Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Share

    Mike E
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2789
    Points : 2853
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Mike E on Sat May 30, 2015 2:09 am

    kvs wrote:
    Mike E wrote:Care to explain the ideology behind such a steel? I have no knowledge of today except for that the new "base" steel is 15% more efficient mass/strength wise.

    It's the same concept as carbon fibre composites.  Layers of fabric with alternating thread orientation fused in a resin.   Steel does not need
    the resin, but having the crystal structure of each steel layer be orientated in alternating directions produces the same mechanical effect as
    for carbon fibre.   The steel becomes a composite material with strength that its basic nature cannot provide.   Concrete and rebars are another
    type of composite where you get a material with properties that simple concrete could never have.

    This composite steel requires the knowhow how to cast steel with a preferential crystal orientation, which is not trivial.  It also requires
    this steel to be worked into thin sheets without losing its crystal coherence.   Finally these sheets have to be fused in a way that
    does not degrade the original crystal structure of the each sheet but at the same time is strong enough to produce a single thick
    sheet of super strong steel that does not come apart like filo pastry.   I am actually surprised they achieved this on a commercial
    scale and it is quite possible I am hallucinating all of this Smile

    It is interesting that the Japanese sword makers produced what amounts to high quality steel without actually having the recipe
    for producing the steel directly.   The smiths would pound the raw metal into ultra think layers stacked on each other.   The
    properties of these Japanese swords were very close to those made with Damask steel.    Of course, they were not producing the
    material I am talking about, but there is a hint of it.
    That sounds amazingly complex...thanks for the comprehensive answer. +1

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat May 30, 2015 2:54 am

    kvs wrote:
    It's the same concept as carbon fibre composites.  Layers of fabric with alternating thread orientation fused in a resin.   Steel does not need
    the resin, but having the crystal structure of each steel layer be orientated in alternating directions produces the same mechanical effect as
    for carbon fibre.   The steel becomes a composite material with strength that its basic nature cannot provide.   Concrete and rebars are another
    type of composite where you get a material with properties that simple concrete could never have.

    This composite steel requires the knowhow how to cast steel with a preferential crystal orientation, which is not trivial.  It also requires
    this steel to be worked into thin sheets without losing its crystal coherence.   Finally these sheets have to be fused in a way that
    does not degrade the original crystal structure of the each sheet but at the same time is strong enough to produce a single thick
    sheet of super strong steel that does not come apart like filo pastry.   I am actually surprised they achieved this on a commercial
    scale and it is quite possible I am hallucinating all of this Smile

    It is interesting that the Japanese sword makers produced what amounts to high quality steel without actually having the recipe
    for producing the steel directly.   The smiths would pound the raw metal into ultra think layers stacked on each other.   The
    properties of these Japanese swords were very close to those made with Damask steel.    Of course, they were not producing the
    material I am talking about, but there is a hint of it.
    namusan! those filthy gaijin ivans got hold of grorious nippon katana folding techniques!

    2SPOOKY4U
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 283
    Points : 300
    Join date : 2014-09-20

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  2SPOOKY4U on Sat May 30, 2015 3:10 am

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    kvs wrote:
    It's the same concept as carbon fibre composites.  Layers of fabric with alternating thread orientation fused in a resin.   Steel does not need
    the resin, but having the crystal structure of each steel layer be orientated in alternating directions produces the same mechanical effect as
    for carbon fibre.   The steel becomes a composite material with strength that its basic nature cannot provide.   Concrete and rebars are another
    type of composite where you get a material with properties that simple concrete could never have.

    This composite steel requires the knowhow how to cast steel with a preferential crystal orientation, which is not trivial.  It also requires
    this steel to be worked into thin sheets without losing its crystal coherence.   Finally these sheets have to be fused in a way that
    does not degrade the original crystal structure of the each sheet but at the same time is strong enough to produce a single thick
    sheet of super strong steel that does not come apart like filo pastry.   I am actually surprised they achieved this on a commercial
    scale and it is quite possible I am hallucinating all of this Smile

    It is interesting that the Japanese sword makers produced what amounts to high quality steel without actually having the recipe
    for producing the steel directly.   The smiths would pound the raw metal into ultra think layers stacked on each other.   The
    properties of these Japanese swords were very close to those made with Damask steel.    Of course, they were not producing the
    material I am talking about, but there is a hint of it.
    namusan! those filthy gaijin ivans got hold of grorious nippon katana folding techniques!

