Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Share
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:13 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    This is a screengrab, any chance to get the source video?

    Also, Armata just keeps getting more awesome thumbsup

    avatar
    BKP

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  BKP on Sun Apr 03, 2016 1:56 pm

    ^ In the resizable illustrations from Otvaga, is the tank shown on the right, top row (and elsewhere), how the T-14 is projected to look when configured for the 152mm gun?

    Also, what is the one on the left, 2nd row?
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 786
    Points : 804
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:20 pm

    Right top row is the (cancelled) Obj 195 / T-95
    No idea what the left 2nd row is.... an early Armata concept maybe?


    Last edited by Big_Gazza on Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5589
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:43 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:Right top row is the (cancelled) Obj 195 / T-95
    No idea what the left 2nd row is....

    Buntar or Molot from mid-late 80's Soviet design of Kharkov bureau.

    https://aftershock.news/?q=node/362522

    Edit: Correction it seems to be "Boxer" 477A Objekt

    http://btvt.narod.ru/3/molot.htm


    avatar
    x_54_u43

    Posts : 190
    Points : 210
    Join date : 2015-09-19

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  x_54_u43 on Sun Apr 03, 2016 7:44 pm


    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Cyrus the great on Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:23 pm



    I'm going to be crowned the captain of asking stupid questions, but I maintain that looking foolish is an integral part of learning. So here it goes:

    I understand that some people have discussed the possibility of incorporating anti-aircraft missiles on the Armata, so could the turret of the T-14 Armata physically incorporate the Verba missile by housing it vertically within the unmanned turret? The space required to accommodate the Verba missile would have to be at least 1.5 meters long. I imagine that the turret could *accommodate* three Verba missiles. I know that SHORAD would better protect armored columns from aerial attacks, so I'm asking this admittedly stupid question to satisfy my own curiosity. Embarassed





    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Militarov on Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:49 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:

    I'm going to be crowned the captain of asking stupid questions, but I maintain that looking foolish is an integral part of learning. So here it goes:

    I  understand that some people have discussed the possibility of incorporating anti-aircraft missiles on the Armata, so could the turret of the T-14 Armata physically incorporate the Verba missile by housing it vertically within the unmanned turret? The space required to accommodate the Verba missile would have to be at least 1.5 meters long. I imagine that the turret could *accommodate* three Verba missiles.  I know that SHORAD would better protect armored columns from aerial attacks, so I'm asking this admittedly stupid question to satisfy my own curiosity.  Embarassed






    Even IF it was ever placed on Armata i dont think they would install vertical launch tubes, as it would probably affect its protection, as they would though turret be laying partially in loader. IF it was ever placed on Armata i personally would do it like its on ZSU-23-4MP Biała for an example:





    Or like this:

    avatar
    x_54_u43

    Posts : 190
    Points : 210
    Join date : 2015-09-19

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  x_54_u43 on Tue Apr 05, 2016 9:50 pm

    Cyrus the great wrote:

    I'm going to be crowned the captain of asking stupid questions, but I maintain that looking foolish is an integral part of learning. So here it goes:

    I  understand that some people have discussed the possibility of incorporating anti-aircraft missiles on the Armata, so could the turret of the T-14 Armata physically incorporate the Verba missile by housing it vertically within the unmanned turret? The space required to accommodate the Verba missile would have to be at least 1.5 meters long. I imagine that the turret could *accommodate* three Verba missiles.  I know that SHORAD would better protect armored columns from aerial attacks, so I'm asking this admittedly stupid question to satisfy my own curiosity.  Embarassed


    Any ground to air functionality would be well performed by the future 57mm that might be mounted to the serial T-14 or the dedicated variant of SHORADS that uses the future 57mm.

    BTW the 57mm is slated for use with laser guided shells.

    Verba would just be a lot of cost with not a lot of functionality outside of shooting down aircraft. Now 57mm, on the other hand, are very, very useful in a variety of roles, from anti-personnel to soft-targets to fuck everything.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5589
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:43 pm

    The Problem you would face with trying to integrate a Verba MANPAD system on a plattform like a Tank that is a frontline (ground to ground) orientated vehicle is that it does not have Thermial Imagers made to search for threats in the sky and due that being not aware of any threats from the sky like Attack Helicopters. That would mean you would need an OLS (IRST) which cost and will have no use 99% of the time they are installed, get easily dirty and by that decrease their functionality, use and will affect the amount of budget you will have to buy new tanks or maintain them, since such systems are made of highly costly materials such as saphiric lenses and what not, very costly for a system that is still very inferior compared even to an old Tunguska. It has no economical use.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16515
    Points : 17123
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 06, 2016 11:34 am

    I think you are mostly ignoring the fact that Armata is not a tank.

