There is no logic in the plans to re-equip the Russian army


Against the background of News about the long-awaited start in 2022 of the serial production of the T-14 "Armata" tank, the message about the upcoming deliveries of armored vehicles in 2021 looks extremely curious. So, according to the information of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, by the end of this year, more than 800 units of a new and modernized armored vehicle are planned to enter the formations and military units of the Ground Forces of the RF Armed Forces. equipment... In total, according to the military department, the troops will receive more than 90 T-72B3M tanks, about 80 T-80BVM units with a gas turbine power plant, a batch of T-90M "Breakthrough" tanks, some of which will be transferred by the manufacturer to the Kazan Higher Tank Command school for training future tank officers. In addition, more than 120 BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles, over 280 modernized BMP-2M with a Berezhok fighting compartment, as well as about 300 BTR-82A and BTR-82AM armored personnel carriers will be delivered to formations and military units.


It would seem, at first glance, impressive delivery rates: about 200 units of tanks alone. For comparison, this is almost the same as the total number of tanks available from the German Bundeswehr (245 units) or from the British Armed Forces (227 units, it is planned to reduce to 148). However, with such planning for the rearmament of the tank fleet, there is a significant flaw - this is the persistence of Soviet problems with the diversity of equipment: for example, together with the T-14, the pilot batch of which should go to the troops this year, several more types of basic battle tanks (T-72B3 / B3M, T080BVM, T-80U, T-90M). Taking into account the long-awaited release of the industry for serial production of modern T-90M and T-14 vehicles, it is difficult to understand the logic of the military department, which continues to modernize the Soviet T-72B on a truly industrial scale. At the same time, judging by S. Shoigu's statements, there are plans to modernize the entire T-72B * fleet to the level of T-72B3M, i.e. Taking into account the current pace and size of the T-72B / B3 fleet, the modernization will be carried out for at least another whole decade.

Of course, the Ministry of Defense can be guided by considerations of economy and try to "squeeze" the maximum possible out of the T-72 platform, partially covering the army's needs for modern vehicles. But in this case, much more questions arise about the modernization of another tank - the T-80BVM, the operating cost of which is an order of magnitude higher than any diesel armored vehicle. In order not to be unfounded, it is worth referring to the collection of IN Baranov “Chief Designer V.N. Venediktov - Life given to tanks ", where literally the following is written about the gas turbine T-80:

In general, the T-80 would be an ideal tank, if not for two of its features: monstrous real fuel consumption and unimaginable cost. In the performance characteristics of the T-80 tank, the power reserve looks pretty decent. However, in reality, the power reserve multiplied by the coefficient of the average qualification of the driver and the conditions of movement in the column turns into a scanty value. I know of cases when fully fueled T-80 battalions got up "dry" after 160-180 km. The second issue is cost. I am sure that if, God forbid, a big war began, the next day all factories would switch to the production of T-72. And the T-80, at best, would be enough for one operation of the initial period of the war. As a tanker - a member of the crew, I was delighted with the capabilities of the T-80U and still consider it the best tank for passing final checks. But as a tank commander, I understand that the T-80 is not a "military" tank. Was there any point in keeping production of the T-80 earlier or restoring it now? It seems to me that there is no point in this.

Such a characteristic raises many questions about why these "gluttonous" combat vehicles of the Russian army (albeit noticeably updated) were needed, because back in 2009 it was planned to completely abandon them in order to unify the tank fleet! It would be much more rational to redirect financial resources to the large-scale construction of new and modern tanks, replacing obsolete models with them, than to modernize 40-year-old (or even older!) Soviet "veterans". Moreover, UVZ (manufacturer of T-90M and T-14) has already promised to reduce the cost of its products in the course of mass production **.

