T-80U and T-80UK thermal imaging questions and discussion.

[ThathumanHayden]

Hello everyone! When reading Wikipedia, I stumbled across this interesting piece of information:

"T-80U (1985): Further development with a better turret, Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour, improved gunsight, and 9M119 Svir missile system. In 1990 a new, 1,250-hp, engine was installed. Overall protection with Kontakt-5 against APFSDS/HEAT is 780/1,320 mm RHAe.^[7] 9K119M with antitank guided missile 9M119M installed since 1990. Some of the tanks in commander version (T-80UK) equipped with Shtora-1 APS, and thermal imaging night sight TO1-PO2T (detection range / target classification range = 6,400/4,600 meters at night). Basic thermal night sight of the T-80U is within the limits of 1,750/1,500 meters."

Unfortunately, the citation link is dead. As a result, I wanted to ask: Does anyone know anything about thermal imagers mounted on T-80s during the Cold War? Unfortunately, Zaloga's excellent book about the T-80 only mentioned thermal imagers in a photo of the T-80U's gunner and commanders positions, with no reference to date or frequency. My understanding is that the Soviets finished development of the "Agava" thermal imager in 1982 or 1983, but it was never fielded before the USSR's collapse as production of the small electronics was deemed too expensive to warrant its widespread adoption.

So do you lot know anything about this? I know this equipment is outside the scope of CM Cold War, but I find this topic very interesting. Perhaps a future expansion will extend the time frame of the game. Any discussion is welcome. Thank you!

[Codreanu]

AFAIK Soviets did not have thermal imagers on any of their production tanks until right after the end of the Cold War. Agava-2 was added to some T-80UMs in the early '90s. This site mentions 1993 for the T-80UM but doesn't give a source: https://en.topwar.ru/139819-teplovizionnye-hroniki-chast-3.html

I see 1992 mentioned also.

[Amedeo]

As Codreanu said, no thermal imagers on Soviet production tanks during the Cold War. The fist tanks to ne so equipped were (or were intended to be) the command versions of the T-80U, that is the T-80UK but, even if some of them reached first line units just before the fall of the Soviet Union, it was at a time when the Cold War was over. So, even if the CMCW timeframe would be expanded to, say, 1989, by future modules, there's no chance to (realistically) see Soviet tanks with thermals in the game.

On the other hand, the USSR did trial some prototype thermal imagers during the late Cold War, here's the photo of a T-80B equipped with such a prototype:

Many years ago, a funny anecdote by colonel Murakhovskiy about these trials was reported on the TankNet forums. A Soviet tanker, showing his enthusiam after having used the new sight, basically said that thermal imagers were the best thing since sliced bread and asked his commander whether the Americans were working on something comparable. But, after the officer replied that thermal imagers were already standard issue on all new US tanks and IFVs, the tanker paled and became gloomy never to speak again.

Poor chap! 

[dbsapp]

Photo of one of the first Soviet thermals in 80s.

[Amedeo]

2 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

Photo of one of the first Soviet thermals in 80s.

Is that a BRDM?

[dbsapp]

17 minutes ago, Amedeo said:

Is that a BRDM?

Probably! seems like it.

[THH149]

9 hours ago, Amedeo said:

Is that a BRDM?

It would be dead now whatever it is!

[arkhangelsk2021]

On 1/18/2022 at 7:23 AM, ThathumanHayden said:

My understanding is that the Soviets finished development of the "Agava" thermal imager in 1982 or 1983, but it was never fielded before the USSR's collapse as production of the small electronics was deemed too expensive to warrant its widespread adoption.

Well, the Soviets have not been shy to invest in money when they think it's worth it - missile-armed tanks, gas turbine tanks, night vision, titanium hulled subs, all of which would demand the best available at the time. I think one of the big reasons is that ... the early thermal imagers just aren't that good, due to their very low number of elements.

This is what a M1 might look like through an optical sight with vertical FOV of 35 milliradians (~2 degrees) at 1000m:

Here's what it might look like in thermal. It's hot, so it's white, but we are now in grayscale:

A "Generation 0" sight (such as 1PN59) is said to use only 50 elements, so the vertical resolution is 50 pixels:

↑Despite the picture being maximally simplified and the tank is white to simulate how a tank pops out from its environs due to heat, does that even still look like a tank? It might be a good toy for specially trained recce troops, perhaps by making the straw even narrower. As a tank sight ... needs work.

↑This, with 100 lines, is about the level of a 1st generation tank sight. Agava-1 is said to be 100 lines. Leopard 2's first sight, EMES 15, would also be about this level (at 120 elements). Definitely getting better, but if it is say at 2000m, or the tank is hull down so its bottom is blocked, or you are thinking your target are much smaller and cooler infantrymen, or we degrade its contrast ratio by putting a real background behind it, put coverings on it to reduce its heat transmission ... etc, do you want to pay a substantial amount and look through 35 mrad straws for this?

