Armour

RE: MMW radar.

Just thought I’d throw a couple of pics in…

1. T-80

2. Yugoslav M-84 on excercise.
Attachments:

RE: MMW radar.

I don’t think MMW radar will replace TI… they would work very well together.

Regarding the advantages… lets look at the Krisanthema system.
It is an anti tank missile system based on the BMP-3 vehicle… much like anti tank versions of the BRDM-2.
The MMW system can see though any kind of smoke, fog, heavy rain, and allows the Krisanthema to target metal vehicles at 6.5km at night, in heavy snow, fog, or even the special smoke screens that IR sights can’t see through. The radar is fully retracible and uses very low emmision levels.

The Russians have systems with very large retracible arms with everything from IR, TI, II sights and radar equipment. The weight involved means that with the sights deployed the vehicle cannot move quickly which can make them very vulnerable. Weight restrictions mean the raised sensors are not well armoured and more vulnerable to a sniper bullet than roof mounted sensors. While allowing the vehicle to be hidden they still give away its position.

RE: MMW radar.

Good points, but if it would be widely used some one would add RWR on the tanks and they could pinpoint the emitters location with that.

I honestly do not believe that this is an option for MBT, but a good idea for a recon vehicle.. I have added a picture of the Fennek recon vehicle, developed for the Netherlands and Germany. The idea of mounting a MMW radar on the mast seems good to me.

(At the moment there are opticla sensores used)
Attachments:

RE: MMW radar.

Well, TI isn’t a perfect system – range is a problem as is weather and smoke (especially from burning tires 😉 ). Because armoured vehicles are so reflective MMW can look through light foliage and camo-netting easier than TI. Also, it can (at certain ranges) provide a near photographic image (minus the colour) and therefore be used to reliably id an enemy tank. As many nations are struggling with advanced TI (I still maintain that Russia is behind the west – hence the interest in British UAVs from Yug) MMW could be an interesting alternative. MMW is used by for Hellfires and Brimstone to fire at tanks – why not stick one on a tank to fire at other tanks?

RE: MMW radar.

Perhaps someone can fill me in. If I´m correct a MMW can not look through wood, buildings, or slopes. And it is not able to identify a tank excactly enough to decide if freind or foe.
So what would be the use of a MMW for a MBT ? All engagements are taking place within line of sight and during this circumstances IR and low light systems offer a better picture of the enemy and help to identify the tank. I could think of a 360° MMW to detect incoming ATGMs and fire the reactive armor before Impact, but whatelse ??

A helicopter can gain height take a look out to 10km and then attack the targets, but a tank would be never able to look over a slope or pop up over a forrest. Therefore the engagement range will always be limited to the line of sight.

So plz explain to me the use of a MMW on a MBT.

RE: MMW radar.

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 12-04-02 AT 03:36 AM (GMT)]The main problem is their short range… Arena and Drozd only look out to about 200m, while the radar for the Ah-64 and the arbalet radar for the Mi-28 and Ka-52 have a max range of less than 10km.

(This is not through lack of power or antenna size but absorbtion of these frequencies by atmosphere and moisture. This also effects jamming range. Very small sidelobes means detection… yes… up close, jamming… not very practical.)

Active jamming might be more counter productive than say shielding with RAM or simply side skirts on tanks that hide the wheels and something to hide the shape of the turret and gun.

(Much like radio height finders for helos and aircraft are of such low power and short range that attempting to jam them is not practical).

RE: MMW radar.

Garry,

I am sure if the system proliferated itself on the battlefield even more so than now, effective counter-measures would be developed against it.

Regards, Glenn.

RE: MMW radar.

The MMW radar is already on the battlefield in the form of the AH-64D helocopter.
MMW radar is not like other radar wavelengths and is not suitable for ARM attack. ESM and ECM is aparantly difficult in these frequencies.
As I said Arena and Drozd both also use MMW radar, as does the krisanthema ground based system.

“Not to mention its a pretty effective way of announcing your presence on a battlefield and attracting interested parties with ATGWs. “

That reminds me… a British grunt called their portable anti tank missile an “attention getter for tanks”.

MMW radar.

Not to mention its a pretty effective way of announcing your presence on a battlefield and attracting interested parties with ATGWs. Not good. TI systems are passive, radar is active. MMW radar Development of this kind on a large scale would see AFVs of the future fitted with their own array of ECM/ESM sensors to beat it, meaning more weight and more cost to devleop and build. Is that necessary?

Regards, Glenn.