    There will be a version of Armata that has a turret with a 125mm or later 152mm main gun that is used as a tank, but there will be Pantsir-SM and Tunguska and TOR versions and as mentioned above a 57mm armed version used for infantry transport... an IFV... the Tunguska replacement will likely also have 57mm guns as well because in the anti air role a 57mm cannon shell killing air targets to 12km makes it a very potent gun, and with the air search capabilities it will be effective in the role too.

    I rather suspect with the data communication and battle management systems all Armatas will carry that a new model Svir or Sokol-1 or improved version of either... perhaps incorporating scramjet propulsion might offer superior performance to any MANPADS through the main gun with net centric data from a range of platforms offering the situational awareness to use them at 10km or beyond.

    A standard MBT will not defend itself from aircraft... there will be IFVs and SPAAGs and short range systems armed with SOSNA-R and Morfei and Pantsir and TOR missiles doing that.


    _________________
    “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
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 786
    Points : 804
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Big_Gazza on Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:59 pm

    Werewolf wrote:The Problem you would face with trying to integrate a Verba MANPAD system on a plattform like a Tank that is a frontline (ground to ground) orientated vehicle is that it does not have Thermial Imagers made to search for threats in the sky and due that being not aware of any threats from the sky like Attack Helicopters. That would mean you would need an OLS (IRST) which cost and will have no use 99% of the time they are installed, get easily dirty and by that decrease their functionality, use and will affect the amount of budget you will have to buy new tanks or maintain them, since such systems are made of highly costly materials such as saphiric lenses and what not, very costly for a system that is still very inferior compared even to an old Tunguska. It has no economical use.

    Additionally, doesn't a Verba need to lock its IR seeker onto a target prior to launch? If so, this suggests that it cannot be launched from VLS.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5589
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:55 pm

    GarryB wrote:I think you are mostly ignoring the fact that Armata is not a tank.

    There will be a version of Armata that has a turret with a 125mm or later 152mm main gun that is used as a tank, but there will be Pantsir-SM and Tunguska and TOR versions and as mentioned above a 57mm armed version used for infantry transport... an IFV... the Tunguska replacement will likely also have 57mm guns as well because in the anti air role a 57mm cannon shell killing air targets to 12km makes it a very potent gun, and with the air search capabilities it will be effective in the role too.

    I rather suspect with the data communication and battle management systems all Armatas will carry that a new model Svir or Sokol-1 or improved version of either... perhaps incorporating scramjet propulsion might offer superior performance to any MANPADS through the main gun with net centric data from a range of platforms offering the situational awareness to use them at 10km or beyond.

    A standard MBT will not defend itself from aircraft... there will be IFVs and SPAAGs and short range systems armed with SOSNA-R and Morfei and Pantsir and TOR missiles doing that.

    I understand entirely, but Armata the name is now, falsely, but non the less a synonyme for T-14. The Armata is the modular based hull, however what he meant was the T-14 being equipped with Verba MANPAD. The battlefield is a combined arms warfare where all the little cogs fit in their intented use and maximize their potential in offensive/defensive capabilities, therefore in no structure of military units is a system like VERBA necessary to be installed as a vertical launcher on a Tank.


    Big_Gazza wrote:Additionally, doesn't a Verba need to lock its IR seeker onto a target prior to launch? If so, this suggests that it cannot be launched from VLS.

    It probably does need a LOBL but maybe it can be linked to IRST with some upgrade.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Militarov on Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:48 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:The Problem you would face with trying to integrate a Verba MANPAD system on a plattform like a Tank that is a frontline (ground to ground) orientated vehicle is that it does not have Thermial Imagers made to search for threats in the sky and due that being not aware of any threats from the sky like Attack Helicopters. That would mean you would need an OLS (IRST) which cost and will have no use 99% of the time they are installed, get easily dirty and by that decrease their functionality, use and will affect the amount of budget you will have to buy new tanks or maintain them, since such systems are made of highly costly materials such as saphiric lenses and what not, very costly for a system that is still very inferior compared even to an old Tunguska. It has no economical use.

    Additionally, doesn't a Verba need to lock its IR seeker onto a target prior to launch?  If so, this suggests that it cannot be launched from VLS.

