Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Question Thread: Russian Army

    Share
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1156
    Points : 1311
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    WP rounds for russian artillery and tanks

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Jun 13, 2013 5:46 am

    WP rounds for russian artillery and tanks?

    The US has used them throughout the cold war and with outstanding success during the Vietnam war. Have the soviets and then Russians ever used used them? IMO they're a lot more useful than dedicated smoke rounds and grenades because they also offer a devastating incendiary effect while giving equally thick smoke.

    Also if tanks could have WP smoke grenade launchers that could also be a useful weapon.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:16 am

    Not very widely, no.

    They have incendiary weapons including the RPO-D and the ZAB series of bombs which are devastating, but AFAIK they don't carry such ammo in their tanks.

    BTW WP wasn't that effective in Vietnam... napalm was more widely used and it was used fairly indiscriminately.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1156
    Points : 1311
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Russian Biological and Chemical weapons:

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:47 pm

    That means  soviet mortars, artillery and tanks had a serious  disadvantage in incendiary weapons. Pretty much any NATO tank with a rifled cannon could fire WP rounds. Not to mention 60mm+ NATO mortars.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 14, 2013 12:29 am

    All Soviet and Russian tanks can generate smoke screens using smoke grenades and by injecting diesel fuel into the exhaust manifold.

    The Soviets have a wide range of fuel air explosive munitions that are far more effective at killing enemy personel than Phosphorus... phosphorus burns fiercely, but will not knock down walls or shatter glass, it gives off poisonous fumes too, but FAEs burn off the oxygen and suffocate people just as effectively, but the blast and heat effects are more consistent.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    ahmedfire
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  ahmedfire on Fri Aug 30, 2013 1:14 pm

    Why BMP-T-Terminator had five operators , i knew the job for every one but isn't this a big number in compraison with bradley vehicle " 3 operators " !
    avatar
    Stealthflanker
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 798
    Points : 882
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Russian gun launched ATGM questions

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sun Sep 22, 2013 2:40 pm

    As in title..hmm aside from development of Kornet-D, Hermes and other type of ATGM's..i wonder how's the development of the Russian gun launched ATGM ? Steady pace so i could expect to see new form of refleks or any other stuff in the future or perhaps it's been abandoned ?

    Other question is related to doctrine.. How those gun-launched ATGM's will be used in a battle ?

    Would love to ask in tank.net.. nonetheless they're not taking new members at the moment.

    thanks for any response.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:55 am

    First of all Tank Gun launched missile is a misnomer as they have laser beam riding anti armour missiles for direct fire use and also SALH missiles for artillery use.


    They have a laser guided round designed for every tank calibre weapon and above including 122mm gun/howitzer, 120mm mortar, 125mm tank gun, 130mm naval guns, 152mm artillery, 180mm artillery shell, 203mm artillery and 240mm mortar. I have not read about any 160mm mortar round but it would no surprise me.

    I also suspect a laser guided direct fire 152mm tank round, and several new guided rounds for the 100mm rifled main gun of the BMP-3, 125mm Sokol-1 guided shell using EO guidance, and new rounds for Koalition.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    SSDD
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 19
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2013-10-26
    Location : Bharat

    Why T 95 project was cancelled?

    Post  SSDD on Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:37 am

    Why this tank project was cancelled? This tank has to had 152 mm smooth bore gun as main armament and 30 mm autocannon as secondary weapon. It would be an extemely power full tank, why it was cancelled?dunno 

    Is there any thing to do with brain drain?confused 
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5700
    Points : 5736
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:39 am

    Because it was a Cold War project not corresponding to the realities of warfare and economics today.

    Nothing to do with brain drain. Armata is more advanced of a project, even if it won't have a giant gun.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Sun Nov 03, 2013 6:34 am

    The T-95 was like the Commanche.

    If the cold war had continued then it might have made sense but with the end of the cold war it was a very expensive tank that would have operated with a range of other vehicles that would be vulnerable to enemy fire... just like today most conflicts the US will operate attack helos in will not have extensive radar coverage so a radar evading helicopter makes little sense and is expensive.

    The Armata MBT will likely be a T-95BIS, or T-95SMT, fitted for but not with a more powerful 15xmm calibre gun.

    The difference is that now they will have entire brigades of armata vehicles that can operate in very dangerous environments.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1184
    Points : 1201
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Nov 03, 2013 11:30 am

    SSDD wrote:Why this tank project was cancelled? This tank has to had 152 mm smooth bore gun as main armament and 30 mm autocannon as secondary weapon. It would be an extemely power full tank, why it was cancelled?dunno 

    Is there any thing to do with brain drain?confused 
    you waffen ss from dfi?
    anyway i think 125mm ETC gun is much better than humongous 152 mm gun. You could fire apfsds and HE with same muzzle energy as 152mm gun and you also have a lot of ammo, though 152 mm offers unparalleled HEAT weapons at standoff (arty) ranges.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:56 am

    It is all about energy... for a given diameter of barrel and the same level of technology level of propellent, and materials and ways to make gun barrels when you reach the limits of the barrel and propellent technology and metalurgy for making gun barrels and penetrators then to make a large step up in performance you have to increase the calibre.