    Katanas actually suck and are overrated by pathetic nipponboos, the katana couldn't even handle chain mail.

    Since this is a tank thread, lets look at some Japanese tanks.

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2521
    Points : 2654
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  kvs on Sat May 30, 2015 3:20 am

    2SPOOKY4U wrote:
    collegeboy16 wrote:
    kvs wrote:
    It's the same concept as carbon fibre composites.  Layers of fabric with alternating thread orientation fused in a resin.   Steel does not need
    the resin, but having the crystal structure of each steel layer be orientated in alternating directions produces the same mechanical effect as
    for carbon fibre.   The steel becomes a composite material with strength that its basic nature cannot provide.   Concrete and rebars are another
    type of composite where you get a material with properties that simple concrete could never have.

    This composite steel requires the knowhow how to cast steel with a preferential crystal orientation, which is not trivial.  It also requires
    this steel to be worked into thin sheets without losing its crystal coherence.   Finally these sheets have to be fused in a way that
    does not degrade the original crystal structure of the each sheet but at the same time is strong enough to produce a single thick
    sheet of super strong steel that does not come apart like filo pastry.   I am actually surprised they achieved this on a commercial
    scale and it is quite possible I am hallucinating all of this Smile

    It is interesting that the Japanese sword makers produced what amounts to high quality steel without actually having the recipe
    for producing the steel directly.   The smiths would pound the raw metal into ultra think layers stacked on each other.   The
    properties of these Japanese swords were very close to those made with Damask steel.    Of course, they were not producing the
    material I am talking about, but there is a hint of it.
    namusan! those filthy gaijin ivans got hold of grorious nippon katana folding techniques!

    Katanas actually suck and are overrated by pathetic nipponboos, the katana couldn't even handle chain mail.

    Be that as it may, they were a big improvement on the raw material that they were made from. If they had gotten some
    real steel to work with they would have handled chain mail "rearry good".


    Since this is a tank thread, lets look at some Japanese tanks.

    Haha, ATF-4 transmission oil leak of epic proportions. How did they achieve this? Did they gouge out the bottom by plowing
    over a rock?


    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Werewolf on Sat May 30, 2015 4:20 am

    The catana myth...of cutting everything and even tanks.

    Catanas are sabres of a uncommon design. Sabres were not made to cut anything else but tissue and the ever very rare occuring armor in japanese history. Real armor on japense fighters and worriors like Samurai was even rarer then the often portraid Knights in plate armor, which was never the case big majority had no armor while the more lucky had Gambeson and even more lucky guys were issues with chainmail, however most had only helmet since head injuries were the biggest worry. In Japanese culture just like for a very long period of time armor was abscent in other regions depending on environmental situation were lot of quality iron was hard to come by or to expensive they kept going for centuries without anything that had any level of protection of plate armor or chainmail. Polish, Crimean Tartars, Turks, Cossacks and other Russian tribes, Indians and so on... all had a long history of designing Sabres to maximize cutting depth power with relative light sabres, because they never had actually necessity to cut through armor only soft meat. Lot of such sabres were designed as rider slashers, swords with good balance forward from the hilt to have more weight at the blade to improve cutting power when slashing downwards from a horse back which Polish,Tartars, Cossacks and so on had their entire culture based around horses and being worriors on horses. The only way how a sabre cut get through chainmail is by thrusting and Katanas have a very thick blade and are actually stiff unlike most Sabres, which gives it superior thrusting characteristics, but in tests it still not capable to pierce through chainmail. If you want get through chainmail either use a Rapier,estoc, Lightsaber (eve tho it is a stupid term because it is not a saber) or use Arrows or Crossbows which fired from Warbow were capable to pierce through such kind of armor.

    mutantsushi
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 285
    Points : 307
    Join date : 2013-12-11

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  mutantsushi on Sat May 30, 2015 6:10 am

    sorry, but Armata ERA + active defense will deflect any Katana blows.... OK enough... Off Topic

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Werewolf on Sat May 30, 2015 6:23 am

    mutantsushi wrote:sorry, but Armata ERA + active defense will deflect any Katana blows....   OK enough... Off Topic

    Even if the Katana sustains the ERA blast the wielder will look something like this.


    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat May 30, 2015 6:50 am

    alexZam wrote:Good news. Few T-14s are being transported somewhere. Probably, directly to regular army tank brigade for state trials. 
    goddamn the insides of those tanks are gonna smell like clorox after the soldiers play with them. Twisted Evil
    any ideas of when we shall see it firing soon?

