Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Share
    avatar
    zg18

    Posts : 881
    Points : 957
    Join date : 2013-09-26
    Location : Zagreb , Croatia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  zg18 on Fri May 08, 2015 12:38 am

    @alexZam , i see all of your pics pirat
    avatar
    mack8

    Posts : 957
    Points : 1017
    Join date : 2013-08-02

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  mack8 on Fri May 08, 2015 12:53 am

    The propaganda damage is done. But who cares, propaganda won't save NATO.

    One of the most disgusting and pathetic things about all this hoo-hah about that tank in the pro-american media is we have this world today with  hundreds of peoples every day dying because of war and violence (in large part created by the same americans and their stooges), peoples living in inhuman conditions because of war and poverty, people's lives and entire countries destroyed by religious fanaticism and neo-imperialist games, peoples freedoms (at least what's left, if there were any in the first case) infringed more each day, and yet they make headlines about a damn tank breaking down in Russia!

    How can one not loath the m*** pieces of *** more with each passing day.
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2132
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri May 08, 2015 12:55 am

    I can see the pics as well....btw, thanks for posting
    avatar
    BKP

    Posts : 356
    Points : 365
    Join date : 2015-05-02

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  BKP on Fri May 08, 2015 12:58 am

    Vann7 wrote:So apparently for what i can understand after google translation ,is that what happened
    in victory parade was that the conscript soldier driving armata , by accident pulled the emergency
    brakes , and effectively the tank responded as was asked to do ,a full lock of the tank  motion,then he later panics after the tank stop and began to pull any switch he saw in the tank
    to try to make it continue running ,and he then turn off the electronics of the tanks , to a manual mode ,and from there it only began to get worse.. The Towing tried to pull the tank with breaks on , which could have damaged the transmission .but then one specialist came later and fix the tank..  But then the RT mediocre report , confuse more ,because it made it look the tank stopped
    then restart , but 15 minutes later stop again..  and no more information given as how the tank left the place..  

    so thanks to RT mediocre journalist we have now 2 versions..

    1)The tank stop ,then restart ,then 15 minutes later stop again..( but what happened next?  Neutral )

    2)Or the visual version + guessing version of the full video. that is the tank stop for 15 minutes,
     then someone try to tow it and fails , and later specialist from the company get to the tank
     turn it on quickly and the tank leave.  Which is what you see in the video..  

    Yet RT report the tanks stop after 15minutes it restart.. but do not provide film evidence of the second stop. So if i had to guess the #2 version is correct.. you can even see in the video the tank was locked its tracks because could not even be towed ,a clear indication of inexperience
    of the people operating the tank. So it looks the Conscript soldier was trying to drive the armata
    tank with the Emergency breaks on. Laughing    This is strongly a possibility because in the video
    you see the tank resisting to be pulled by mini truck designed to tow tanks.

    So until now it looks like inexperience of the driver of armata the cause of the halt. but is only
    the information until now we have. not yet confirmed by any official statement from minister of defense.  

    I'm not sure I'm buying this explanation. But, even if it's true, it still reflects poorly on something. If they're blaming an inexperienced conscript, then whose fault is that really? I say it's the fault of the planners, presumably military, who put him there. Given the importance of the occasion, they should be using experienced tankers, and alternates, who have already received considerable training on the new tank at the factory.

    Actually, I'm less concerned if the tank malfunctioned, as its a brand new, complex machine with a lot of additional testing ahead of it. If it has about 10k more embarrassing failures, that will put it almost on par with the F-35 program (C.Puffs, you there?). And, you know, I'm at least fairly sure that if it fired its gun, even at this point, it wouldn't flop over on its side like the Stryker MGS, and that is a fielded system.  Rolling Eyes  

    However, if this is the result of a planning error in assigning the appropriate personnel, then I find that a bit worrying.


    Last edited by BKP on Fri May 08, 2015 1:00 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3147
    Points : 3270
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  kvs on Fri May 08, 2015 12:59 am

    alexZam wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:Maybe you should try uploading pics via directupload.net

    Yeah. I'll try to stick more with directupload.net

    Sorry, guys...

    Embarassed

    No apologies needed. I had to enter a captcha to view your images when their address was given, but I only had to do it for
    one picture to see the rest. But not all of your pictures are visible on this forum. Most of your recent pictures in the
    photos thread are visible to me but not in this thread.
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2132
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri May 08, 2015 1:21 am

    BKP wrote:I'm not sure I'm buying this explanation. But, even if it's true, it still reflects poorly on something. If they're blaming an inexperienced conscript, then whose fault is that really? I say it's the fault of the planners, presumably military, who put him there. Given the importance of the occasion, they should be using experienced tankers, and alternates, who have already received considerable training on the new tank at the factory.

