On the electronic pages of "Military Review" very often there is a dispute about the advantages of various tanks of the "Soviet school", and each side gives different reasons. And as a result, one of my comrades asked to speak. I will quote his request verbatim:
“It was always curious what kind of crap" 1G42 "and" 1G45 "are? Can you share it somehow? Practice opinion interests. I have always been interested in practical work using the T-80 sighting and observation systems”.
I want to immediately apologize to "Aleks TV" for unconsciously misleading him, the second "hrendelpupina" has the name 1G46 …, and 1G45 refers to the KUV (Controlled Weapon Complex) "Cobra". Well, these are "annoying little things." And also I want to thank and congratulate him on very interesting articles about the modernized T72B3 tank. But back to the topic.
I was very lucky, I entered the Kharkov Guards Tank School at a time when our army was preparing for rearmament. And the command, knowing that the days of the T64 on the assembly line were "numbered" and a new "single" tank would soon go to the troops, decided to train us, future tank "painters", as specialists of a "general profile". We studied and practically mastered various types of tanks in each course of the school, nevertheless leaving the "profile" T64 machine. And as a result, during our studies, we were given the opportunity to practically shoot with a regular projectile from T64B, T72, T80B and T80UD and a "insert" from T62 … And honestly, I am very grateful to the teaching staff of the Kharkov Guards Higher Tank Command Order of the Red Star of the School named after the Supreme Soviet of the Ukrainian SSR for their work, they taught us “not out of fear, but out of conscience,” since the professionals themselves were excellent. But the department of firepower training stood out even against this high general background. Well, where else could the teachers themselves disassemble the new artillery fuse in order to draw a diagram of the general arrangement for us, the cadets, or "agree" at the repair plant in order to make a split operating model of the recoil brake or the reel of a tank gun according to their drawings? And what about Colonel Boyko? With his "Knots", with which he shouted to the shooting shift, if someone smeared or did something wrong - "mowed", and he shouted it while on the tower, and could be heard at a distance of 100 meters inside the tank, with the engine running and systems and wearing headsets … and then clearly and intelligibly explaining why such a "nuisance" happened …
But my acquaintance with different models of tanks did not end there. During my service I was fortunate enough to serve on all our main types of medium and OB tanks.
Let's start with T64B. In terms of fire, it is a very good machine equipped with a 1G42 sight, which we often called by its second name - PDPS (Sight-Rangefinder, Tracking Device), and in principle, in this it is indistinguishable from the T80B, which, thanks to a more advanced chassis and GT- An engine that allows you to move more smoothly is an even better "fireman".
Here is his field of vision, that is, what the gunner sees - the tank's guns when he looks through the "eyepiece" of the PDPS sight.
It's a pity the image is not in color, so a little clarification is required here. At the bottom of the sight there is a small panel where information is displayed:
- about the readiness of the gun to fire (in case of readiness, the green light lights up);
- about the selected type of projectile (shining letters "O", "B", "N", "U" appear);
- on how many targets the laser beam was reflected from and, accordingly, the measurement result will be obtained, - measured range in meters;
- about the inclusion of "commander's target designation" (the red light comes on).
Everything is very informative and does not overload the gunner with unnecessary information.
In addition, the gunner measures the range with a laser rangefinder and fires from a tank gun using only the "Central aiming mark with a vertical stroke" or as it is called in short - "Central square".
In the case when it is necessary to manually enter data for firing, this is done by turning the "ring" located above the control panel, visually a "horizontal stroke" moves in the sight, which must be combined with the desired mark on the "aiming angle scale" of the desired type of projectile … but this should be done very rarely, the main mode, of course, is automatic. In the automatic mode of firing, a lot depends on the correct operation of the FCS (Fire Control System), one of its constituent parts is TBV (Tank Ballistic Calculator), in which the firing conditions are measured (recorded) by the firing conditions sensors, namely, wind corrections, speed target movements and tank roll are entered automatically, and corrections are manually entered for air temperature, change in initial speed depending on the batch of charges, atmospheric pressure, barrel bore wear, charge temperature.
TBV, on the basis of the information received in it, according to certain algorithms, generates the calculated values of the aiming angles in the vertical and horizontal planes and sends commands to the actuators of the gun and turret. The cannon not only automatically stands at the desired throwing angle, but also rotates at the desired lead angle, while the "central square" remains motionless. Thanks to this, the shooting is carried out as follows (simplified):
- the gunner aims at the selected target "Central Square";
- without being distracted from the aiming, makes sure that the type of the loaded projectile corresponds to the selected target;
- by pressing the button on the "control panel" measures the range;
- after which, making sure that a green light is on in the field of view - "Ready" and holding the "Central Square" on the target, fires a shot.
With the T72, everything is not so simple, with an overall high reliability, this machine is less effective in terms of fire. To begin with, the TPD-1K sight (Tank Sight-Rangefinder) is installed on it.
His field of vision:
Here, too, a little explanation is required - under the number 9 there is a "luminous rangefinder mark", a brightly burning ring that can be located anywhere in the field of view. In automatic mode, this "ring" is aimed at the selected target and by pressing a button on the control panel, a measurement is made. The fact that the measurement has taken place is indicated by the fact that the "range scale" begins to move and stops with the desired mark against the "index", at this moment "the central square moves in a vertical plane up or down. The firing data is entered using a "corrector", for which the commander uses a special table, finds the desired correction value, informs the gunner of the gun, and he already performs the necessary manipulations … Also, unlike the automated FCS T64b and T80B, lateral corrections for wind and movement speed targets are not automatically processed by the ballistic corrector.
