A year ago designers from Azov militia started designing a “tank for urban combat”, commonly known as Azovets. The development has been funded by donations and crowd funding. This month the vehicle started the final testing.
Azovets has been the sibject of many jokes in Russia. It’s viceprime minister Dmitry Rogozin –famous for his comments- congratulated the designers because they had created a tank from dump containers.
In reality the project is much more serious than what it looks at first sight. The designers have experience in Lvov and Kharkov tank factories. Staff with combat experience in the Donetsk campaign have collaborated. The work has been carried out in a tractor factory that went bankrupt a few years ago and has been taken over by the militia.
Currently there are no official specs, but enough information is available to allow an analysys. The chassis is from a T-64, and a hull to accommodate the crew has been installed. Most sources state that crew is 4, but in the diagrams only 3 are shown.
The designers decided to eliminate driver’s periscopes as they are targeted by enemy snipers. They also create a weak spot in the armour, Driving and fighting is done using cameras. The commander will have a panoramic camera with a thermal sight.
The armament is integrated in 2 unmanned turrets. Each has a 23 mm gun, a 7.62 mm machine gun and Stugna/Korsar missiles. There are plan to install 2 UAVs.
Armour consists of “Nozh” ERA installed over the aluminium hull. On the front there are 2 layers. Engine is the same as in T-64BV, a 5TDF engine with 700 HP.
Crew position, only 3 can be seen.
After looking at the configuration, there are several aspects that could be improved –in my opinon-. The 23 mm guns are not optimal for urban warfare. Russian BMPT is equipped with 2×30 mm and it has been critisised. The new version is likely to have a single 57 mm model.
The 2 combat modules are not a bad idea. There have been a few comments comparing this setup with early T-26 variants, but in this case each one is controlled by an operator. Lack of thermal sights is an issue, although it is likely that they get an image from commander’s sight. In any case, these expensive devices have to be imported.
Rear light/camera.
The UAV does not seem very efficient. It is not clear who would operate them, and they are likely to overload the crew. The vehicle would have to carry them and field them. A BMS (Battle Management System) would be more effective.
The choice of AT missiles is intereting. Both are 100 mm, but the Stugna has twice the range, 5000 meters against 2500. No reason has been given for the installation. Maybe it is simply that they are alsready available.