    The larger the calibre the more energy you can push down the barrel.

    Larger calibres also mean wider HEAT shells which means more effective HEAT shells, and in terms of gun launched missiles the larger calibres mean more efficient HEAT warheads and also more room for electronics and extra propulsion and guidance options.

    In other words a bigger missile means adding computerised guidance to allow fire and forget performance.

    Having said all that... a new calibre is expensive and larger and heavier which means new loading and handling equipment and fewer rounds per vehicle etc etc.


    _________________
    “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

    Rpg type 7v
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 399
    Points : 263
    Join date : 2011-05-01

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Rpg type 7v on Mon Nov 04, 2013 7:21 pm

    well there is not much true information about t-95 for now , lets wait for armata and more data about t-95 ,then we can compare.
    avatar
    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3202
    Points : 3316
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  flamming_python on Mon Nov 04, 2013 8:02 pm

    Yes unfortunately the T-95s 'brain-drain gun', it's secondary turret weapon wasn't ready yet.

    They fitted it with the standard co-axial machine gun instead, but when taken altogether they realised that such a configuration wouldn't offer that much of an advantage over the competing Armata project while being considerably more expensive. So they halted the project.
    avatar
    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1494
    Points : 1528
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Zivo on Tue Nov 05, 2013 12:13 am

    Here's my conjecture...

    1] Object 195 was designed first and foremost as an MBT, with modular properties.

    2] Armata was designed from the beginning as a universal platform.

    I believe the MoD felt that by investing in Armata, they could modernize and replace a lot more vehicles for less cost. I also believe the restructuring of the Russian military is a necessity, and Armata was chosen to fill the requirement of high part-commonality required to keep modernization costs to a minimum. Performance of the vehicle had little importance in the decision.



    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 05, 2013 10:42 pm

    T-95 was a tank program to replace the T-90/72 family of tanks... much the same way the PAK FA was to replace the Flankers and Fulcrums.

    The problem was that the conflict in Chechnia made them realise that mobility was important, as was protection and firepower, and that sometimes lighter, more mobile vehicles were needed and at other times heavy well protected vehicles were needed.

    This led to a change in thinking... instead of making one MBT (ie T-95) and one IFV (BMP-4) and one APC (BTR-82) and one light armoured vehicle (BRDM-4), that for each operational brigade you need all the vehicles to have similar levels of mobility and similar levels of protection, so they all should arrive together, and they should all be able to withstand similar levels of enemy fire.

    It means the MBTs wont be left on their own after the enemy have picked off all the light vehicles like BMPs and BTRs.

    The solution was a completely clean sheet of paper.

    There was only one T-95 and it was a main battle tank with a rear mounted engine.

    Armata is a vehicle family that includes vehicles with the engine at the back, a turret in the middle and crew in the front like the MBT, but it also includes IFVs and APCs which likely have front mounted engines so the troops can exit from rear ramps.

    A lot of things that were developed for T-95 will have been transfered directly to the T-99 (ie Armata MBT)... but the point is that there will likely be four T-99s... T-99h for heavy, T-99mw for medium wheeled, T-99mt for medium tracked and T-99l for light... the heavy model will be tracked and the light model will be wheeled, but they will all share electronics and sensors and weapons.

    The T-99l might have a 45/57mm gun because it is simply too light for a 125mm gun for instance but it will have Kornet-EM missiles to allow it to engage enemy MBTs if they stumble on them in combat.

    The brigade structure with the four vehicle types was theoretical and was pretty much passed to the Russian MIC when the T-95 was cancelled so they all started from scratch then, but the companies these design requirements were passed to started from scratch in terms of layout, but they could use existing things where useful... not everything needed to be made from scratch.


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5362
    Points : 5601
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    New Ammunition in Service?

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:24 pm

    I wanted to know if there is somehwere reliable source or official source about ammunition that entered active service. Manufactors develope all kind of ammunitions but the problem is just because ammunition exists it doesn't mean it is in active service.

