What do Russia's Turtle Tanks Indicate?

I’ve written very little about the on-the-ground conflict in Ukraine leaving that part to writers like Simplicius who concentrate on that aspect, but this new contraption that’s appeared as an excellent field expedient has motivated me to do this short essay. At the conflict’s outset, it was clear that a new combat paradigm would emerge related to drones of all types and their eventual abilities to select their own targets instead of being flown 100% of the time by a dedicated operator along with other uses related to supply, mine clearance and evacuation of wounded. Initially, field expedients to deal with what are called First Person View (FPV) drones were the erection of crude cages (cope cages) over the tops of all sorts of AFVs that provide a modicum of protection but not complete. AFV roofs are usually very thin armor-wise and thus a prime target site along with the rear deck just aft of the turret, and a great number of AFVs on both sides have been killed by hits in those places. Various Electronic Warfare (EW) instruments meant to disrupt FPVs have been tried, but none has proven 100% effective as there’s a tech race between EW devices and unjammable drone guidance systems usually employing some sort of Artificial Intelligence (AI). FPV drones are armed with various munitions depending on the amount of weight they can carry that range from the basic hand grenade to artillery shell warheads with a plethora that fit in between. Commenting elsewhere back in 2022, I advocated for some sort of armored umbrella/canopy which is what the cope cages mimic. But that wasn’t good enough, so some Russian tanker or field engineer decided to go further.

This Sputnik article has several videos of a turtle tank in action. Yes, the driver’s vision is very limited with reverse being completely blind, and there’s very little left-right travel for the turret and main gun, but the complete cover makes the tank immune to the most common FPV attacks using grenades or 81mm mortar shells. Also, infantry mounted atop the tank is also completely sheltered from above, although not from fire coming straight at the tank thus making the tank an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV), although off-loading mounted infantry wouldn’t be as rapid as a dedicated IFV. The tanks heavier frame also makes it capable of adapting the additional weight of its carapace without too much problem. I wouldn’t at all be surprised to see Russian BMPs (IFVs) fitted with carapaces, although their speed would be lowered and bogging in soft ground would also become an issue. Casualties from FPVs ought to drop dramatically, and that’s a very big consideration when Ukrainian troops lacking artillery only have FPVs to act in its place to defend against armored assaults.

Initially, full carapaces of the sort employed as a field expedient on the T-72 tank pictured will be adopted by militaries facing FPV drones globally as they make perfect sense and not just on tanks but IFVs too. Eventually, drones will be able to select their own targeting/impact point as the Russian Lancet is now able to do and fly into the underside of the carapace then detonating, although that will be on the much stronger front and turret armor. AFV designers may opt to thicken the topside armor so it can defeat most FPV drone payloads, although I’m sure those payloads will also increase. Infantry will now want to know where their carapaces are as they remain the primary targets/victims of FPVs which are very deadly when attacking trenches as they attack from directly overhead. Much effort’s put into trying to find the right mixture of EW methods to defeat/deter drones of all sorts, although self-targeting drones with some sort of limited AI like the Russian Lancet will continue to get keener as time passes.

What does this new contraption mean for the current conflict? It will give Russian assault teams much greater protection during the approach to their landing/dismounting points, which is something already being seen in combat. With the lack of artillery and defeat of FPV drones, Ukrainian troops lacking strong reliable anti-tank weapons—which is usually the case—will be overwhelmed and unable to defend their positions leading to rout retreats, surrender or casualties. And coordination with Russian aerospace forces for the delivery of very accurate glide bombs to defensive lines just prior to the arrival of assault teams means almost certain victory for Russian troops. New assault tactics are now being devised to take advantage of this new device which will greatly increase the stretch of open ground assaults from the current 1-2km to 5-10km depending on the depth/severity of minefields which become the only real hindrance to advance of a column of carapace equipped AFVs and other combined arms. NATO has nothing in its armories currently capable of deterring carapace clad AFVs aside from strong reliable anti-tank weapons of which it has some; but as with most every other thing, not nearly enough nor the capacity to increase production of those items most in demand.

*
*
*
Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!