Today, more and more you can hear discussions about the military power of 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 the praised Abrams to be the best in the world. But they don’t 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 see who succeeded in this regard and who needs to reconsider their weapons.
A bit of general information
We can safely say that the T-90 and M1A1 tanks, aka Abrams, are typical representatives of Russian and Western tank building. At the same time, design as well as technological ideas differ markedly. For example, “Abrams” and “Panther 2A7” are meaningless to compare, since they practically do not differ. A completely different situation with the T-90.
The T-72 can be called the predecessor of the T-90, the latter is a deep modification of the former. The main armament is a 125-mm smoothbore gun. After improvement, security increased by 300%. There appeared powerful passive and semi-active armor, as well as dynamic protection. All this was placed on the tank without a significant increase in the weight of the latter.
We can say that the layout of the T-90 is quite dense. This, on the one hand, is good, on the other hand, not, which we will talk about a little later. After welded towers began to be manufactured, the possibilities for reinforcing armor increased. As for the power plant, it is a V92C2 diesel engine.
If we talk about the layout, then its high density allows you to make a car with a low silhouette and good armor. Moreover, the longitudinal and cross-sectional areas are 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 ammunition especially vulnerable to enemy fire.
Briefly about M1A1
It is impossible not to say a few words about the American Abrams. This machine participated in many military conflicts around the planet and has proven itself well. Thick armor, good dynamics, impressive firepower and modern means of guidance and communication. It is for this that American soldiers fell in love with the M1A1.
On the "Abrams", regardless of modification, an improved German gun Rh-120 (M256) is installed. The US combat vehicle is famous for its magnificent armor, which consists of composite plates. But is she really good and is she superior to the T-90 protection, we will figure it out a bit later.
As for the layout, “Abrams” differs little in this parameter from its western relatives. For example, the reserved volume is almost 20 cubic meters. The T-90, this figure is less than half. A key feature of the M1A1, as well as an advantage, is the placement of the combat unit. Shells are placed in the tower and the body in isolation. In addition, there are knockout plates. The disadvantage of this decision is that the entire ammunition is in the tower, and it is most vulnerable to shelling.
If we compare the tanks of Russia and the United States for the power plant, the engine power is almost the same. However, the American car is equipped with a gas turbine engine, which has a greater fuel consumption than Russian diesel.
Comparison of firepower and fire control system
M1A1 and M1A2 are equipped with a 120-mm smoothbore gun. The initial velocity of the projectile is 1625 m / s, and the rate of fire is about 8 rounds per minute. At the same time, the rate of fire during movement, especially over rough terrain, is significantly reduced. Ammunition consists of armor-piercing subcaliber shells. Usually these are several types of ammunition, for example, M829A1, M829A2, M829A3. Over the past few years, the M1A1 and M1A2 have been supplied with new-style M829A3 shells, which are the most dangerous for the Russian T-90. In general, this is a promising US tank with quite powerful weapons. But let's see what Russian designers and engineers prepared in response.
The T-90 is armed with a 125 mm smoothbore gun. The initial velocity of the projectile is 1750 meters per second, which is slightly higher than the Abrams. The ammunition for the most part consists of armor-piercing subcaliber shells of the 80s model. For this reason, we can say that in terms of armor penetration, Russian shells are somewhat behind, therefore they need to be replaced with new ones. However, changing ammunition to new ones is quite difficult for the reason that there are restrictions on the length of the loaded shells. Gun rate - 8 rounds per minute. In motion - about 6 shots. Another feature of the T-90 is that it has the Reflex-M KUV in its arsenal. This allows you to effectively conduct targeted fire at a distance of 3 km, which is 2 times larger than the radius of destruction of other modern tanks. "Reflex-M" allows you to win the battle of T-90 even before entering the zone of effective firing.
Fire control system T-90
On the T-90 set the SLA with a day and night sighting system. The day sight has independent stabilization in two planes. That allows the gunner to work more efficiently. The night sighting system has dependent stabilization along two planes. The disadvantage of such a fire control system is that it is difficult to track and fire at night against moving targets. The T-90S modification is equipped with an improved Essa thermal imaging sight, which allows more efficient tracking and firing at targets at night.
If we compare modern tanks of the USA and Russia (Abrams and T-90), the latter are distinguished by the fact 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 sighting system. The bottom line is the full use of the technical capabilities of each of them. Mount two corrector. The first is intended to eliminate errors in synchronization of tracking of the aiming complex, which are caused by inaccuracy of the installation. The second eliminates the error in the installation of transmission mechanisms. Another key difference from the Abrams is that the T-90 commander has the ability to fire at ground and air targets from a stabilized machine gun installation.
Fire control system "Abrams"
The latest US tank M1A1 has one significant drawback, which lies in the limited capabilities of the commander to search for targets. This is especially noticeable during the movement of the machine. But the flaw was discovered and eliminated in a subsequent modification of M1A2. A panoramic thermal imaging sight has already been installed there. In this case, the commander can more effectively track and identify moving targets.