↑Agava-2, at 256 elements. Ah, definitely becoming useful here. That's when the Soviets decided they finally had a viable tank sight ... but then the Soviet Union broke up.

That may well be the main differential point between NATO and the Soviets - whether to accept a resolution less than the 144p which is the crappiest resolution on Youtube or wait for 240p. I think NATO can accept the lower resolution because they are thinking they need to attack hot, mobile Soviet tanks and are willing to shoot at blobs that are only a bit better than a dot. The Soviets wanted something that can help them hunt down hull down tanks, small TOW jeeps and infantry.

[Amedeo]

2 hours ago, arkhangelsk2021 said:

That may well be the main differential point between NATO and the Soviets - whether to accept a resolution less than the 144p which is the crappiest resolution on Youtube or wait for 240p. I think NATO can accept the lower resolution because they are thinking they need to attack hot, mobile Soviet tanks and are willing to shoot at blobs that are only a bit better than a dot. The Soviets wanted something that can help them hunt down hull down tanks, small TOW jeeps and infantry.

Interesting points. However, it should be considered that a procedure used by M60A3 TTS gunners was to acquire potential targets with the thermal sight at 3x magnification and then switch to the 8x daylight mode to identify them. Whit such a technique, the usefulness of even a crappy (in terms of resolution) TS would have been enhanced.

Of course, I'm not saying that the US Army fielded crappy thermal and then was forced to use them in conjunction with day sights (the AN/AVS-2 thermal on the M60A3 TTS was even better, in terms of resolution, than the one fitted on the original M1), I'm saying that even a poor TS can be useful in the field. I agree, however, that even this limited usefulness might not justify the expense of equipping thousands of tanks with them - especially if a better solution is already in the works.

[dbsapp]

10 hours ago, arkhangelsk2021 said:

Well, the Soviets have not been shy to invest in money when they think it's worth it - missile-armed tanks, gas turbine tanks, night vision, titanium hulled subs, all of which would demand the best available at the time. I think one of the big reasons is that ... the early thermal imagers just aren't that good, due to their very low number of elements.

This is what a M1 might look like through an optical sight with vertical FOV of 35 milliradians (~2 degrees) at 1000m:

Here's what it might look like in thermal. It's hot, so it's white, but we are now in grayscale:

A "Generation 0" sight (such as 1PN59) is said to use only 50 elements, so the vertical resolution is 50 pixels:

↑Despite the picture being maximally simplified and the tank is white to simulate how a tank pops out from its environs due to heat, does that even still look like a tank? It might be a good toy for specially trained recce troops, perhaps by making the straw even narrower. As a tank sight ... needs work.

↑This, with 100 lines, is about the level of a 1st generation tank sight. Agava-1 is said to be 100 lines. Leopard 2's first sight, EMES 15, would also be about this level (at 120 elements). Definitely getting better, but if it is say at 2000m, or the tank is hull down so its bottom is blocked, or you are thinking your target are much smaller and cooler infantrymen, or we degrade its contrast ratio by putting a real background behind it, put coverings on it to reduce its heat transmission ... etc, do you want to pay a substantial amount and look through 35 mrad straws for this?

↑Agava-2, at 256 elements. Ah, definitely becoming useful here. That's when the Soviets decided they finally had a viable tank sight ... but then the Soviet Union broke up.

That may well be the main differential point between NATO and the Soviets - whether to accept a resolution less than the 144p which is the crappiest resolution on Youtube or wait for 240p. I think NATO can accept the lower resolution because they are thinking they need to attack hot, mobile Soviet tanks and are willing to shoot at blobs that are only a bit better than a dot. The Soviets wanted something that can help them hunt down hull down tanks, small TOW jeeps and infantry.

Great pic!

To build up:

M1 thermal sight modelled in Steel Beasts. You can see one t-62 in the open and one behind bushes at the distance of 1800 meters.

Optical sight:

Concerning Soviet Agava thermal sight. The sight has successfully passed the tests, more than 50 devices were made, but it was not accepted into service. The official reason was not announced, the Army mentioned small vertical field of view. But, as the developers argued, the true reason possibly was military bosses were afraid that field units were not ready to work with sophisticated helium equipment. 

 

Edited February 13, 2022 by dbsapp

[Halmbarte]

Everything has a cost, even in a command economy like that of the Soviet Union. 

If the Sov decided to upgrade all their tanks with thermal sights, what new equipment would they have to forego or other upgrade would need to be canceled? 

With hindsight not upgrading to thermals was a mistake, but it wasn't nearly as obvious at the time. The NATO countries felt that they were behind in numbers of tanks and were going for a qualitative edge to offset Soviet numbers. The NATO countries could also leverage the West's strengths in electronics manufacturing to make each thermal sight made a smaller chunk of the available GPD. 

H