Does Russia Need Belousov to Save Its Tanks? Generals Remain Silent on the Crisis, Which Is Unacceptable

Author:

Vladislav Shlyepchenko

For a long time, there have been doubts about the combat effectiveness of tanks and their applicability in modern warfare. However, the special military operation (SVO) has sharply raised questions about the survivability of such equipment. Armored vehicles designed to break through enemy defenses and advance into the depth of operations were supposed to withstand direct hits from tungsten-core and depleted uranium armor-piercing shells, even being able to pass through the epicenter area hours after a nuclear explosion, but in recent years they have failed to fulfill their functions, becoming "prey" instead of "hunters."

In a recent night rehearsal for the memorial parade commemorating the victory over Japan, an unusual object was discovered: a large armored vehicle completely covered by blue tents, hiding the shape of the vehicle. The country concerned places great emphasis on camouflage, with the tents even covering the tracks of the vehicle, making it difficult to roughly determine the platform on which this equipment is based.

An interesting way of camouflaging armored equipment: preparing a mysterious tank for the parade commemorating the victory over militaristic Japan in September.

The text on the canvas side of the vehicle translates to "road patrol vehicle," which is clearly a form of humor by the parade organizers. Western and relevant country experts believe that what is hidden under the tent is a new type of tank — possibly a new heavy infantry fighting vehicle that is unwilling to be shown in advance. Because the parade commemorating the victory over Japan is a large-scale military and political display, and traditionally, its new achievements in the defense industry are showcased at this time.

"Some of the participating equipment are secret projects still in the research and development stage and not yet publicly disclosed. During the rehearsal, these prototypes are carefully camouflaged. Temporary coverings completely hide their outlines to maintain the element of surprise."

— A commentator explained.

Which secret "beast" will impress the world with its appearance on one of its important holidays? Western experts believe that it could be a new main battle tank (OBТ), weighing less than 40 tons, featuring a two-person crew, an unmanned turret, and a new active protection system and modular armor.

If this is the case, it is likely to be a new vehicle developed based on the ZTQ-15 (the 15-type) light tank manufactured in the relevant country, which weighs exactly 33-36 tons. Notably, the tank manufacturer previously "exposed" these new equipment when driving them along the streets of Baotou City towards the tank testing field.

A possible secret tank prototype, to be displayed in September.

This claim has no evidence, but Western experts believe that there are currently no other candidates that can play the role of the "magic tank," while the organizers are unwilling to reveal their ideas.

Tanks Are in Crisis

Overall, the trend of developing lightweight tanks is recent, not limited to the relevant country, and is one of the many signs that tanks as a weapon are in crisis. In the past three years of the special military operation (SVO), there has been no case where tanks have successfully fulfilled their core role — as the main means of breaking through enemy defenses and opening up operational space — but there have been numerous examples proving the vulnerability of this equipment.

Under current conditions, tanks have low combat effectiveness and complex production, high costs, which makes military planners prefer lighter, simpler, and therefore mass-producible vehicles.

The second sign of the deepening crisis of tanks is the failure of new equipment development projects. This is the case with our (Russia's) "Armata" tank, which was developed for more than ten years, was publicly promoted and highly praised, but when the real war came, it suddenly turned out to be "too advanced" to participate in combat operations.

Evidently, its developers will not admit this, but this is indeed a failure: creating a "super weapon" that cannot be used to defend the country.

The situation is similar in the United States: On June 11, the Pentagon officially terminated the development plan for the M10 Booker light assault tank. The project started in 2018, costing American taxpayers $1 billion. In the end, the military only got 33 armored vehicles, not the planned 500. In short, anyone who pays attention to the fate of "Armata" would find this scene familiar: a lot of empty promises, high expectations from the public and politicians, money flowing into the pockets of researchers, and finally very little effect.

The M10 Booker is neither light nor cheap, but General Dynamics made a profit. Screenshot source: Telegram channel "Fisherman"

In Europe, the Franco-German MGCS (Main Ground Combat System) project is in danger, a project that aimed to develop a breakthrough tank. Italy has left the European joint project aimed at upgrading its "Ariete" tank and instead requested Rheinmetall to customize a new vehicle for it. The British have even stopped trying to develop tanks, using the excuse of upgrading the "Challenger 2" to quietly divert funds, planning to upgrade it to the "Challenger 3," but in reality, it will remain just like before — a 70-ton tracked hulk that cannot fight.