But much more perplexing is the recently launched modernization of the BMP-2 into the BMP-2M version, as well as the ongoing purchase of new BTR-82A and the modernization of the old BTR-80 to the level of the BTR-82AM. These armored combat vehicles (AFVs) are hopelessly outdated morally and constructively, especially in terms of protecting the crew and landing forces, due to which no modernization can fundamentally change something in this regard. So, all of the listed armored vehicles have only bulletproof booking. Since the days of Afghanistan, there have been cases when the BTR-80 (and the armoring of the BTR-82 is almost no different from its predecessor) was pierced from a 7,62-mm machine gun into the side! The BTR-82, due to its low profile, is devoid of a V-shaped bottom and "suspended" seats, and therefore the explosion of a mine under the bottom leads to fatal consequences, due to which the infantry prefers to move on armored personnel carriers. Similar problems are observed with the BMP-2. The persistence of the Ministry of Defense in saturating and modernizing the armored fleet of motorized rifle troops with these outdated models is even less amenable to a reasonable explanation, given the presence of two ready-made modern platforms - Kurganets-25 and Boomerang, devoid of most of the shortcomings of Soviet armored combat vehicles and are actually at the stage of state testing.

The dubious logic of the current plans to re-equip the Russian army is increasingly becoming a topic for the attention of authoritative experts. Loud statements about the high percentage of modern equipment in the ground forces for testing have little to do with reality, since the same modernized armored combat vehicles mentioned above cannot be modern by definition. In turn, the situation with the diversity of armored vehicles as a whole line of armored vehicles on the basis of new combat platforms enter the troops will only get worse, and taking into account the procurement carried out by the Ministry of Defense policy there are no prospects for fixing it in the foreseeable future.

* Upgrading to the level of T-72B3M is carried out only on the basis of the existing T-72B, upgrading of earlier versions of the T-72 to the level of T-72B3M is not possible.

** The cost of one T-14 MBT based on the "Armata" is currently 250 million rubles, the price is planned to be reduced due to serial production, technology development, reducing labor intensity and increasing manufacturability.
  • Author:
  • Photos used: Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation
Ad
We are open to cooperation with authors in the news and analytical departments. A prerequisite is the ability to quickly analyze the text and check the facts, to write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. We offer flexible working hours and regular payments. Please send your responses with examples of work to [email protected]
21 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Just a cat Offline Just a cat
    Just a cat (Bayun) 27 February 2021 08: 16
    +2
    Right now, when Russia is once again turning its face to the Arctic, only the T-80BVM can work effectively in severe frost conditions.
    1. Artemy Gromov Offline Artemy Gromov
      Artemy Gromov (Artemy Gromov) 27 February 2021 10: 01
      0
      As an author, I will comment that the gas turbine engine really starts up noticeably faster in frost, however, in addition to the engine, the tank has the same batteries, which, like on diesel cars, are very hard to endure and require preliminary recharging or replacement. So the speed of bringing the tank unit to combat readiness, but which they hope so in the case of the T-80BVM, in frosty weather will not differ much from the T-72 / T-90, and the cost of operation will differ significantly.
      1. Just a cat Offline Just a cat
        Just a cat (Bayun) 27 February 2021 12: 28
        -1
        The author apparently does not know that the battery can be removed and kept warm, unlike the engine.

        Tank batteries in vehicles and storage facilities are recharged continuously. It is allowed to suspend recharging for up to 10 days during network repairs and on holidays.

        https://vk.cc/bZ1eot
        1. Artemy Gromov Offline Artemy Gromov
          Artemy Gromov (Artemy Gromov) 27 February 2021 12: 59
          0
          The batteries can of course be kept warm, in fact, like the tank, you can keep the whole in a heated hangar (ideally, it should be so). In this case, there will be no problems with launching from the word at all.
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Ivancarafuto Offline Ivancarafuto
        Ivancarafuto (Ivan) 27 February 2021 14: 24
        +6
        Author you do not quite own the topic .....