The shooting itself is conducted like this:
- the gunner directs the “rangefinder ring” to the selected target and presses the range measurement button;
- at the end of the movement of the "rangefinder scale", the gunner directs the "central square on the target", or the square on the side scale, depending on the nature of the movement of the target and the tank, and he must choose the correction for lead, as a result, the gun becomes as at the desired angle throwing, and at the lead angle;
- looking up from the eyepiece, looks at the panel for selecting the type of projectile in order to understand that the type has been selected correctly (in principle, this can be omitted);
- making sure that the "Ready" light is on above the rangefinder scale, fires a shot.
So the time for firing a shot from the T72 has to be spent more than when firing from the T64B or T80B, in addition, the FCS with the "corrector" is less accurate than with the TBV. Therefore, I believe that thanks to the more advanced sighting system and the FCS, the "old" T64B and T80B tanks have more chances in the confrontation with the "not modernized" T72 tank.
And honestly, it would be interesting to look at the "biathlon", in which both modernized and not modernized T72B and T80B would compete, a lot would become clear.
So it is, of course, good that the T72B3 tanks are now equipped with Sosnoy-U and the FCS, but if the T80B tanks were equipped with such a complex in the case of the Russian Armed Forces, the output would have been a more powerful machine.
The only huge drawback of the T80B and its PDPS sight can be considered that it allows you to shoot only the radio-controlled Cobra, but this is fixable. You just need to either make the necessary modernization of the PDPS using the solutions and assemblies used on the 1G46 - PDPN (Rangefinder Sight Observation Device) in order to fire guided projectiles with laser guidance, or to replace them entirely, which is not difficult, since they are similar in size and the sights themselves are manufactured in Russia. This, by the way, will allow removing a lot of the old KUV equipment that is no longer needed from the tank, which will not only lighten the weight of the tank, but also add free space inside the turret of the tank.
As a result, if the Sosny-U fails, the tank will not lose the ability to use the KUV (Guided Weapon Complex), which will happen on the T72BZ tank, since its standard telescopic sight does not allow firing the TUS (Tank Guided Projectile) … Yes, and retraining personnel from PDPS to PDPS will not take much time, since they are very similar. And then I come to the logical conclusion that the modernization of our "old" tanks should be done in a different way. What is T72B3 was at the "level" in 1995, now this is not enough. There is no need to try to "shove in the unpushable" or poorly "crammed", but, using the existing developments, to make the maximum unification of the tank fleet. Otherwise, our "new" tank will be unable to fight on an equal footing even with Chinese vehicles. How to do it? You can, of course, switch to a T72 "family" tank, but this path is not entirely correct. Residents of the Far East will confirm that the network of railways and highways in that region, shall we say, "is far from meeting world standards," which raises the issue of operational maneuverability of tank units and formations very highly. And at this stage, only the T80 with a gas turbine engine can provide it, this is the reality. Alas, the V-92 engine of the T-90 tank, similar in power, does not have the same reliability, in addition, the presence of a liquid cooling system is not the best in a region where temperatures drop for a long time and stay below -5 degrees Celsius … to give up the T80 as a "base chassis" is irrational.
We must follow the path of creating a "unified fighting compartment" based on the turret of the T90MS tank. This means that such a tower must be equipped with:
- AZ, adapted to accommodate BPS "high power", including for the T80. Alas, the MZ, having a slightly larger capacity, also has a number of design flaws, namely, a large lesion area, more complex and less reliable cable drives, requiring constant adjustments, and also more reducing the ability to move, if necessary, m.v. from the command department to the combat one;
- sighting and command complex "Sosna-U";
- additional sight 1G46 PDPN;
- unconditional installation of a STV (Tank Armament Stabilizer) and an FCS of the T90MS type;
- additional command device, type TKN5;
- closed ZPU;
- a new installation of a "coaxial" machine gun, which would make it possible to fire from it at the moment when the gun is at the angle of loading;
- more advanced means of communication and control that allow transmitting the necessary information both in voice and graphical modes, and having a "guaranteed durability" of at least 2 hours.
In addition, it is necessary to strengthen the booking by installing additional booking modules throughout the hull. The need for an APU is unconditional, I think it is better like the ZSU 23-4 "Shilka".
On tanks with engines of at least 1200 hp it is necessary to install a GOP (Hydrostatic Transmission), which will increase maneuverability and efficiency.
Yes, such modernization, of course, will not be the "cheapest", but it will achieve a lot. And most importantly, to provide our army with completely modern tanks until the Armed Forces are fully equipped with tanks based on "Armata". It is possible to carry out such modernization at the production base of the Omsk plant, freeing UVZ from these works.
I really hope that the current leadership of the Defense Ministry will take a different look at the problem of rearmament of our Armed Forces. Our soldiers and officers deserve to serve and, if necessary, fight on modern technology, which would more fully allow them to realize their capabilities.
In preparation were used
1. Technical description and operating instructions vol. 219, book 1.
2. Technical description and operating instructions for the T72B tank.
3. Operating instructions for the sight 1A40.