    Apparently it was Shoigu's decission.....UVZ wanted to use their own crews
    avatar
    BKP

    Posts : 356
    Points : 365
    Join date : 2015-05-02

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  BKP on Fri May 08, 2015 1:46 am

    Cyberspec wrote:
    BKP wrote:I'm not sure I'm buying this explanation. But, even if it's true, it still reflects poorly on something. If they're blaming an inexperienced conscript, then whose fault is that really? I say it's the fault of the planners, presumably military, who put him there. Given the importance of the occasion, they should be using experienced tankers, and alternates, who have already received considerable training on the new tank at the factory.

    Apparently it was Shoigu's decission.....UVZ wanted to use their own crews

    Well, Shoigu seems a good man. He certainly has Putin's confidence. But if he didn't want to sort of fraudulently put factory workers into servicemens' uniforms for the parade (like, who would know?), and insisted on using real guys, then those guys must be brought up to speed. I mean, did they just fasten the last bolt on these things two weeks ago? Even so, there should've been training already prepared and used some time ago.

    To me, showing poor planning to your potential adversaries is worse than a technical failure. Machines are machines. But, if you can't plan for shit, it doesn't matter how good your gear is.

    calripson

    Posts : 138
    Points : 163
    Join date : 2013-10-26

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  calripson on Fri May 08, 2015 2:07 am

    Same Shells, New Tank

    When the tank enters serial production, slated to start as early as next year, Armata will come standard with a 125 mm cannon capable of firing several types of shells and even anti-tank guided missiles — but these munitions are already fielded by older and cheaper Russian tanks like the T-72.

    Though the cannon is a new design, "Armata will be using ammunition manufactured for the T-72," said Pukhov.

    This will leave Armata firing shells with shorter range and lower impact velocity than Western analogues, according to Pukhov.


    Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Moscow-based Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, a defense think tank

    More Moscow Times propaganda ? What is this Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, or more to the point, who funds them ???
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3245
    Points : 3351
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  flamming_python on Fri May 08, 2015 2:29 am

    Aren't the T-14 and latest T-90 variants capable of firing a new longer type of shell that older T-90s/T-72s/T-80s cannot?
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4489
    Points : 4662
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Fri May 08, 2015 3:05 am

    flamming_python wrote:Aren't the T-14 and latest T-90 variants capable of firing a new longer type of shell that older T-90s/T-72s/T-80s cannot?

    Absolutely, hence the reason why they re-designed the autoloader to be capable of firing longer APFSDS's.
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2132
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri May 08, 2015 3:16 am

    calripson wrote:Same Shells, New Tank

    ....

    More Moscow Times propaganda ? What is this Center for the Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, or more to the point, who funds them ???

    It could just mean they haven't started production of the new ammo.

    CAST claims to be independent but it seems mainly aimed at a western audience

    CAST does not receive any financing from the government, commercial companies or other organizations. All its funding is derived from research and media products, consultation services and other projects. In that sense, CAST is a commercial venture, and its success depends entirely on the quality of the services it offers to customers.

    http://www.cast.ru/eng/about/
    avatar
    alexZam

    Posts : 343
    Points : 399
    Join date : 2015-04-23
    Location : SoCal

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  alexZam on Fri May 08, 2015 4:06 am

    I almost feel that this "fail" on a Red Square was intentional. Just see how much attention this incident drew to new Russian military gear. A lot of people will be watching parade on Saturday morning because of this. And even more people around the globe at least heard about new military toys from Moscow - it's all over the news now. Around the globe. Black bad PR is a PR too. It kinda make sense a bit: oh, ah, just "mountain break", guys, just mountain breaks.. And everyone: wait ... It has MOUNTAIN breaks?!? Wtf? Sneaky..
    avatar
    BKP

    Posts : 356
    Points : 365
    Join date : 2015-05-02

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  BKP on Fri May 08, 2015 5:00 am

    BBC article discusses Armata and the modernization program. Most of it relying on the viewpoint of an "expert" named Keir Giles, with whom I'm not familiar.

    A little bit of it is vaguely complimentary, some is slanderous in the typical fashion, and some of it I don't know one way or the other.

    Can anyone comment on the value (or lack it) of these assertions?:

    The Armata may symbolise the Russian military's future, but it makes much wider use of electronics on-board, and Igor Sutyagin says that is a problem.

    Up to 80% of the chip-sets for the most critical electronics in the Russian electronics industry are imported - and mainly imported from the West.

    I'm pretty dubious about that one. Don't most Western processor makers actually job out their fabrication to companies located in Taiwan? Similarly, If Russia couldn't do the actual fabrication itself, wouldn't they also contract out the production? I can't image that they would just risk using generic Western-designed chips.