        So the speed of bringing the tank unit to combat readiness, but which is so relied upon in the case of the T-80BVM, in frosty weather will not differ much from the T-72 / T-90E

        will differ and significantly, if the start of the heater and the actual heating of the diesel engine fall out of this cycle, then the process will accelerate significantly. And in the operation of the T-72 / T-90E in low temperatures, there are some nuances known only to experts adding "hemorrhoids" to operators. As for the batteries, back in Soviet times, in the SA, there were methods for keeping them working (at low temperatures) and quickly installing them on equipment (I think science has not been in place since then).
        I agree that a gas turbine engine itself is more expensive, more expensive to operate. But the trouble is, they have already been produced and are available and are suitable for use in conditions ultra-low temperatures like no other .... So what remains is to "take a pencil" and count the economy and efficiency in a column ... With all due respect to the author, who clearly knows how to "put letters into words and sentences", he judges superficially and without thoughtful calculation of efficiency.
      3. boriz Offline boriz
        boriz (boriz) 27 February 2021 19: 44
        +4
        Since the launch of tanks with a diesel engine takes longer, then the battery on them will die faster and start will become impossible.
      4. Ulysses Offline Ulysses
        Ulysses (Alexey) 27 February 2021 22: 37
        0
        however, in addition to the engine, the tank has the same batteries, which, like on diesel vehicles, are very hard to endure and require preliminary recharging or replacement.

        In the north of Russia, a bunch of all kinds of equipment, starting with automobiles, use batteries.
        With proper care, everything works fine. request
    2. Hayer31 Offline Hayer31
      Hayer31 (Kashchei) 27 February 2021 17: 21
      -4
      There is a threat of invasion from the Arctic direction ??? Not only technology is outdated, but also some brains.
      1. boriz Offline boriz
        boriz (boriz) 27 February 2021 19: 45
        +2
        Americans are constantly trying to say that they will toughly defend their interests in the NSR, that is, in the Arctic.
  2. beeper Offline beeper
    beeper 27 February 2021 10: 55
    +4
    The name is intriguing, but the logic of the article itself, persistently promoting the "idea of ​​illogicality", did not seem to me at all (according to Vanya Solntsev). request
    And the author's "murderous argument" from a thoroughly engaged eulogy (a few years ago, I carefully read this, alas, almost a third "watery", voluminous "collection of memories" from cover to cover winked ) General V.N. Venediktov and the Ural "seventy-two" (in this continuous stream of praises to the "luminary of tank building" his colleague, chief and predecessor-Chief Designer L.N.Kartsev is the main inspirer and creator of the prototype of the T-72- "creative compilation" of the Ural experimental object "167" and the Kharkov T-64, which was already adopted by the Soviet Army, and the persistent promoter of the concept of the Uralmash "mobilization variant" based on the ideas of the Kharkov tank and its own design developments ... by the way, In his, also published, memoirs, Leonid Nikolaevich Kartsev somehow bitterly dropped that he was mistaken with Venediktov's recommendation to his place, when, due to his daughter's health, he was forced to leave Nizhny Tagil with his family and the question arose about a successor at the post of GC KB, which was supposed to introduce into production an almost finished machine, the future T-72 ...)) made me remember an ancient Arabic proverb:

    you said once - I believed, you repeated - I doubted, you said for the third time - I understood that you were not telling the truth!

    But why is this to the author, the goal ??! winked

    In my opinion, as a Soviet mechanical engineer, tank officer, production worker and repairman (including heavy tracked vehicles) with many decades of experience, the Russian authorities and the military are doing everything correctly, expediently and efficiently, logically, along with the introduction of new tanks, using the existing stocks of armored vehicles to modernize and saturate the troops with them in the face of the obvious anti-Russian "escalation of the situation" and the growing threat of revanchist aggression (in the majority of countries that have already attacked our USSR together with the Nazi Reich and actively participated in the destruction of our and our compatriots!) of the "NATO bloc" headed by the neo-Hitler "civilizers" -the colonialists of the United States!
    IMHO
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
  3. steelmaker Online steelmaker
    steelmaker 27 February 2021 12: 27
    -8
    Putin said that apart from galoshes, the USSR produced nothing. And Shoigu modernizes these "galoshes", and he does not rush to introduce his "galoshes". So I say that no one listens to Putin and he is not an authority! To be in power for 20 years, to drive the "blizzard" for all 20 years. And what "galoshes" is Putin going to leave after his rule? Modernized Soviet !!!
    1. Ivancarafuto Offline Ivancarafuto
      Ivancarafuto (Ivan) 27 February 2021 14: 32
      +4
      Yes, he is Putin! Only, unlike the Ukrainian presidents, he did not lower Russia to the level of the most impoverished country in Europe, incapable of producing anything. Tanks of Ukraine are Soviet tanks, from tank cemeteries ...... Neither armor, nor guns, nor machine guns, nor the radio station "Nezalezhnaya" can be produced. Technologies are lost, and they do not allow creating new owners
      1. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
        Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 27 February 2021 18: 47
        -3
        There is an elder in the garden, and there is an uncle in Kiev - what does Ukraine have to do with the rearmament of the Russian army is clear only Ivancarafuto (Ivan) ...
        1. Ivancarafuto Offline Ivancarafuto
          Ivancarafuto (Ivan) 28 February 2021 12: 41
          +1
          Ukraine, despite the fact that the "steelmaker" barks from there from behind the fence .....
    2. Rinat Offline Rinat
      Rinat (Rinat) 28 February 2021 09: 18
      +4
      Quote: steel maker
      To be in power for 20 years, to drive the "blizzard" for all 20 years.

