At last week’s ARMY-2024 show, Russian state media reported that Arena-M Active Protection System is being installed on new T-90M tanks. While reports that tanks are obsolete may be premature, FPV Kamikaze drones having been destroying large number of their tanks with some sources claim FPVs now account for two-thirds of tank losses. Russia has to keep tanks back from the front line leaving a ‘no-tank zone’ up to ten kilometers deep, only advancing during assault – and still getting destroyed.
In theory the T-90M is already well protected with sophisticated layered armor combining metal, ceramics and composite material; its front armor is equivalent to almost three feet of solid steel. But drones rarely attack from the front and troops in the field have bolted on additional armor to cover weak spots, from simple roof screens (mockingly nicknamed ‘cope cages’) to shed-like armor superstructures on bizarre ‘turtle tanks.’ None of this has worked. Will active protection shield Russian tanks and let them roam freely again?
Enter The Arena
Historically tank armor has been ‘passive,’ providing protection just by being there, but this has been supplemented with ‘active’ armor which responds to a threat. In the 1980s Russia started adding explosive tiles to its tanks which disrupt a warhead when it hits the vehicle. Known as explosive reactive armor, these tiles are seen everywhere in this conflict (even on U.S.-supplied Abrams). Reactive armor reduces the effectiveness of shaped charge warheads, the type used by almost every anti-tank missile, rocket and grenade.
After the Chechen war in the 1990s when Russian tanks were decimated by light anti-tank weapons, they introduced another new concept, an active protection system or APS to detect and intercept incoming projectiles.
Known as Arena, the Russian APS comprises three elements: an array of radar sensors on the outside of the tank, a computer control system, and launch tubes or silos for interceptor rounds.
Once activated Arena automatically tracks incoming threats, specifically anything moving between 150-1500 mph. It filters out false targets including outgoing rounds and near misses which do not threaten the tank, as well as birds and small projectiles. When the threat approaches within 160 feet , the system launches an interceptor rocket.
The interceptors are arranged to provide 360-degree protection, with a total of 26 with overlapping fields of fire. The interceptor detonates close to the threat, detonating in a dense, directional spray of shrapnel claimed to be able to destroy any incoming missile.
One downside is that Arena creates a danger zone a hundred feet across which is hazardous for accompanying footsoldiers. The original Arena did not provide 360-degree coverage but was followed by Arena-M which provides protection from all angles including top-attack. The new version also fires two interceptors at a time to increase the chances of destroying threat and in 2021 the makers claimed it was proof against all Western anti-tank missiles including Javelin.
Following development, Arena was not installed on Russian tanks, apparently due to its high cost. It was offered for export but there were no takers.
In the meantime Israel took the APS concept and ran with it. The Trophy system, made by Rafeel, is described on the company’s website as ‘the World’s Only Operational Active Protection System.’ Trophy is installed on a variety of IDF tanks and is combat proven, having shown itself effective at stopping RPGs, guided missiles and other threats.
The U.S. Army has evaluated Trophy for enhanced protection of the M1 Abrams. They note that it adds about 7,200 pounds – around 3.5 tons –but provides hemispherical protection from a variety of threats even when the vehicle is on the move.
Arena Versus Drones
Arena’s makers, the Kolomna Design Bureau of Mechanical Engineering say they have updated the system to deal with the drone threats seen in Ukraine. This is necessary because earlier versions ignored anything slower than 150 mph, allowing FPVs or drone bombs through. The problem is how low to set the threshold, because FPVs can approach targets at walking pace.
The wide range of speeds, flight paths and configurations make it dangerous to let anything through. The system is likely to be susceptible to decoys as well as false positives and may be triggered by passing birds. Of course crews may leave the system turned off, but attacks frequently come when not expected. In at least one case a T-90M was hit by an FPV while sheltering inside a warehouse.
The system also has a limited supply of interceptors. The 26 rockets have overlapping coverage, but only a fraction are facing in each direction, and two are expended each time. Multiple drones coming from one angle will quickly exhaust the ammunition supply.
And Russian tanks are getting hit by a lot of FPVs. Earlier this year one Russian source said that in their sector 6-10 FPVs were launched at every vehicle. Another said they were seeing up to a dozen FPVs attacking each vehicle, while a third speaking in July said up to 30 drones were targeting one tank. Ukraine is stepping up its FPV production, aiming to produce a million drones this year and import a million more. Arena may be oversaturated as soon as it is deployed.
The other threat comes from drop drones, consumer quadcopters repurprosed as bombers. One might hover a few hundred feet overhead, outside the range of Arena’s interceptors, and drop a dozen golf balls wrapped in tinfoil to exhaust the missile supply.
Or a bomber might keep returning and dropping bombs until they get through the APS. They already do this with reactive armor; a video from earlier this year shows a persistent drone operator bombing a Russian tank with a reactive armor roof screen, blasting away one piece at a time. It took them ten drops to eventually destroy the tank. Another drone operator returned 17 times to complete the destruction of a bunker. When there is no effective counter-drone defence, it is just a matter of time before the drones score enough hits. At best an APS delays the inevitable.
The Future Of Armor?
In addition to Arena, ARMY-2024 also showed new T-90M add-on armor including what looks like rubber matting protecting the turret rear; this may also mask the thermal signature. Like other add-on armor, this is likely to succumb rapidly to multiple FPV strikes.
Arena-M should improve the T-90Ms chances of survival. It will not be infallible though. A video from Gaza appears to show Hamas drone successfully bombing an IDF Merkava tank, suggesting even the Trophy APS may fail to spot a threat, and the Russian system may be far less effective.
Ukraine has already captured at least three undamaged T-90Ms in its operation in Kursk, indicating that crews are not waiting around to find out what happens when the FPVs arrive. This suggests the real motive for the Arena announcement: to persuade tank crews they have a chance and are not driving to certain death. After all, similar announcement that Arena would be installed in T-90Ms was made eighteen months ago and nothing happened. Promises are cheaper than high-tech armor.