RE: Armour

MMW radar does not provide an image quality good enough for identification that is 100%. It can count wheels and detect a gun, but it can’t tell if that gun is real or a piece of metal just sitting in place. Lean 6 tank wheels against a tractor and you might get a convincing tank from some angles.

Russian tanks do have a problem with ammo storage. The way they brew up with a penetrating hit is not good. One current prototype (Black Eagle) shows the use of turret mounted bustle auto loader. This is probably because of the ammo for the gun used is probably one piece and rather long so the standard auto loaders can’t load them.
The other prototype I have seen an image of shows all the crew in the front hull with an external gun. Presumably the ammo is seperated from the crew by armoured bulkhead, so this would solve the problem as well. The turret bustle version can be retrofitted to earlier tanks.. (I have seen a T-55M with a turret bustle autoloader… or perhaps just a mockup of one) but as they include modern sights and FCS then I don’t think they will sell very well as the cost would be a large fraction of a new tank like a T-90.
So a solution is there but money is still the problem.

RE: Armour

[i] “Are there any practical, economic or technological reasons why MMW radar cannot replace (or supplement) TI? Apart from tactical considerations (i.e. radar is an active sensor while TI is passive) I cannot see any reasons – besides, how many tanks are fitted with RWR? Apologies, this is not my field so I’m not entirely certain whether these questions are pointless or not – bear with me.” [/i]

I think cost is a major factor, as well as maintnance/durability concerns and the fact that latest generation TI sensors can seemingly do pretty much all that can be done given the limits of current tank weaponry and employment. Also, current trends point toward increased digitally linked offboard sensing and away from large scale, long ranged mechanized battles where the capabilities of a MMW aided FCS might come into play.

RE: Armour

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 10-04-02 AT 02:58 PM (GMT)]Check out the following sights for info’ on Russian Thermal Imaging Systems:

http://milparade.com/1996/18/42-45.htm

http://army-technology.com/projects/t-80

for the latter site visit the industrial projects screen and click on main battle tanks, you will then be given a list of vehicles including the T-80U. Russian TI as I said before is limited purely for economic reasons, since the US success against Iraqi tanks in “Desert Storm” however Moscow has placed greater emphesis on TI technology. I am not saying they lagg behind in tech’ compared to the US in TI tech’, but their tank designs are equal to anyone else.

RE: Armour

Are there any practical, economic or technological reasons why MMW radar cannot replace (or supplement) TI? Apart from tactical considerations (i.e. radar is an active sensor while TI is passive) I cannot see any reasons – besides, how many tanks are fitted with RWR? Apologies, this is not my field so I’m not entirely certain whether these questions are pointless or not – bear with me.

RE: Armour

Flanker,

Everything I have read (and every one to whom I have spoken) has indicated that the Russians are still about 5 to 10 years behind the west as far as TI technology is concerned. If you have information I hadn’t heard before I would very much appreciate it if you shared it on this forum.

RE: Armour

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 10-04-02 AT 12:31 PM (GMT)]Ink, at the bottom of your post you suggest the Russians are “famously” behind the West. The “Shtora” kinda puts them up there with the best as far as defence is concerned and as far as TI, T-80Us are being equipped (albeit in small numbers) with advanced TI equipment. The reason for the delay in development is purely cost.

RE: Armour

Flanker,

Re-read my post. Where did I say that the Russians were behind the west in tank design?

RE: Armour

Ink, who said the Russians were behind the West in tank design? You don’t still believe all the Cold War rubbish about Eastern tech’ which the US produced do you? In the past, Russia only exported its “Monkey models” to client states (tanks which were equipped with sub-standard systems compared to Russian service types, a bit like the F-15S being a down graded F-15E). For many years now, Russia has lead the way in many respects with tank and ICV design. Look at the BMP-1, nothing in the West was close to this design for many years. Now the BMP-3 is considered the best ICV in service. The T-72 is in widespread service and has many nations offering upgrades such as the “Moderna” from Slovakia. The T-80U is one of the best protected tanks in the world and can be fitted with Shtora EOD systems, Arena self defence systems, Kontact-5 ERA and can fire the “Reflex” anti-tank missile as standard. Also the T-80U has a more powerful turret than the MIA1. The Russian MSTA self-propelled gun is considered the best weapon of its type and the BTR-80 leads the way for APC vehicles. If anything Russia leads the world in armour technology!

RE: Armour

Part of the Arena and Drozd systems use MMW radar so in a sense they can already be fitted. There is mention of the next generation of Russian tanks (T-95, and Black Eagle) having Radar as well as TI and other channels of detection.
On the pictures and models I have seen there has been nothing like the antenna for the MMW radar for the Krisanthema, or the flat antennas used for Arena and Drozd.