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  max steel on Sat May 30, 2015 2:51 pm

    Russia's Mighty T-14 Armata Tank: Should America Be Worried?


    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-mighty-t-14-armata-tank-should-america-be-worried-12999

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1516
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat May 30, 2015 4:19 pm

    max steel wrote: Russia's Mighty T-14 Armata Tank: Should America Be Worried?  


    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-mighty-t-14-armata-tank-should-america-be-worried-12999


    do I get this wrong or after Germ,an s Israeli claim they are authors of Armata?
    This is particularly the case given that the Armata family is, like the Merkava it’s based on,


    and here´s where I stopped reading this pind@-cr@p


    Russia has plenty of time to work out these problems, but if problems develop with the Armata, then it could begin to look like the PAK FA. A year ago, the PAK FA looked like the most dangerous fighter in the world, tougher than the F-22 and cheaper to boot. Now, Russia is struggling to afford more than a token buy, and the Indian Air Force has grown exceedingly frustrated with production delays and shoddy construction.

    2SPOOKY4U
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 283
    Points : 300
    Join date : 2014-09-20

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  2SPOOKY4U on Sat May 30, 2015 4:53 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    max steel wrote: Russia's Mighty T-14 Armata Tank: Should America Be Worried?  


    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-mighty-t-14-armata-tank-should-america-be-worried-12999


    do I get this wrong or after Germ,an s Israeli claim they are authors of Armata?
    This is particularly the case given that the Armata family is, like the Merkava it’s based on,


    and here´s where I stopped reading this pind@-cr@p


    Russia has plenty of time to work out these problems, but if problems develop with the Armata, then it could begin to look like the PAK FA.  A year ago, the PAK FA looked like the most dangerous fighter in the world, tougher than the F-22 and cheaper to boot. Now, Russia is struggling to afford more than a token buy, and the Indian Air Force has grown exceedingly frustrated with production delays and shoddy construction.

    Based...on the Merkava?

    There are no words.

    And the Indians who are frustrated with the FGFA are free to continue on their own, they're bitching because they don't have 1/10th of the design,skill,production, and technological sophistication capability that Russia has, and they clearly expect Sukhoi to do all the work, all the meanwhile insulting the PAK-FA.

    And the notion that the PAKFA won't go into production is ridiculous at best. I can't believe people took the news of that order for a 12 plane testing batch as the full scale serial production order.

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2521
    Points : 2654
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  kvs on Sat May 30, 2015 5:00 pm

    You know, all these claims of we invented it first are proof that the T-14 is a real revolution in tank design. It has
    all these wankers really insecure and compensating with a frenzy of trash talk. Losers.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Werewolf on Sat May 30, 2015 5:31 pm

    Relying on Indian Press Bitching about russian technology like T-90, Mi-28/26/17/8 or PAK-FA is like relying on Ukrainian TV about information of what actually goes on in theor own country. Dishonest, lies and lobbyism nothing else.

    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1516
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat May 30, 2015 6:31 pm

    Werewolf wrote:Relying on Indian Press Bitching about russian technology like T-90, Mi-28/26/17/8 or PAK-FA is like relying on Ukrainian TV about information of what actually goes on in theor own country. Dishonest, lies and lobbyism nothing else.

    info-warfare. Strange enough Modi´s govt seem to be rather in favor of Russian equipment and rapprochement on general. Seems that journos and editor have ¨free grants¨ from Carnegie endowments or other saboteurs´ hatchery

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat May 30, 2015 6:32 pm

    Werewolf wrote:Relying on Indian Press Bitching about russian technology like T-90, Mi-28/26/17/8 or PAK-FA is like relying on Ukrainian TV about information of what actually goes on in theor own country. Dishonest, lies and lobbyism nothing else.

    It's called 'Paid News'.

    kvs
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2521
    Points : 2654
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  kvs on Sat May 30, 2015 6:37 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:Relying on Indian Press Bitching about russian technology like T-90, Mi-28/26/17/8 or PAK-FA is like relying on Ukrainian TV about information of what actually goes on in theor own country. Dishonest, lies and lobbyism nothing else.

    It's called 'Paid News'.

    India should be careful that it does not turn into another Ukraine. The Ukrainian public were f*cked up big time with paid news and other
    pro-NATO oligarch propaganda. India should impose draconian media influence laws. Paid news and analysis should be treated as the
    worst form of corruption.