    An example: russia tried to introduce new 30 mm AP rounds (APDS) since early 00s and so far i couldn't find anything credible that this ammunition is in service. Majority of outdated information still state that russian army and vvs use old AP-T rounds with rather mediocre penetration capabilities compared with newer designs.
    avatar
    collegeboy16
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1184
    Points : 1201
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 20
    Location : Roanapur

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Mar 05, 2014 5:38 am

    a new armour piercing round would be nice, tho imo its not that needed. A 30 mm round optimized for soft targets and lightly armored ones would be better.

    im42
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 21
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Efficent evolution of AK

    Post  im42 on Thu Sep 18, 2014 3:32 pm

    Greetings forumers
    I want to topic on the topic with no offshots to keep it clean na informative. As you know the AK rifle has its limitation due to the nature of design that bloomed back in late 40s. As the design hold and will to do so the efficent design it is far from being perfect and here comes the topic. What would you change if you could apart the caliber ie. 5.45x39, receiver and overall self loading system. I am hoping for viable ideas that are "easy" to accomodate. As firearms aren't of much importance in whole picture of full scale conflict they can be really beneficial in smaller ones or in certain scenarios. Move yer heads and lets start the brainstorm forumers ... there might be a jewel hiding in someones skull Wink.
    Cheers !
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:54 am

    There can only be two replies to this sort of thread... make it a bolt action (ie the Mosin strong solution), and the turn it into an AR (ie the AR strong solution).

    Personally I think all the real and perceived issues and details of the AK-74 have been identified and addressed in the AK12 design and I also think that one should be sent to me immediately so that I can test it thoroughly and make a video of my observations and musings to post on the internet...


    _________________
    “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
    avatar
    Anas Ali
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 61
    Points : 108
    Join date : 2013-02-12
    Age : 29
    Location : Egypt

    9S18M1 Snow Drift , Buk-M2 and Tor-M2

    Post  Anas Ali on Mon Nov 10, 2014 3:35 pm



    i am need help finding detail information not just specs about the 9S18M1 Snow Drift and the Acquisition Radars and Engagement Radar of the Buk-M2 and Tor-M2

    thanks so much in advance
    avatar
    zg18
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 879
    Points : 955
    Join date : 2013-09-26
    Location : Zagreb , Croatia

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  zg18 on Tue Nov 11, 2014 3:44 pm

    Anas Ali wrote:

    i am need help finding detail information not just specs about the 9S18M1 Snow Drift and the Acquisition Radars and Engagement Radar of the Buk-M2 and Tor-M2

    thanks so much in advance

    I would suggest starting from Russian Wikipedia

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/9%D0%A118

    or pvo.guns

    http://pvo.guns.ru/buk/buk_12.htm

    Hope it helps

    avatar
    Anas Ali
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 61
    Points : 108
    Join date : 2013-02-12
    Age : 29
    Location : Egypt

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Anas Ali on Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:20 pm


    ^^
    thanks a lot Wink

    r111
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 31
    Points : 39
    Join date : 2014-11-24

    The death of direct impingement .

    Post  r111 on Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:07 pm

    Marines had enough of a weapon that "throws up into his own mouth". Enter the M27.
    Surely Army is to follow. Spec ops already seem to be H&K mostly.

    Zee Germans (H&K) managed to add a simple piston to AR design with very minimal changes.
    The bolt, instead of gas port, now has an anvil - that piston rod strikes to cycle. The piston/rod is very thin and lightweight, compared to AK design.

    more or less the only change. Charging handle is the same.

    The rifling in standard issue is cold hammered.

    Visited a friend recently and we shot his AR. Was my first experience with it and I was amazed to see a number of jams in a very controlled and clean env. Can only imagine what it behaves like in real world conditions. Took US from Nam till now (half a century) to close this sad chapter.

    Anyway, i had this question - why we, the soviets/russians, never fielded a direct impingement weapon. Now I know Smile

    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16681
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 25, 2014 4:53 am

    The irony is that with very modern very clear burning propellent the lack of a piston rod is not actually a bad thing.

    The real problem is that when the use of the M16 became popular and the demand for ammo increased by an order of magnitude the production capacity of the clean burning powder was exceeded by a wide margin... to some dork decided to change to standard ball powder and the rest, as they say, is history.

    With a new propellent a piston rod is not critical, but you need to have very clean burning powder.

    Obviously other solutions were worth a look... the SVD and FN FAL both have light weight piston rods that are not directly connected to the bolt carrier that greatly reduce weight and recoil as they only move a few cms.

    The FN FAL also has the separate upper and lower, with the mag well and barrel as the upper and the pistol grip and firing mechanism and recoil spring as the lower.

    The fact that the mag well is part of the upper means different calibre uppers can have different mags, so unlike the M16 uppers in 7.62 x 39mm the FN FAL upper could be made to use standard AK mags... that would be cool. Smile


    _________________
    “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

    Sponsored content

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Jun 27, 2017 12:37 am