    You can feed it into missile externally i belive.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Apr 07, 2016 6:47 am

    As far as shorad missile compromising armor density, I don't think it has to be. Turret bustle could be the place to store the shorad missile and launcher, with a mechanism in the rear of the bustle that could set the missile launcher at a 45 to 90 degree position, though I would recommend the IR seeker guidance being replaced with a laser beam riding channel in the rear of the missile, and or a radio command version similar to the Kristamum system. Turret bustle could also be the place for a smaller MLRS system such as a modernized BM-14 system, to rapidly engage soft-skin and human targets.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10517
    Points : 10994
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  George1 on Thu Apr 07, 2016 9:19 am

    New video with the tank T-14 of the "Armata" platform





    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    Vann7

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Vann7 on Thu Apr 07, 2016 9:25 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:The Problem you would face with trying to integrate a Verba MANPAD system on a plattform like a Tank that is a frontline (ground to ground) orientated vehicle is that it does not have Thermial Imagers made to search for threats in the sky and due that being not aware of any threats from the sky like Attack Helicopters. That would mean you would need an OLS (IRST) which cost and will have no use 99% of the time they are installed, get easily dirty and by that decrease their functionality, use and will affect the amount of budget you will have to buy new tanks or maintain them, since such systems are made of highly costly materials such as saphiric lenses and what not, very costly for a system that is still very inferior compared even to an old Tunguska. It has no economical use.

    Additionally, doesn't a Verba need to lock its IR seeker onto a target prior to launch?  If so, this suggests that it cannot be launched from VLS.


    somewhere it was said the Verba can operate in fire and forget mode. And can connect its mini radar to the defense network of any nation. So if confirmed, they can shut down any civil
    avatar
    higurashihougi

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  higurashihougi on Thu Apr 07, 2016 10:24 am

    Actually I am more curious about the BMPT version of Armata. It will be similar to what Garry described or it will looks more like the old Terminator ?
    avatar
    OminousSpudd

    Posts : 891
    Points : 908
    Join date : 2015-01-03
    Age : 22
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  OminousSpudd on Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:07 am

    higurashihougi wrote:Actually I am more curious about the BMPT version of Armata. It will be similar to what Garry described or it will looks more like the old Terminator ?

    I want it to look like the old Terminator or obvious reasons. Very Happy
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16515
    Points : 17123
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 07, 2016 11:41 am

    Big Gazza is right... to be vertically launched the system needs an autopilot and some way of acquiring the target after it is launched... most radar guided missiles like SARH or ARH are launched and then either start looking and find an illuminated target in the case of the SARH or scan for the target themselves in the case of the ARH both after being directed to the area the target is located by autopilot.

    In this case however the Verba requires a view of the target before it can be launched so unless the target is directly above the tank then there would be no launch.

    New missiles like Morfei will use an Imaging IR seeker and a datalink so it can be launched and directed towards where the target is before looking itself and locking onto the target... ie lock on after launch or LOAL.

    somewhere it was said the Verba can operate in fire and forget mode. And can connect its mini radar to the defense network of any nation. So if confirmed, they can shut down any civil

    All Verbas are heat seeking and operate in a fire and forget mode... just like all Igla-S, Igla-1, Igla, and the Strelas before them. None of them have mini radars, but can use nearby radars to cue the operator to point the missile in the correct direction ready for use.

    The idea that in the future a MBT might have small self defence missiles is not actually that far fetched as a trailer with Morphei could be used to shoot down threats like anti armour missiles, but for the moment the Afghanistan APS should suffice and of course any anti aircraft missile would more easily be fired through the main gun to greater ranges than the Verba is effective to.

    Remember against helos some existing ATGMs fired through 125mm gun tubes have a range of 8km with a lofted trajectory even though their anti armour range is 5.5km.

    A newer ramjet powered model could probably be used to much greater range... fit it with the seeker of the Morfei and you could probably hit targets at enormous distances...


    _________________
    “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
    Militarov

    Posts : 5538
    Points : 5579
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Militarov on Thu Apr 07, 2016 3:54 pm

    OminousSpudd wrote:
    higurashihougi wrote:Actually I am more curious about the BMPT version of Armata. It will be similar to what Garry described or it will looks more like the old Terminator ?

    I want it to look like the old Terminator or obvious reasons. Very Happy

    I am not rly sure about it happening. We already have T15, which has 30mm cannon and ATGMs and is on tank platform, that basically covers the idea behind Terminator.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Cyrus the great on Fri Apr 08, 2016 7:12 am

    Militarov wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:

    I'm going to be crowned the captain of asking stupid questions, but I maintain that looking foolish is an integral part of learning. So here it goes:

    I  understand that some people have discussed the possibility of incorporating anti-aircraft missiles on the Armata, so could the turret of the T-14 Armata physically incorporate the Verba missile by housing it vertically within the unmanned turret? The space required to accommodate the Verba missile would have to be at least 1.5 meters long. I imagine that the turret could *accommodate* three Verba missiles.  I know that SHORAD would better protect armored columns from aerial attacks, so I'm asking this admittedly stupid question to satisfy my own curiosity.  Embarassed






    Even IF it was ever placed on Armata i dont think they would install vertical launch tubes, as it would probably affect its protection, as they would though turret be laying partially in loader. IF it was ever placed on Armata i personally would do it like its on ZSU-23-4MP Biała for an example:





    Or like this:



    I understand now that vertical launch tubes would be an altogether bad idea. Your suggestions would not negatively impact the armour protection of the turret, but it does seem as though they would increase the profile of the Armata. The profile of the Armata is just perfect. Thanks for the picture, mate.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Cyrus the great on Fri Apr 08, 2016 7:40 am

    x_54_u43 wrote:
    Cyrus the great wrote:

    I'm going to be crowned the captain of asking stupid questions, but I maintain that looking foolish is an integral part of learning. So here it goes:

    I  understand that some people have discussed the possibility of incorporating anti-aircraft missiles on the Armata, so could the turret of the T-14 Armata physically incorporate the Verba missile by housing it vertically within the unmanned turret? The space required to accommodate the Verba missile would have to be at least 1.5 meters long. I imagine that the turret could *accommodate* three Verba missiles.  I know that SHORAD would better protect armored columns from aerial attacks, so I'm asking this admittedly stupid question to satisfy my own curiosity.  Embarassed


    Any ground to air functionality would be well performed by the future 57mm that might be mounted to the serial T-14 or the dedicated variant of SHORADS that uses the future 57mm.

    BTW the 57mm is slated for use with laser guided shells.

    Verba would just be a lot of cost with not a lot of functionality outside of shooting down aircraft. Now 57mm, on the other hand, are very, very useful in a variety of roles, from anti-personnel to soft-targets to fuck everything.


    You're right, the 57mm is infinitely better suited (and cheaper) for that task than MANPADS. The 57mm would also have a far longer range -- making it more effective. The various anti-aircraft systems would more effectively protect armoured columns and soldiers from aerial attack in combined arms operations. Being so fixated on missiles, I forgot just how potent the 57mm is. Thanks for answering my question, mate.




    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Cyrus the great on Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:58 am

    Werewolf wrote:The Problem you would face with trying to integrate a Verba MANPAD system on a plattform like a Tank that is a frontline (ground to ground) orientated vehicle is that it does not have Thermial Imagers made to search for threats in the sky and due that being not aware of any threats from the sky like Attack Helicopters. That would mean you would need an OLS (IRST) which cost and will have no use 99% of the time they are installed, get easily dirty and by that decrease their functionality, use and will affect the amount of budget you will have to buy new tanks or maintain them, since such systems are made of highly costly materials such as saphiric lenses and what not, very costly for a system that is still very inferior compared even to an old Tunguska. It has no economical use.

    I definitely get what you're saying, mate:

    A tank (like any other platform) in a modern military doesn't operate in a vacuum but as part of a combined arms team, with each element of that team operating more effectively when they are assigned to execute their intended role (s). Russia undoubtedly has the best air defence systems in the world and so its armoured columns won't be under any threat. Thanks for the thorough explanation, Werewolf. Thanks, mate.

    Cyrus the great

    Posts : 269
    Points : 279
    Join date : 2015-06-12

    incorporating anti-aircraft missiles on the Armata

    Post  Cyrus the great on Fri Apr 08, 2016 9:21 am

    GarryB wrote:I think you are mostly ignoring the fact that Armata is not a tank.

    There will be a version of Armata that has a turret with a 125mm or later 152mm main gun that is used as a tank, but there will be Pantsir-SM and Tunguska and TOR versions and as mentioned above a 57mm armed version used for infantry transport... an IFV... the Tunguska replacement will likely also have 57mm guns as well because in the anti air role a 57mm cannon shell killing air targets to 12km makes it a very potent gun, and with the air search capabilities it will be effective in the role too.

    I rather suspect with the data communication and battle management systems all Armatas will carry that a new model Svir or Sokol-1 or improved version of either... perhaps incorporating scramjet propulsion might offer superior performance to any MANPADS through the main gun with net centric data from a range of platforms offering the situational awareness to use them at 10km or beyond.

    A standard MBT will not defend itself from aircraft... there will be IFVs and SPAAGs and short range systems armed with SOSNA-R and Morfei and Pantsir and TOR missiles doing that.

    Too right, Garry. As you point out, armoured vehicles and SHORAD would work together to ensure that there are no gaps in the formation. Scramjet assisted missiles could reach speeds of 2, 000 meters per second, with the Verba being comparatively slow at 500 mps. The Sokol-1 has a max range of 12 km and so a scramjet assisted Sokol-1 missile would be absolutely devastating against helicopters.

    You and Werewolf are the best. Very informative posts. Thanks, mate.
    avatar
    Project Canada

    Posts : 622
    Points : 627
    Join date : 2015-07-20
    Age : 29
    Location : Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Project Canada on Mon Apr 11, 2016 12:02 pm


    Sponsored content

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:02 pm