He is expecting a radically new tank design, such as the US made from the M-60 to the M1.
That is what the T-95 was supposed to be and he cut that for being too expensive and "unnecessary".
BTW the M1 was created thanks to the Shah of Iran. All the previous American models were even more conservative than Soviet models... the M47, M48, M60 looked very much alike but with slightly bigger guns.
The M1 looked different because of the British armour it used. British armour that was paid for by the Shah of Iran that wanted a new tank developed. When the Shah lost power the Brits kept the tank design and called it the Challenger I.
They were not part of the upgrade because domestic industry could not do it which is why it was cut.
The upgrade was supposed to be completed some time about now, but was cancelled before it was even finalised. How would have have known whether the domestic industry could have made it when they were never given a chance too.
I think what really happened is that he was told that most of the money currently available will go into C4IR and that there is no money for tanks or tank upgrades. He will get money for tank upgrades in 5 years time when the C4IR is sorted, so he decides he will have a hissy fit and b!tch and moan about the state of Russian military equipment to stir the domestic industry into action to update and upgrade so that when there is money there will be better domestic options.
That might work... or it might just lead to foreigners running your MIC for the next decade.
Personally I think instead of airing the dirty laundry in the media an ruining export prospects for existing material they should have sat down and developed a new structure where the MIC go to strategic planning meetings and to the troops in the field to find out what will be needed and what each company is working on and what works in the field and what doesn't. Why make the Tank makers develop a new C4IR system for their tanks when it should be applied to all vehicles in the armed forces so cooperation is needed between all sorts of companies to work this stuff out.
A tank is not likely to share many components with an APC, the requirements for engines and transmissions are completely different, but there are lots of things that can be shared like the new anti mine/IED electronics we see on come interior ministry vehicles and gunfire locating technology also being used would also be useful on pretty much all vehicles.
What I am saying is it makes more sense to share technology that can be used in other areas, because this reduces wasted research money, it improves commonality for training and maintainence and logistics, and it means good technology gets used.
It is like the customer is complaining about the lack of stock in a shop when the customer has not spent a dollar in that shop for 20 years and will not tell the shop keeper what they want till they want it.
The customer needs to keep in mind that things have been tight for everyone and I am sure the shop keeper is just as keen to get all the latest stock in, but that costs money and you haven't been buying stuff so until you start making orders don't expect improvements.
Anyone can order catalogs and look at new stuff, but developing it and learning its good an bad points takes time and money, but you want results now.
Who is being unreasonable?
Considering M1A1s have been hit by Hellfires and the crews survived is enough evidence for me that they can survive Javelin and BILL. M1A1 is considered obsolete now and the newer tanks are even better in protection.
They have also been defeated by old model RPG-7 rockets.
What makes Javelin and BILL 2 so dangerous is that they are top attack munitions and apart from the belly of a tank the top is the most thinly armoured side. A Hellfire hit to the rear area of an M1A2 would be fatal because the engine is protected against HMG only and a direct hit on the gas turbine engine would cause an unstoppable fire that would burn out the entire tank. That is not opinion, that is fact. Any model RPG-7 could do this... even an RPG-18.
It is no surprise really because that will pretty much kill any other tank in existence too.
BILL 2 will also kill any tank because it is designed to target the turret roof. The Javelin might not be as effective because although it follows a lofted flight profile it is not designed to actually target the top of a tank and therefore I really don't think it would be a guaranteed kill on a T-90 anyway. The demo I saw they had a rig that held a couple of dozen hair driers heating up an old T-55 so that the Javelin could see it and get a lock on so they could fire a missile at it. The smoke grenades that are designed to hide tanks from thermal sights should be perfectly effective in making a T-90 completely invisible to a Javelin too.
BILL 2 on the other hand is SACLOS guided, or semi automatic command to line of sight guided so the gunner could continue to aim where the tank was and the missile would fly over that position and its metal detecting warhead would detonate above the vehicle anyway.
ARENA won't do anything against a top-attack projectile, its angle of fire is lateral. Drodz isn't worth mentioning.
ARENA munitions are launched upwards and fire downwards at the incoming weapon so that the danger area around the tank is minimised. The munitions are attached to the tank with a fine wire and when the wire reaches its length limit the munition explodes downwards. The system knows the length of the wire and the angle of the sprayed fragments and for an incoming weapon 3-4 munitions could be fired to hit that weapon because of the width of the spray.
It would not be that hard to modify the system to either spring higher or to have two sets of fragments... one spraying up and one down to get normal munitions and top attack munitions without increasing the danger to nearby friendly troops.