    GunshipDemocracy
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1516
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat May 30, 2015 6:39 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:Relying on Indian Press Bitching about russian technology like T-90, Mi-28/26/17/8 or PAK-FA is like relying on Ukrainian TV about information of what actually goes on in theor own country. Dishonest, lies and lobbyism nothing else.

    It's called 'Paid News'.

    Free press´news is always about truth and values.
    Laughing Razz Laughing Razz Laughing Razz Laughing
    lol!

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3228
    Points : 3352
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Vann7 on Sat May 30, 2015 6:55 pm

    Mike E wrote:Care to explain the ideology behind such a steel? I have no knowledge of today except for that the new "base" steel is 15% more efficient mass/strength wise.

    It means that the new steel ,is 15% more stronger ,thanks to the way is prepared..
    So with the new steel ,they can have exactly the same protection in any previous tank..
    like T-72 or T-90.. but with 15% less weight.   Or make them with the same weight.. but
    15% more armor ,thanks to the stronger steel.

    One old trick ,to make stronger steel is its purity.. To heat it at very intense temperatures..
    and then remove any material impurity from it.. like residues of Iron or any other substance.

    THe other its hybrid steel composites .. mix it with new elements that made it stronger.

    So armata is effective  15% more stronger , 15% more protection even using the same weight
    of previous T-90 tank.. in real practice should be less than 15% ..because not all things in armata are made of that new enhanced steel ... but not sure.. it could be even a bit better if the
    non steel parts ,also have been improved its strengh/weight ratio.

    All said the weight of Armata can be misleading.. if compared with previous tanks.. because
    ARmata T-14 could be made to have the same weight of a T-90 ,and still have 15% stronger armor protection against kinetic sabot rounds. This is without using reactive defenses or any
    external defenses to the core armor of the tank.

    So probably the weight of armata should be increase by 15% if you want to compare it with previous tanks.. But it should be more ,because armata also use more armor in the body ,thanks to having a smaller turret.

    So if T-90 weight 48 tons.. And officially is said Armata weights 48.. then Armata should be comparable to a 55-58 tons tanks ,if it was using the older steel.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  max steel on Sat May 30, 2015 8:00 pm

    National Interest is not Indian media outlet its a western media outlet probably usa . I just shared their article on T-14 . You can look for more such military articles on National Interest . They have catchy headlines

    KoTeMoRe
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3565
    Points : 3600
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sat May 30, 2015 9:48 pm

    GunshipDemocracy wrote:
    max steel wrote: Russia's Mighty T-14 Armata Tank: Should America Be Worried?  


    http://nationalinterest.org/feature/russias-mighty-t-14-armata-tank-should-america-be-worried-12999


    do I get this wrong or after Germ,an s Israeli claim they are authors of Armata?
    This is particularly the case given that the Armata family is, like the Merkava it’s based on,


    and here´s where I stopped reading this pind@-cr@p


    Russia has plenty of time to work out these problems, but if problems develop with the Armata, then it could begin to look like the PAK FA.  A year ago, the PAK FA looked like the most dangerous fighter in the world, tougher than the F-22 and cheaper to boot. Now, Russia is struggling to afford more than a token buy, and the Indian Air Force has grown exceedingly frustrated with production delays and shoddy construction.

    NI is OK for a printed toilet paper. As it is virtual, it fails even that one task.

    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sat May 30, 2015 9:54 pm

    2SPOOKY4U wrote:
    Based...on the Merkava?

    There are no words.

    And the Indians who are frustrated with the FGFA are free to continue on their own, they're bitching because they don't have 1/10th of the design,skill,production, and technological sophistication capability that Russia has, and they clearly expect Sukhoi to do all the work, all the meanwhile insulting the PAK-FA.

    And the notion that the PAKFA won't go into production is ridiculous at best. I can't believe people took the news of that order for a 12 plane testing batch as the full scale serial production order.
    hehe, this is gold. sorry juice str0nk but the T-14's lineage does not include merkava. the family of vehicles based on similar chassis idea- nope, even merkava isnt unique. example is T-72/90 chassis- it has 5 spinoffs which are: BMPT series; tos-1 flamethrower; brem-1 recovery vehicle; imr-2 engineering vehicle; and mtu-72 bridgelayer. vs just 4 spinoffs of merkavas: Namer APC, Nemmera recovery vehicle, Sholef howitze and tankbulance. the wiki actually mentions 5, the one omitted is merkava LIC; which is just TUSK for merkava tanks, if they are referring to modularity, none of the merks can swap modules and swap roles- like say a tank replaces its turret with howitzer; and with regards to armor almost everyone and their dog uses modular armor principle nowadays.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3228
    Points : 3352
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Vann7 on Sat May 30, 2015 10:09 pm

    Omg ... this is big.. Shocked

    IRAQ denied M1A2 from US and bought instead T-72 B from RUssia..
    because the americans ones are less reliable than the Russian ones..?