The SLA 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 a range finder. Multiplicity of the daily channel x3 and x10, with vertical stabilization. There is also an auxiliary eight-time sight without stabilization. In general, the fire control system on the M1A2 modification is more modern. It provides for imaging cameras for the commander and gunner. The crew is completely dependent on an automatic fire control system. The electronic control unit (ECU) allows you to stabilize an independent sight, gun drive. In general, we can say that if we compare the tanks of Russia and NATO, the latter succeeded in terms of the LMS. But the T-90 wins significantly at long distances.
On the protection of Abrams and T-90 tanks
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 as a separate item. The latest US tank M1A2 has rather thick sheets of armor, but at the same time their effectiveness is much lower than that of the T-90. For example, the tower is equipped with steel armor plates with stiffeners, between which stacks of armor made of metal and composite are stacked. In general, the effectiveness of such protection is sufficient, but the resistance to contact is significantly reduced. The sides of the M1A2 tower are also more vulnerable than the T-90. Experts say that the turret of an American tank, although armored, is easily penetrated by armor-piercing shells.
The T-90 boasts semi-active turret armor. It is a three-layer system. In addition, the rational angle of inclination of the armor of the frontal part of the tower allows more efficient use of it. Also, Russian military tanks, in particular the T-90, have dynamic protection like Contact-5. It protects against the effects of cumulative and armor-piercing-projectile shells. Thanks to the creation of a powerful lateral impulse, the core is destabilized, which leads to its destruction even before it comes into contact with the main armor of the tank.
What conclusions can be drawn?
The safer the crew of a tank will feel, the better it will perform its functional duties. That is why they always try to improve frontal armor. Since the Abrams and T-90 were developed during the Cold War, the most attention was paid to the front of the combat vehicle, which is important when conducting a battle in an open area head-to-head. But at present, there is a high probability of tank battle in the city. Therefore, it does not make sense to hit the frontal armor with a thickness of up to 800 mm, since it is much easier to pierce the side or stern. Usually there the armor thickness is not more than 100 mm.
That is why the heavy tanks of Russia, as well as the United States, have weaknesses. Nevertheless, among the advantages of the T-90, it is worth noting the possibility of hitting targets guided by missiles at a distance of up to 5 km, good maneuverability, high rate of fire, reliable armor. As for the "Abrams", then he is not without strengths. The Americans value their crew, so they always isolate it from the ammunition. In addition, M1A1 and M1A2 have high power density and good maneuverability, as well as an excellent fire control system. But this comparison of tanks of Russia and the United States is not over. Now we will consider some more modern cars. These tanks are under development, but it is already known that they will soon be lowered from the conveyor.
New Russian tanks: Armata
The heavy Armata combat vehicle is designed to replace the T-72, T-80, and also partially the T-90. Experts note that the military-technical level of "Almaty" will be 20-30% higher than that of all existing analogues in the world. The key features, or rather, the differences between this tank and the T-90 are that the crew, fuel tank and ammunition will be located in separate rooms. This will increase survivability on the battlefield, even when breaking through armor. The unit will be equipped with an engine of 1200 horsepower, which will provide sufficient maneuverability with a tank weight of 50 tons.
We can say that the main weapons of Russia are 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 is generally lower. That is why the developers paid special attention to the protection of "Almaty". This is a multi-layer “cake” consisting of metal, ceramic and composite bags. The use of a new steel grade allowed to increase armor characteristics by 15% and at the same time reduce the weight of the car by the same amount. "Armata" will be equipped with a 125-mm gun, similar to the German L-55 weapon, but surpassing it in technical characteristics by 20%. For such a gun, special ammunition with increased penetration has been developed.
So we examined the new tanks of Russia. Armata and the T-90 are the best of them. Well, now about the most promising American development.
Modern US tanks: promising developments
Currently, the 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 it’s impossible to say anything confidently on this topic. Maybe new cars will appear by the end of 2015, few people know anything about this.
But it is already known that the development will be carried out in the direction of improving the maneuverability and mobility of combat vehicles, therefore, modern US tanks will have thinner armor, a powerful chassis and power plant. Rather, it is about reconnaissance, not tanks intended for a head-on collision. In particular, developments are underway to create machines for a crew of 2 or 3 people with an uninhabited tower. For example, a combat vehicle with a crew of 2 will have an engine of 1, 500 horsepower, a low silhouette. In this case, the weight, in comparison with M1A1, will be 20-30% less, which will increase the specific power.
It is difficult to say whether such tanks will be in service with the United States, but their development is underway, but information on the technical characteristics and capabilities of the vehicles in the battle was not disclosed. In general, the Americans have M1A2 and its modifications. These tanks meet modern requirements and have a fairly high efficiency, including survival, on the battlefield. For this reason, they are not going to change them yet. The most modern and advanced are the US TUSK military tanks. This is a modification of M1A2, which consists in the presence of a remotely controlled machine gun and improved mine protection of the underbody of the machine.