    Igor Sutyagin agrees. "Russian defence officials openly recognise that 30% of Ukrainian imports to Russia's defence industry cannot be substituted domestically. One-third is large enough, when you bear in mind that one out of every five pieces of Russian military hardware is either Ukrainian or depends upon Ukrainian parts."

    I'm guessing this is way over stated. What could Ukraine possibly produce that Russia eventually could not if if had to?

    http: / /w w w .bbc.com/news/world-europe-32622653
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3147
    Points : 3270
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  kvs on Fri May 08, 2015 5:27 am

    BKP wrote:BBC article discusses Armata and the modernization program. Most of it relying on the viewpoint of an "expert" named Keir Giles, with whom I'm not familiar.

    The Armata may symbolise the Russian military's future, but it makes much wider use of electronics on-board, and Igor Sutyagin says that is a problem.

    Up to 80% of the chip-sets for the most critical electronics in the Russian electronics industry are imported - and mainly imported from the West.

    I'm pretty dubious about that one. Don't most Western processor makers actually job out their fabrication to companies located in Taiwan? Similarly, If Russia couldn't do the actual fabrication itself, wouldn't they also contract out the production? I can't image that they would just risk using generic Western-designed chips.

    It's nonsense.   He's talking about "chip sets" so he clearly has no clue what he is yammering about.   Russia has the manufacturing
    plants capable of producing 90 nm parts in large amounts and as of recently can do 65 nm parts.   Russia has domestic companies that
    specialize in ASIC design which can be manufactured in Russia and not abroad.   Then we have the general purpose microprocessor
    based on the Elbrus architecture which Russia contracts TSMC to manufacture.   It can manufacture it in Russia at Mikron facilities if
    it wanted.   A tank does not need 22 nm parts.   Even 180 nm ASICs can handle any conceivable task that the tank needs, including
    every ballistic trajectory calculation and every communication task.  


    Igor Sutyagin agrees. "Russian defence officials openly recognise that 30% of Ukrainian imports to Russia's defence industry cannot be substituted domestically. One-third is large enough, when you bear in mind that one out of every five pieces of Russian military hardware is either Ukrainian or depends upon Ukrainian parts."

    I'm guessing this is way over stated. What could Ukraine possibly produce that Russia eventually could not if if had to?

    This is yet more rubbish.  There is no software or electronics needed from Ukraine.   There were some ship turbines that were
    made in Ukraine, but Russia can manufacture them domestically.   The problem is that something like a ship turbine can't be
    popped out in a couple of days.  It would take about one year to replace and likely longer.  

    The western media has lost its grip on reality.  It is spreading projection fantasies in every freaking article about Russia.

    Guest
    Guest

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Guest on Fri May 08, 2015 5:44 am

    BKP wrote:BBC article discusses Armata and the modernization program. Most of it relying on the viewpoint of an "expert" named Keir Giles, with whom I'm not familiar.

    A little bit of it is vaguely complimentary, some is slanderous in the typical fashion, and some of it I don't know one way or the other.

    Can anyone comment on the value (or lack it) of these assertions?:

    The Armata may symbolise the Russian military's future, but it makes much wider use of electronics on-board, and Igor Sutyagin says that is a problem.

    Up to 80% of the chip-sets for the most critical electronics in the Russian electronics industry are imported - and mainly imported from the West.

    I'm pretty dubious about that one. Don't most Western processor makers actually job out their fabrication to companies located in Taiwan? Similarly, If Russia couldn't do the actual fabrication itself, wouldn't they also contract out the production? I can't image that they would just risk using generic Western-designed chips.

    Igor Sutyagin agrees. "Russian defence officials openly recognise that 30% of Ukrainian imports to Russia's defence industry cannot be substituted domestically. One-third is large enough, when you bear in mind that one out of every five pieces of Russian military hardware is either Ukrainian or depends upon Ukrainian parts."

    I'm guessing this is way over stated. What could Ukraine possibly produce that Russia eventually could not if if had to?

    http: / /w w w .bbc.com/news/world-europe-32622653
    BBC is trash. Over the last several months, they have transformed into a Russophobic propaganda machine. I can't take anything they put out seriously anymore and this is no exception with them mixing the Russia of today with the Russia of +10 years ago.

    Case in point is the electronic chips, last I checked, Russia had already been designing chips for its military equipment like the Sukhoi PAK-FA and Russia is making their own chips for the civilian market.

    I am wondering where did they pull the 30% statistic from. There is no way that Russia would liberate Crimea if Russia was aware that the doing so would jeopardize the military's capabilities or if the cost to the Russian economy would be so high.

    Vann7

    Posts : 3472
    Points : 3584
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Vann7 on Fri May 08, 2015 5:44 am


    Amazing Russia produce a new tank.. and many other next generation military hardware
    and western media claim it was made with Ukrainian technology and parts .. because poor Russia cannot do it at home.. Rolling Eyes

    avatar
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2150
    Points : 2251
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  higurashihougi on Fri May 08, 2015 6:30 am

    Can never fathom the idiocy of BBC in this garbage article.