Drodz 2 included further smaller rocket munitions around the rear of the turret that greatly improved all round coverage. Again it would not be that hard to add some upward firing grenades, or in the case of Javelin a dazzler that prevents the IIR seeker getting a lock. Laser jammers are already available to Russian forces so something to damage a Javelins seeker wouldn't be that hard either.
It could also be used against other threats that use optical homing seekers too like the laser homing Hellfires and Maverick.
K-5 ERA will not stop the LATEST APFSDS rounds, only Cold War models.
And Kaktus and Relikt?
If we could build it, he would buy it. 15 years is long enough to wait.
I doubt it. You have 20,000 tanks in service or storage, I rather doubt he would buy a new tank even if he knew what he wanted.
Armour is a low priority right now so I doubt he wants to pay for anything.
What he needs to do is stop talking to his last tank maker through the media and go and talk to them face to face and lay out what the situation is and what his plans are. Now these plans might change overnight especially if he is replaced. It has happened before.
The point is that the last tank maker in Russia can make plans and save money if it has concrete information it can plan its future on.
It takes more than Soviet era weapons to take these tanks out.
The RPG-29 is a Soviet era weapon. Its 105mm warheads are the same as fitted to the 105mm PG-7VR RPG-7 rocket.
The RPG-28 has a 125mm rocket warhead.
The weight makes logistics a pain, but the soldiers that ride them are great-full for the protection it provides.
The T-90 has similar levels of protection when fitted with explosive in its ERA. The real difference is that when an M1A2 gets its side penetrated there is no ammo in the hull or the turret to ignite. The Iraqis and Afghans have never operated an M1A2 and so they don't know where the fuel or ammo is stored.
The upgrade of the T-90 was supposed to improve crew safety by moving all the ammo to armoured automatic loaders in the turret bustle and the base of the turret ring.
By cancelling funding and delaying the T-90 upgrade the result is Russian tank crewmen will remain less safe for a little longer, or they will have to operate with a reduced ammo load without loose rounds in the turret and hull.
TOS is not accurate enough to hit a tank, nor would a near miss affect an NBC enclosed vehicle.
NBC enclosed vehicles maintain safe environs for the crew by sucking in and filtering outside air to clean it and then blowing it into the crew compartment so any airborne contaminants don't enter any nooks or crannies because the inside air pressure is higher than outside air pressure so the air flows out of any gaps or holes rather than in bring in contaminants.
Even assuming all the tanks are closed up with hatches shut and NBC system is on a TOS attack will consume all the oxygen both outside and inside the tanks fairly rapidly and unless the crew had extra oxygen equipment they would rapidly suffocate and suffer burns from the high temperatures.
The over pressure is high enough to set off land mines unless those tanks are perfectly hermetically sealed they would be in trouble.
Relikt is not superior to K-5 in KE protection, it is cheaper to produce and better against chemical penetrators.
If it is cheaper to make and better against HEAT penetrators why isn't it in service?
If it can take out K-5, it can take out Relikt and they have plenty of old K-5 modules left from the bloc countries. Ukraine is happy to sell Relikt if they want it.
If you want a tank right now that can defeat an M1A3 and can't be harmed by an M1A3 or a tactical nuclear explosion then you are sh!t out of luck. How about doing what the Americans do and fund something better and put into service now what you have... oops no, you cancelled the T-95 and the T-90 upgrades and you are left with a tank you have had for the last decade or two.
The problem with whining that the new stuff isn't the super best in the whole universe is that if you don't keep spending money on tanks then the tank maker will not be doing anything or earning any money so the problem will just get worse.
The solution is make what you can now, tell your tank maker what you want next and get them working on it and deal with all those other tanks you have but don't want or need.
Make some new tanks, upgrade others to a similar standard and when you get a C4IR system that works then look at what you will need to penetrate Americas best tank and what protection you need to protect your tank from their best ammo and ask for that to be made.
If you go to war tomorrow the most powerful tank does not always win... Ask the Germans, they proved that an inferior tank used properly can win and that a superior tank used well against superior numbers that are also used with skill can lose.
Tanks in most modern conflicts are mobile direct fire artillery support, if a tank on tank conflict ever arises Airpower is more likely to be a deciding factor than another tank... and no tank on the planet can shrug off a hit from a Kh-29. (317kg HE shaped charge warhead for destroying the concrete foundations of large heavy bridges and other things is going to make short work of any armour).