      You chase a blizzard about "galoshes", comrade "steel maker". If it were as you drive, then Russia and personally Vladimir Putin would not have such a powerful advance in all directions possible for the West.
      1. steelmaker Online steelmaker
        steelmaker 28 February 2021 14: 39
        -1
        such a powerful roll in all directions possible for the west.

        And this is all the merit of Putin? And EBN spoke in the US Congress, so what? You judge the head of state not by those achievements. In the meantime, we live by the Soviet legacy, and Putin has not created anything of his own. Even the flag and anthem are banned. And you still defend this shame?
  4. Sapsan136 Offline Sapsan136
    Sapsan136 (Sapsan136) 27 February 2021 12: 38
    +5
    The decision on the T-80 looks controversial. As for the modernization of the T-72 and the production of the T-90MS, then everything is logical. Not a single country in the world can today quickly update its entire tank fleet, this will require colossal costs. Therefore, all countries are modernizing their existing tanks. in the production of the T-90MS also makes sense, since a tank that is not in the country's armament cannot really be sold abroad, and all T-90 tanks in service can be brought to the level of the T-90MS, increasing their combat characteristics.
  5. Ivancarafuto Offline Ivancarafuto
    Ivancarafuto (Ivan) 27 February 2021 14: 03
    +3
    If the author does not see the logic, most likely he does not have the completeness of information ... It makes no sense to argue with the author without information ...
  6. Rinat Offline Rinat
    Rinat (Rinat) 28 February 2021 09: 05
    0
    The logic is simple: to increase the number of armored vehicles by lesser means, improving the previously released samples suitable for this. We have a pre-war period and the saturation of troops with a large number of equipment looks quite logical. Agree, it is better to lose on the battlefield the iron that we have in sufficient quantity than to lose our soldiers. At the end of this period, or after our victory, the surplus can be sold to states friendly to Russia, or transferred to the allies for a successful war.
  7. trahterist Offline trahterist
    trahterist (Elmars) 28 February 2021 14: 22
    +2
    One thing is written in the book, but in Practice all mechanics, Without exception, are just delighted with the ease of control of the T-80.
    And already in battle it is extremely important - no need to take a steam bath, whether the engine stalls or not, and there is no archaic need with an intensive search of gears of the BKP.
    Yes, the T-80 has "mechanics", but, in principle, it is quite possible to drive in one gear, in the mode of a kind of "automatic machine", operating only with a gas-brake combination.
  8. Netyn Offline Netyn
    Netyn (Netyn) April 10 2021 13: 56
    0
    Who has not mastered this opus, a short content - the author is a leading armored expert with a world name, the level of analyte is not inferior to Pan Sergei, the issue of competence and expertise is not worse than that of Kharkov Radivo on the topic of the Navy.
    So, the author claims that all MOs are stupid because they upgrade previously released equipment. In fact, it needs to be handed out to retirees and some kind of wunderwolf, for example, the Death Star, should be fooled with all the money. And with the help of it, kill all people with death rays from space.
    PS Seriously to disassemble this libel, there is no point from the word at all