    "Today, anti-tank weapons attack tanks from the top and it is effectively impossible to improve the protection of a T-64 type. So the Russian army needed a fundamentally different design - that was the promise of Armata."

    Ah yeah, myth of divine Javelin can top-attack and destroy Russian tank Laughing Laughing  all bullshit may be he knows nothing about Shtora or Arena.

    Even if sanctions are lifted, he thinks a legacy will remain and, as in the Cold War years, there may be significant restrictions on exports to Russia with potential military uses.

    Being a Russian and he does not know about Russia's self-suistanability ?

    Western analysts believe the Russian army may be facing manpower challenges in maintaining forces close to Ukraine. But the conclusion was that Russia might be able "only" to put 90-100,000 men in the field, "which still dwarfs anything Ukraine's Western neighbours might be able to muster to resist Russian pressure", Mr Giles says.

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha a country with 140 mil. people can only mobilize 100000 men against EU ? Not to mention that, against only Ukraina today 100000 men are more than enough.

    Igor Sutyagin says such talk reflects Russia's awareness of its "inability to compete on equal terms with the West in conventional terms".

    Again pure bullshit. The West wants to compete with M16, 5.56x45mm, SR-71, Abrams, Rafale, F-35 ? Dear me.
    avatar
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 800
    Points : 882
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Stealthflanker on Fri May 08, 2015 7:49 am

    Guys.. pls.. Stop making stupid ppl (BBC "experts") famous.

    need moar better imagery for measure stuff :3
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2132
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri May 08, 2015 9:30 am

    Some details on the T-14 (and a bit on the other new stuff) in the diagram and the VPK article below. The author is Sergei Ptichkin from Rus. Gazeta




    Article: Arrow http://vpk.name/news/131478_raketyi_sobyut_na_podlete.html


    So according to this,

    - the shape of the turret is designed to reduce radar/thermal signature and is (or will be) coated with a special coating to assist in that function. The turret is covered on all sides (incl. top) with new generation dynamic protection.

    - The Opto-Electronic system is used not only for observation but assists in the guidance of guided rounds. It can also be used for tracking aerial targets.

    - The round fired by the 2A82-1M gun can penetrate 1M of armour @2KM

    - it does have a 7.62mm co-ax mg and the gun in the remote controlled station is apparently 12.7mm
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3912
    Points : 3939
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Fri May 08, 2015 9:42 am

    Cyberspec wrote:Some details on the T-14 (and a bit on the other new stuff) in the diagram and the VPK article below. The author is Sergei Ptichkin from Rus. Gazeta




    Article: Arrow http://vpk.name/news/131478_raketyi_sobyut_na_podlete.html


    So according to this,

    - the shape of the turret is designed to reduce radar/thermal signature and is (or will be) coated with a special coating to assist in that function. The turret is covered on all sides (incl. top) with new generation dynamic protection.

    - The Opto-Electronic system is used not only for observation but assists in the guidance of guided rounds. It can also be used for tracking aerial targets.

    - The round fired by the 2A82-1M gun can penetrate 1M of armour @2KM

    - it does have a 7.62mm co-ax mg and the gun in the remote controlled station is apparently 12.7mm

    Clearly it is not the case.

    It has a 7.62 coax and same ORCWS. It is a PKT the barrel length of a .50/12.7 would be different.

    On a side note I fully expect we see the mockup presented as an "artillery platform" with a different set of armour. This is MK.0 prototype.
    avatar
    Mike E

    Posts : 2760
    Points : 2806
    Join date : 2014-06-19
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Mike E on Fri May 08, 2015 10:30 am

    That round....is it HEAT or KE? If KE then wow...
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2132
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri May 08, 2015 10:45 am

    Mike E wrote:That round....is it HEAT or KE? If KE then wow...

    It doesn't say....my guess would be Kinetic
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Fri May 08, 2015 11:03 am

    Mike E wrote:That round....is it HEAT or KE? If KE then wow...

    Having given a range, he is referring to a KE round.


    Of course, I am not vouching for any of the info he has provided.


    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

    Posts : 1942
    Points : 2059
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Fri May 08, 2015 11:18 am

    In may opinion, it seems that the turret's outer layer is "mainly" a low-observable layer. The following is a list of its possible roles.

    1- A low-observable layer.

    2- A sensor layer for activating active/reactive armor elements.

    3- A current path for electric-current-based reactive armor. This would imply an inner high conductivity cladding, e.g., copper cladding.

    chicken

    Posts : 99
    Points : 104
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  chicken on Fri May 08, 2015 11:42 am

    What of happenings?


    Sponsored content

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:39 pm