be drawn?

The safer the tank crew feels, the better it will perform its functional duties. That's why they always try to improve frontal armor. Since Abrams and T-90 were developed during the Cold War, most attention was paid to the frontal part of the combat vehicle, which is actual in the conduct of battle in the open area forehead in the forehead. But at the present time there is a high probability of tank combat in the conditions of the city. Consequently, it is useless to hit frontal armor up to 800 mm thick, since it's much easier to pierce the stern or stern. Usually there the thickness of the armor is not more than 100 mm.

That is why the heavy tanks of Russia, as well as the United States, have weak points. Nevertheless, among the advantages of the T-90 is the possibility of target destruction guided missiles at a distance of up to 5 km, good maneuverability, high rate of fire, reliable armor. As for "Abrams", then he is not without strong points. Americans value their crew, so they always isolate it from the boating. In addition, M1A1 and M1A2 have a high specific power and good maneuverability, as well as an excellent fire control system. But this comparison of tanks of Russia and the United States is not finished. Now we will consider a few more modern machines. These tanks are under construction, but it is already known that they will be launched from the conveyor soon.

New tanks of Russia: "Armata"

The heavy fighting machine "Armata" is designed to replace the T-72, T-80, and also partially T-90. Experts note that the military-technical level of "Armata" will be higher by 20-30% than all analogues in the world. The key features, or rather, the difference of this tank from the T-90, are that the crew, fuel tank and combat equipment will be deployed in separate rooms. This will increase the survivability on the battlefield, even with the penetration of armor. The unit will be equipped with a 1200 horsepower engine, which will provide sufficient maneuverability with a weight of 50 tons.

It can be said that the main weapon of Russia is tanks, as well as self-propelled guns. This is due to the fact that they are more than the Americans, by 20-35%. However, the survivability of technology as a whole is lower. That is why the developers paid special attention to the protection of "Armata". This is a multi-layer "cake" consisting of metal, ceramic and composite bags. Using a new grade of steel allowed to increase the armor characteristics by 15% and at the same time to reduce the weight of the car by the same amount. "Armata" will be equipped with a 125-mm gun, similar to the German weapon L-55, but superior to its technical characteristics by 20%. Special ammunition with increased penetration has been developed for such a gun.

So we examined the new tanks of Russia. "Armata" and T-90 are the best of them. And now - about the most promising US development.

Modern tanks of the USA: perspective developments

At present, Americans do not produce new tanks. For the most part, they are engaged in the modernization of M1A1 and M1A2. Of course, developments are underway in some areas, but it is unlikely that in the next few years the world will see new US tanks, although the information is secret and something can not be confidently stated on this topic. Perhaps, new cars will appear already by the end of 2015, about this very few people know anything.

But it is already known that the development will be carried out in the direction of improving maneuverability and mobility of combat vehicles, therefore, modern US tanks will have more thin armor, a powerful undercarriage and power unit. Rather, we are talking about reconnaissance, and not about tanks intended for a head-on collision. In particular, the development of vehicles for the crew of 2 or 3 people with an uninhabited tower is underway. For example, a combat vehicle with a crew of 2 people will have an engine of 1500 horsepower, a low silhouette. In this case, the weight, compared with M1A1, will be less by 20-30%, which will increase the specific power.

It is difficult to say whether such tanks will be in the US arsenal, but their development is under way, but information about the technical characteristics and capabilities of the machines in battle is not disclosed. In general, the Americans have M1A2 and its modifications. These tanks meet modern requirements and have rather high efficiency, including survival, on the battlefield. For this reason, they are not going to change them yet. The most modern and perfect are US military tanks TUSK. This is a modification of the M1A2, which consists in the presence of a remotely controlled machine gun and improved mine protection of the bottom of the machine.

Conclusion

So we conducted a small comparison of the tanks of Russia and the United States. As you can see, both countries have high military potential. Between the T-90 and Abrams, company fights (10x10) were simulated, which showed that T-90 is more effective in the conditions of the steppe area. At the same time, the bumpy terrain gives some advantage, albeit small, to the American technique. This is due to the fact that in such conditions it is difficult to fire at long distances, and especially guided missiles.

The main problem of T-90 is that all the improvements and developments are in the form of patents, as well as samples. No significant measures are taken to improve the protective, dynamic, and fire characteristics. In addition, the problem of insufficient training of the tank crew is acute, which, in an intensive collision, should respond quickly and accurately. This requires some experience. Both Abrams and T-90 are some of the best of their kind. Consider the tank "Armada" as a real candidate, as well as American developments, does not make sense. This is due to the fact that the tank is assessed during tests at the test site, and not in the hangar. It may seem that it is ideal, and in the course of the practical part, significant shortcomings will be revealed. Here, in principle, and everything that can be briefly told about the tanks in the arsenal of the US and Russia. They have almost identical effectiveness only with slight differences.