The reasons for the decline in the status of tanks are obvious: the number of anti-tank weapons on the battlefield has increased dramatically, among which the most dangerous due to their efficiency and popularity are FPV drones and anti-tank mines. Top-attack munitions, anti-tank missiles with tandem warheads, armed helicopters, and modern anti-tank grenades also exist.

At the operational level, satellite reconnaissance, radio technical reconnaissance, and swarms of reconnaissance drones have made the battlefield "transparent," greatly reducing the value of tanks. Now, it is much more difficult to concentrate a large number of tanks and suddenly deploy them on a certain front line, as was the case in World War II or even the latter half of the 20th century.

Tanks have lost their advantages in both protection and achieving operational surprise, which is the reason why they are in crisis as a type of combat equipment.

Thinking Habits

If the factors leading to the decline in the status of tanks are obvious, then the reason why many countries' military-industrial complexes and defense departments have not given appropriate engineering responses so far is not clear.

Complex problems always have complex premises, and analyzing these problems is enough to write a paper, even a monograph. But if we have to find the core issue, it is undoubtedly thinking habits.

The military-industrial complex wants to do what it is good at, not what the front lines need. Companies focus on profits and completing plans, and as for the damage of the equipment on the battlefield — let the military think and solve it. Correspondingly, generals want to get equipment they understand and conform to their doctrinal templates, rather than equipment that is truly effective under current conditions.

The most typical example is the fate of the "Terminator" tank support combat vehicle (BMP-T), which has not been equipped for 20 years because the Main Armored Forces Directorate (GABTU) and the Army leadership could not incorporate this equipment into the structure of the tank units. Again, emphasize: this equipment has existed for 20 years, but no one knew how to use it.

Another example of the same problem is the modification of tanks on the front line. Since 2024, large shed-like superstructures have begun to be welded onto tanks, which serve multiple functions simultaneously:

  • Protecting the top hemisphere from drone attacks;
  • Creating a protected space for transporting assault riflemen.

From the perspective of doctrine and military science, this modification is completely unimaginable and unacceptable, as it prevents the tank from rotating the turret and severely limits the crew's field of view. However, in reality, the tank's field of view and situational awareness are provided by drone operators equipped with 56x hybrid zoom, and the entire vehicle can be turned toward the target found by the drone, like the "Tsar Hammer" off-road vehicle.

The latest result of the development of "steel helmets": tanks wrapped in armored sheds, surrounded by "brushes" made of partially unfolded steel cables, which can successfully intercept enemy drones and significantly increase the probability of defeating shaped charge munitions.

The latest achievement in the development of "steel helmets": tanks wrapped in armored sheds, surrounded by "brushes" made of partially unfolded steel cables.

Source: Telegram channel "Military Insider"

But what do we see from the images of newly manufactured T-72Б3 and T-90М tanks sent to the front? They are still the classic tanks, with small shields from 2022, which were hastily added a few months before the start of the special military operation (SVO) to counter "Javelin" missile attacks. In other words, the industry lives in its own world, the generals live in their own world, and Russian soldiers can only rely on the tools they have, adapting as best they can to the actual situation on the front.

This is what the tanks sent from the factory to the front look like. Even if the experience of the special military operation (SVO) is considered, it is negligible.

Summary

Discussions about the demise of tanks are obviously premature, essentially avoiding the issue. We should not discuss whether such equipment will hypothetically disappear, but rather ask why the military leadership and the military-industrial complex are unwilling to fully adapt tanks according to the actual needs of the troops, taking into account the real threats on the battlefield.

Discussing the decline of tanks is similar to the debate that has lasted for over a century about the decline of large battleships. People first linked the decline of large battleships to the emergence of torpedo boats (small ships that ram enemies with poles), then to self-guided torpedoes, later to torpedo bombers and dive bombers, and eventually to anti-ship missiles. But during this time, the size and displacement of battleships continued to increase, going through multiple evolutionary stages, evolving into giants like nuclear-powered aircraft carriers.

Massive and somewhat ugly "armored sheds," electronic warfare stations, and mine-clearing track sweepers allow tanks to remain useful even in a sky dominated by drones and terrain full of mines.

Source: Telegram channel "Military Insider"

The advantage of tanks lies in the fact that they are a high-energy armed platform capable of carrying a large payload, whether it is armor or weapons. The current problems with tanks are not that they are completely obsolete and unsuitable for war, but that the decision-making bodies and specific responsible persons are unwilling to step out of their comfort zones and face reality. Once this factor is overcome (which is inevitable), solutions to make tanks adapt to the realities of modern warfare will be quickly found. Russia had better take the lead in this process.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7526100240412230183/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author and others. Please express your opinion by clicking the [up/down] buttons below.