    So much for Russian tanks being death traps and turrets blow out..and the abrams do it
    too..    lol1

    Now it cannot be claimed the US airforce "DEstroyed them" so no one can analize the tanks..
    since IRAQ have them..  Wink

    So much for TR1's claims of abram being "Combat tested" an the iraqui government says is not happy with its performance and not so good and saying the Russian ones are better?... lol1

    http://fortruss.blogspot.ca/2015/05/iraq-turns-down-us-abrams-tanks-in.html

    Well maybe the american exports really sucks big time.. but the T-72s Russia send
    are also export version. it also could be something about trust.. and price/performance ration
    being better for Russian T-72b tanks.

    One thing is really clear however.. the Tanks the US army faced in the 90s in IRAQ was first
    generation T-72s exports without night vision or modern electronics and munition , so pretty much useless to combat at night.. the new ones are far better and better protection ,munition and can combat at night..  

    THis is the reason why Russia should continue selling T-72s even if they will not use them.. and instead continue improving them.. but without breaking its price/permance balance ,so they are very accessible for Africa and Middle east.. they are also easy to repair and very low maintenance according to Syrian army which say they do the job.

    If you compare T-72 (~$1million) vs Abram ($10 million) in price alone. you could buy 10 x T-72s per each abram tank and performance of the american tank being inferior in many ways when it comes to urban warfare and clearing buildings from terrorist. For fighting other tanks in one vs one Abram for sure should be better for its superior gun..

    One of the things that a Syrian tank commander told ,that was using T-72 was the easy to maintain and repair them. You can repair them virtually with a hammer and welding and withing
    few hours after being hit by rocket grenades and penetrated ,most of the time they can be repaired. If you have a tank with lots of electronics and circuits it will be different . the T-72 follows the same principle of the Ak-47,, easy to use , with almost no maintainance need. ideal
    for long wars where the tank will need to be exposed to a lot of dirt and mud and dust..and bad terrain.


    Last edited by Vann7 on Sat May 30, 2015 10:32 pm; edited 2 times in total

    KoTeMoRe
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3565
    Points : 3600
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sat May 30, 2015 10:19 pm

    Vann7 wrote:

    Omg ... this is big.. Shocked

    IRAQ denied M1A2 from US and bought instead T-72 B from RUssia..
    because the americans ones are less reliable than the Russian ones..?



    So much for TR1's claims of abram being "Combat tested" an the iraqui government not happy
    with its performance and saying the Russian ones are better?... lol1

    http://fortruss.blogspot.ca/2015/05/iraq-turns-down-us-abrams-tanks-in.html

    Well maybe the american exports really sucks big time.. but the T-72s Russia send
    are also export version. Wink

    Yes the Abrams are less "available", they take like forever to service, cost two legs, an arm and some teeth. Compared to that, the T72B's and M1's Iraq has gotten from everywhere else, is cheaper, better suited and overall more "available".

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  flamming_python on Sat May 30, 2015 11:01 pm

    Mike E wrote:Care to explain the ideology behind such a steel? I have no knowledge of today except for that the new "base" steel is 15% more efficient mass/strength wise.

    It was developed by NII Stali (Scientific Research Institute of Steel) and is produced by the VMZ Metallurgical Plant in Volgograd.

    From the bits and pieces I have read, it's main trick is that its composed of several layers of steel, each at varying angles to each other and to the horizontal plane.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat May 30, 2015 11:33 pm

    flamming_python wrote:
    Mike E wrote:Care to explain the ideology behind such a steel? I have no knowledge of today except for that the new "base" steel is 15% more efficient mass/strength wise.

    It was developed by NII Stali (Scientific Research Institute of Steel) and is produced by the VMZ Metallurgical Plant in Volgograd.

    From the bits and pieces I have read, it's main trick is that its composed of several layers of steel, each at varying angles to each other and to the horizontal plane.

    Essentially what 'kvs' said.

    Sponsored content

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 5:02 pm


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 5:02 pm