Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Share

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sat Apr 25, 2015 8:20 am

    From Otvaga






    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Apr 25, 2015 8:48 am

    victor1985 wrote:Question: a powerfull elsctromagnet coulx deviate a spike projectile? Although i know thsy are made from uranium.

    No so far.

    The most practical means available today is using high explosive, detonated on top of the projectile to deflect it to the ground.

    I

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 25, 2015 2:31 pm

    user interface should be in the visor as augmented reality with short range radio transmitters inside the crew compartment, when crew are outside short range transmitters can still feed the data into their visor. a series of cameras on the outside should give the crews 360 degree visibility, and there should be 2 machine guns / grenade launchers that can be slaved to the sight of a crew member on a need basis for close in fire support.

    imagine just looking around inside the tank and see the entire world on the outside. shout "grenade launcher" and the independent grenade launcher is slaved to your head movement and shout fire (or press on a button to get it to shoot at whatever you look at.

    That's how it should work! same system can be installed on IFVs for example, and even on UGVs with directional laser control.

    I agree, and I suspect... looking at the EO ports on the Ka-52 and Mi-28N that they will also have a virtual external view for the pilot to enable an excellent unobstructed view of around the vehicle...

    Remember the three crew positions in all the new vehicles is unified... so one position could be for the gunner, the commander, or the driver... they can actually change roles without changing seats, so full external virtual view for all three crew positions is likely... and that is for all vehicles.

    What do You think, why there is a gap there and why it's not filled?

    That area... is mostly armour from the side... if you consider the front and top will be 30cm thick or more, there is likely a piece of NERA not yet fitted.

    The rounded box on the top right of the turret is shaped like the independently aimed smoke launcher on the T-15. I'm certain that's what it is.

    Or it could be the commanders panoramic sight with remote weapons mounts to allow the commander to engage targets rapidly as they appear....

    Question: a powerfull elsctromagnet coulx deviate a spike projectile? Although i know thsy are made from uranium.

    Likely not rapidly enough to have a serious effect on its performance.

    [qote]it's sure that the boxes at the rear of T-14 are APU? one of them at least... what is the other one? Rear armour seems very weak, like 50mm steel...[/quote]

    50mm would stop HMG fire... which would make it as strong as the armour fitted to any other MBT.

    This is probably the APU.

    The engine of the Armata is X shaped and likely has two exhausts...

    An APU might use one or both of those exhausts as well of course.



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2507
    Points : 2640
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  kvs on Sat Apr 25, 2015 2:37 pm

    victor1985 wrote:Question: a powerfull elsctromagnet coulx deviate a spike projectile? Although i know thsy are made from uranium.

    This is the mythical magnetic shield. The problem is that the magnetic field cannot be configured dynamically to have the
    geometry to protect from an incoming metal projectile. The projectile will develop a strong magnetic field itself so there
    will be attraction and not just repulsion for any initial configuration of the defense "magnetic force field".

    This article implies a solution is possible:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7487740/Star-Trek-style-force-field-armour-being-developed-by-military-scientists.html

    I will have to see it to believe it. It will never be as effective as in sci-fi.

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sat Apr 25, 2015 3:11 pm

    kvs wrote:
    victor1985 wrote:Question: a powerfull elsctromagnet coulx deviate a spike projectile? Although i know thsy are made from uranium.

    This is the mythical magnetic shield.   The problem is that the magnetic field cannot be configured dynamically to have the
    geometry to protect from an incoming metal projectile.   The projectile will develop a strong magnetic field itself so there
    will be attraction and not just repulsion for any initial configuration of the defense "magnetic force field".  

    This article implies a solution is possible:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/7487740/Star-Trek-style-force-field-armour-being-developed-by-military-scientists.html

    I will have to see it to believe it.   It will never be as effective as in sci-fi.

    I think the Telegraph has heard of one of the Russian electromagnetic or electrical armor technologies and then has characteristically got confused about the technology and has falsely credited their confused version to the "Defence Science and Technology Laboratory".

    "andrei_bt" has a lot of information about electromagnetic and electrical armor technologies, by the way.

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 986
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sat Apr 25, 2015 6:56 pm

    Is it true the current gun on the shown T-14s is a mockup. If it isn't the gun itself looks quite tiny compared to large size of the platform. However I do hope the 2A82 is actually longer than the 2A46. Being 125/51 like the ZTZ-99 is IMO optimal.

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 986
    Points : 1139
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Sat Apr 25, 2015 7:00 pm

    I don't know of it's posted already and I apologise if it is but I found a pretty nice video realistically showing the T-14 component layout piece by piece based on what we know so far. It also shows the armata chassis can hydraulically elevate just like the BMD. Will this offer a significant advantage for a nonairborne vehicle?

    Is it true as according to the schematic that the bustle will hold shells for the main gun? If yes then it's dissapointing because it disproves that the T-14 will have an autocannon.




    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sat Apr 25, 2015 7:08 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:I don't know of it's posted already and I apologise if it is but I found a pretty nice video realistically showing the T-14 component layout piece by piece based on what we know so far. It also shows the armata chassis can hydraulically elevate just like the BMD. Will this offer a significant advantage for a nonairborne vehicle?

    Is it true as according to the schematic that the bustle will hold shells for the main gun? If yes then it's dissapointing because it disproves that the T-14 will have an autocannon.




    Apprently someone compiled it into video.

    You can actually see those images at Otvaga forum. Anyway it's a mere speculations, nothing so far available at T-14's autoloader layout or turret designs.


    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat Apr 25, 2015 7:34 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:Is it true the current gun on the shown T-14s is a mockup. If it isn't the gun itself looks quite tiny compared to large size of the platform. However I do hope the 2A82 is actually longer than the 2A46. Being 125/51 like the ZTZ-99 is IMO optimal.
    except that your vanilla 2a46 is already 125/48. i doubt youd get any noticeable performance increase with addition of mere 3 calibre lengths.

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:I don't know of it's posted already and I apologise if it is but I found a pretty nice video realistically showing the T-14 component layout piece by piece based on what we know so far. It also shows the armata chassis can hydraulically elevate just like the BMD. Will this offer a significant advantage for a nonairborne vehicle?
    i dont see the need for it act like a lowrider - and i think theyd prefer not to indulge in expensive trivialties, or any at all.
    KomissarBojanchev wrote:
    Is it true as according to the schematic that the bustle will hold shells for the main gun? If yes then it's dissapointing because it disproves that the T-14 will have an autocannon.
    well the turret is still under (literal) wraps so we must take this as just another speculation, same as an autocannon. not to mention it has a lot of wrongs init - namely the 3 hatches.

    KoTeMoRe
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3547
    Points : 3582
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sat Apr 25, 2015 7:39 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:I don't know of it's posted already and I apologise if it is but I found a pretty nice video realistically showing the T-14 component layout piece by piece based on what we know so far. It also shows the armata chassis can hydraulically elevate just like the BMD. Will this offer a significant advantage for a nonairborne vehicle?

    Is it true as according to the schematic that the bustle will hold shells for the main gun? If yes then it's dissapointing because it disproves that the T-14 will have an autocannon.




    How does it disprove that the T-14 will have an unmanned turret with self-loading mechanism?


    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Zivo on Sat Apr 25, 2015 8:21 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    Or it could be the commanders panoramic sight with remote weapons mounts to allow the commander to engage targets rapidly as they appear....

    Smoke grenade dispenser in red, RWS in yellow.





    There's going to be very few tailor made pieces, it's all going to be mass produced and simply bolted-on.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Zivo on Sat Apr 25, 2015 9:22 pm

    Maybe... dunno


    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec on Sun Apr 26, 2015 12:08 am

    Did you do that photoshop? Seems like a reasonable guess

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Zivo on Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:15 am

    Cyberspec wrote:Did you do that photoshop? Seems like a reasonable guess

    No, from otvaga. But if I were to make a speculative rendering, it would look similar, but mine would have APS tubes around the turret ring with panoramic cameras just above the tubes.

    victor1985
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 852
    Points : 901
    Join date : 2015-01-02

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  victor1985 on Sun Apr 26, 2015 8:33 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    victor1985 wrote:Maibe a sistem like the mouse trap would work against spikes.

    Lol...no it wouldn't the momentum would break the tank not the APFSDS.
    Point was that the apfsds maibe would be deviated. Ofcourse depend of the speedbof mouse trap. Also notice that speed convert to mass so a mouse trap that move whit 1 meter per 0,01 second will deviate the apfsds

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:31 pm


    Smoke grenade dispenser in red, RWS in yellow.

    Is it a coincidence that the smoke grenade dispenser you mark in red seems to be elevated to the same angle as the main gun... could it be a gunners sight that is coaxially mounted with the main gun to allow shots at aerial targets?

    I would agree that the yellow marked item is likely a combined pano sight and RWS though.

    Is it true as according to the schematic that the bustle will hold shells for the main gun? If yes then it's dissapointing because it disproves that the T-14 will have an autocannon.

    If they rejected the Burlak upgrade of the T-90 because turret bustle main gun ammo stored above the turret ring is too vulnerable to enemy fire... why would they store ammo in the armata above the turret ring exposed to enemy fire?

    That video proves nothing... I could have made it and put laser cannons on it... Russia Strong russia


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:36 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    Smoke grenade dispenser in red, RWS in yellow.

    Is it a coincidence that the smoke grenade dispenser you mark in red seems to be elevated to the same angle as the main gun... could it be a gunners sight that is coaxially mounted with the main gun to allow shots at aerial targets?

    I would agree that the yellow marked item is likely a combined pano sight and RWS though.

    Is it true as according to the schematic that the bustle will hold shells for the main gun? If yes then it's dissapointing because it disproves that the T-14 will have an autocannon.

    If they rejected the Burlak upgrade of the T-90 because turret bustle main gun ammo stored above the turret ring is too vulnerable to enemy fire... why would they store ammo in the armata above the turret ring exposed to enemy fire?

    That video proves nothing... I could have made it and put laser cannons on it... Russia Strong russia

    Because from the little scale models of Armata turret compared to the very slim turret shape and the ammunition/storage bustle on several pictures and videos seems far to slim. So my assumption and some others do, that the ammunition bustle like turret lacks applique armor NERA and ERA similiar to chinese ZTZ-99A2.


    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Regular on Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:33 pm

    What im really intersted is how fast it accelerate and how fast is it's reverse speed.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:35 pm

    Regular wrote:What im really intersted is how fast it accelerate and how fast is it's reverse speed.

    Since it has automatic gearbox it should know have much more speed and acceleration in both directions, not like manual shifting and only one speed for reverse.

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Regular on Sun Apr 26, 2015 3:52 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Regular wrote:What im really intersted is how fast it accelerate and how fast is it's reverse speed.

    Since it has automatic gearbox it should know have much more speed and acceleration in both directions, not like manual shifting and only one speed for reverse.
    Yes, it's said that automatic transmission will even improve maneuverability automatically handling gears for needed turn ratio. X engine of Armata is very promising too. And if it does have suspension elevation like BMD, then I can imagine would be perfect in hull down position.


    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1207
    Points : 1234
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Apr 26, 2015 4:05 pm

    from otvaga:




    Dima
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1035
    Points : 1050
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Dima on Sun Apr 26, 2015 6:30 pm

    collegeboy16 wrote:from otvaga:

    Its not the official ones, right?

    Like the T-50 to Su-27......Armata in flesh and soul is Russian to the core. The only tank it resembles is Russian. Also with that outer shell lightened I get the feel of a T-90... thumbsup

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  TR1 on Sun Apr 26, 2015 7:06 pm

    Regular wrote:What im really intersted is how fast it accelerate and how fast is it's reverse speed.

    Don't worry, its not anemic like every soviet MBT before it.

    Transmission is not stone age anymore.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  TR1 on Sun Apr 26, 2015 9:54 pm

    http://topwar.ru/index.php?do=lastcomments&userid=60226

    Intersting info from Alex, overall a relatively reliable "insider":

    -152mm WILL be on the tank, but not right away. And it will be electrochemical, and has already been financed by the MOD.
    -Tanks are not final products, half of the ones already made will be sent to Kubinka to be flogged the other back to UVZ. This includes the T-15.
    -Protection.....make of this what you will, but I just translating what he said:
    -traditional ERA has become outdated in terms of potential
    -instead they will use 'electro, plasma polymers, graphene" <--------anyone with a background should comment here.
    -APS will be very advanced, multi-shot, with automatic reloading.
    -Electrical transmission
    -Claims crew in the next 5-6 years will be cut down to 2- FOR SURE.
    -45mm has been chosen as firm replacement for 30mm- already has started testing with new rounds- YAY
    -Armata program so far has full funding, no sequester.

    Anyways yeah.
    The guy has generally been proven more right than GurKhan has in their big Armata debate....how much of the above will come to fruition I cannot say.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Apr 26, 2015 10:30 pm

    -instead they will use 'electro, plasma polymers, graphene" <--------anyone with a background should comment here.

    Sounds like sensetionalistic bullshit.

    Electronmagnetic armor isn't possible at this point, we lack the generator to even give us enough power, so there is no basis there. Russia does has compact electromagnetic generators but not enough power. If it is meant as an EMP field to be used to screw up electromagnetic and guided ammunition then it would be of limited use.

    -Plasma in theory great in practical terms unlikely to be seen in near future nor will it have anywhere near the performance of ERA. In theory Plasma armor, is nothing else but Tesla like coils vaporizing incoming projectiles, which is hard to get since the electric induced plasma needs specific power and time to have to affect the projectile which i doubt that the technology is that developed.

    -Graphene is one of the hardest materials and the lightest at the same time, we can artificial produce it but freaking expensive and in very low quantities, however it similiar to ceramic in that regard of how bridle it is.

    If that would be true, there wouldn't be Afghanistan APS with tubes on the Armata tank, if any of those "armors" would be true NII Stali wouldn't be developing Relikt and introducing it to vehicles.

    Sponsored content

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:55 am


      Current date/time is Sun Dec 04, 2016 4:55 am