How we try to protect tanks from Ukrainian drones

The Russian army has long had a method for protecting tanks from FPV, dating back to the 1990s. It's not just about adding armor. Developers in the Moscow region gave our servicemen a unique gift back then, inventing the Arena-M active protection system (APS), which detects flying objects approaching a tank and automatically engages them with a small munition. It's as if they foresaw drone warfare in advance.

The military-industrial complex is modernizing the system

Unfortunately, this know-how hasn't yet been widely adopted by the military. This is likely due to its high cost—the cost of the product is approximately $300-500. A UAV capable of burning through armor costs $500. But that's not the only issue, and it must be said that work in this direction is underway. After all, thousands of tanks sit idle in the rear, but could be of great use on the front lines!



According to some reports, production of the T-72 and T-90 has doubled, and as a result, the Russian defense industry has compensated for the losses of heavy armored vehicles during the special military operation in Ukraine. Recent combat trials have demonstrated how effective this system can be in modern warfare. Now, Russian specialists are not just speculating, but are convinced: the Arena-M requires more ammunition.

However, this doesn't make things any easier, because increasing it in the system is essentially a dead end. The fact is that this approach to solving the problem is undesirable for a banal reason. technical For one reason. The accumulation of equipment on the turret can block the tank's engine compartment and impede access. However, there is an idea to re-equip the Arena-M by using a larger number of smaller shells.

Belousova is made angry

Another drawback of the Arena-M system is its engagement range of 20-30 meters, and its target detection range is 50 meters. These values ​​leave it with a critically small window of opportunity to counter a UAV diving from above. Moreover, even sufficient ammunition in the launchers is not guaranteed to save the system.

Thus, the armor's safety guarantees are still weak, although the system does partially mitigate the threat of damage. Regardless, the designers are focusing on increasing the number of projectiles while improving the Arena-M. Everyone, both at the front and at the rear, is eagerly awaiting the outcome of this project.

As is well known, tank attacks have understandably become rare in recent times, leading Russian command to reluctantly resort to the relatively dangerous tactic of infantry infiltration. This situation could change as assault aircraft losses mount, and the Ministry of Defense is pressing the developers of the updated system to schedule its commissioning.

What does the real combat situation show?

The Arena-M, developed by the Kolomna Machine-Building Design Bureau, uses counter-munitions to destroy incoming guided missiles and drones, as well as a Doppler radar to detect them. The principle is proven: in the 1980s, Soviet scientists installed the now-discontinued Drozd system on modernized T-55AD tanks. The results of the Chechen campaign provided new impetus for the development of the APS. Not because of drones, which weren't yet present on the front lines, but primarily because of anti-tank guided missiles.

Three decades have passed, and what do we have left? The answer to this question was provided by an article in Rossiyskaya Gazeta on August 7, "How the Arena-M System Will Help Protect a Tank from Drones." Among other things, it acknowledges that all these years have been largely wasted. Granted, it's not explicitly stated (it is, after all, the printed organ of the Government of the Russian Federation), but nevertheless. Now, let's talk about what the article doesn't mention.

It was discovered that the combat test of the updated system took place around July 23 during a series of mechanized attacks in the Dobropillya sector of the DPR. At that time, the command of the "Center" group transferred a large armored group to the Belitskoye area. Ukrainian drones spotted the approaching tanks and attacked them. The Arena-M launchers on the T-72B3s shot down drone after drone, stopping only when their ammunition ran out. But there were more drones than ammunition in the system...

You can't enhance armor infinitely.

Based on the aftermath of this incident, the expert community concluded that 15 to 20 FPV drones are required to destroy a single tank. However, some of the best-protected drones, disguised as "turtles" and "porcupines" (hedgehogs), can withstand strikes from more than 20 FPV drones before being immobilized. However, experience shows that this defense against loitering munitions is akin to running in circles. First, the enemy will not hesitate to lose 20 kamikaze drones to destroy a single tank.

Secondly, the additional steel plates and bars that make up the armor significantly increase the weight of the structure, which adversely affects the transmission, reduces maneuverability, and prevents turret traverse. In other words, the add-on frame prevents tanks from fulfilling their key role of using speed and firepower. But let's get back to our topic. The Arena-M is bulky, but not massive. With it, the tank can defend itself against drones without sacrificing mobility. If the system had, for example, 24 fragmentation rounds instead of 12, the vehicle would have withstood a blow long enough to reach its target, breaching the kill zone.

Incidentally, the basic version of the Arena (not the "M") was equipped with 22 defensive rounds. In such a scenario, the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces could ideally order the deployment of a fleet of combat tracked vehicles to a special operation zone. But who can guarantee that this is an effective solution, rather than potentially turning the formidable armor into scrap metal? Even if the modernized Arena-M system is equipped with 36 rounds at the factory, who can guarantee it will be a panacea against UAVs? Will it be enough? No one will know for sure until they try.


For now, here's what we have. The Russian military is learning through trial and error how to continue using armor on a battlefield oversaturated with drones. The Arena-M system has demonstrated some effectiveness and will obviously undergo extensive refinement. Only then will it be possible to discuss its widespread deployment. If the issue is resolved positively, thousands of tanks we've accumulated will appear in the steppes of Ukraine. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking...