Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Share
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:04 pm

    Mike E wrote:Sorry, but that makes no sense.

    Who mentioned a 516p (what kind of resolution is that...) monitor?

    To see far, you need a high-resolution array, high magnification, and maybe even high output (monitor) resolution (which improves the image when using electronic zoom).

    I believe you are talking about digital processing, which isn't exactly an exclusive feature. MS, even the M1A2 use it.


    Made a little mistake the resolution for most MFD is 512p (640x512) which are very broad in use in military other resolution do exist aswell but HD is very bad to downsample to fit for such mediocre resolutions to actually improve the image without losing quality in the downsampling process and large MFD's beyond 640 are not in wide use and that comes due the space such MFD's would occupy.

    Everything i listed is more important then high resolution cameras which monitors can't even provide pictures for without losing quality in process.



    Cameras see and give pictures to commander aswell gunner unless he uses direct optical eye piece connected but still processed via camera. Resolution is provided to commander via monitor and most military monitors are MFD with resolution of 640x512 or similiar ranges of resolutions due the size limitations.

    What i am talking about is entirely different than what you have assumed. What your cameras can capture has nothing to do what commander can actually see over a monitor. Optical resolution is not in use other than by gunner and will decrease over time due to moving on to other designs aswell having hard time to ensuring the current and past designs.
    avatar
    Mike E

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

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Mike E on Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:13 pm

    "Everything i listed is more important then high resolution cameras which monitors can't even provide pictures for without losing quality in process."

    This is your problem, you are assuming the monitors will need to display a lower resolution, which isn't true. For example, the new IFLIR sight will be able to output 1080p to a new 1080p monitor.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:16 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Mike E wrote:Ugh, issues? Never mentioned that Neutral

    Going off of current data (found on Paralay I believe) it'll basically match the Catherine-XP in most parameters; x3 magnification, x2 zoom, 20 mK sensitivity (whatever it is), and a 600-ish resolution sensor. That's not bad, but simply put, it isn't up there with the top models. In all honesty, it just needs higher magnification and sensor resolution, which is where it is outperformed (for ex, FLIR gen 2 has a magnification of x25, and resolution of over 900 IIRC, while its' updated version can also output 1080p).

    Hopefully it is better than expected, that, or a return to radar-assisted sights?

    Let's remember now that the T-14 is a prototype, and that Russian MOD wants to get it in to service as cheap as possible, hence the reason why they went with the less radical 125mm smooth-bore main gun with the option (if deemed necessary) to upgrade to a 152mm smooth-bore main gun (among under future upgrades). At a estimated $3.7 million price tag (half the price of the best foreign analogues of an older generation), which means theirs plenty of 'economic elbow-room' to upgrade the T-14 to a higher standard if deemed necessary. Upgrades which could come in the form of a 152mm main gun, superior thermals, and or potentially DIRCM suite or even photonic based systems of various stripes.

    One last thing, if the thermals match the Catherine-XP, then that's what they're probably using. At this point in time the Russian MIC is in a point of transition of radically reducing foreign dependency, and while the the Catherine-XP is tolerated (because they're domestically manufactured under license), it'll take time to replace them with a more advanced domestically made thermals (I estimate no less than 2 years). So in the mean time it's better to train your MBT operators with some thermals compared to training them with older, less capable domestic variants, or even worse, no thermals at all.
    It wont be. The chip is made by Orion which is 100% Russian.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:28 pm

    Mike E wrote:"Everything i listed is more important then high resolution cameras which monitors can't even provide pictures for without losing quality in process."

    This is your problem, you are assuming the monitors will need to display a lower resolution, which isn't true. For example, the new IFLIR sight will be able to output 1080p to a new 1080p monitor.

    That is not an assumption but a simple fact. A simple MFD that has nowhere near the size to display 1080p will never be capable to display 1080p meaning the monitor will have to downsample the resolution to fit its own. It is like playing 4K resolution video game on a 14 inch monitor, not possible to appreciate the 4K.
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt

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

    T-14

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:57 am


    Austin

    Posts : 6439
    Points : 6840
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Austin on Tue Jan 26, 2016 6:09 am

    First & Only Video of T-14 ARMATA Tank Firing

    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5609
    Points : 5650
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Militarov on Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:04 pm

    "Russian Land Forces will get T-14 Armata main battle tanks (MBT) among the newest armaments. The first batch to be fielded following the appropriate acceptance trials will include 32 MBTs (one battalion), according to the Land Forces chief, Colonel General Oleg Salyukov. Several research and development (R&D) works are in progress to create advanced armaments for armored vehicles, including T-14 MBT and T-15 BMP infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), respectively, Kurganets-25 IFV/armoured personnel carrier (APC), Bumerang (Boomerang) IFV/APC. The R&D were scheduled for completion by the next year’s end, Salyukov explained.

    "On completion of the acceptance trials, which may last a year or more, a battalion complement of these machines (32 machines of each type) will be acquired for trial operation with the troops undergoing all stages of combat training. Based on results, their final functions and amount of supplies will be defined," the commander added. In 2015, the Land Forces will adopt for service two brigade complements of Iskander-M mobile ballistic missile system, one for the Southern, the second for Eastern Military Districts. Pursuant to a long-term government contract, the troops are to receive two brigade complements every year. To date, four complements have been delivered. A fifth is due to be made available before the end of the current year for a missile unit of the Central Military District.

    The Russian Land Forces consider the possibility of acquiring the Terminator-2 combat tank support vehicle. The issue of its further employment would be determined following completion of work on the development of the future concept of the Land Forces, Salyukov said.At the same time, no plans are made for procuring the BTR-90 APC. "Now we are buiyng BTR-82A APCs that includes the latest achievements in armament package, fire control system, protection, mobility, and operability", Salyukov said.



    Two independent motor rifle brigades (in Murmansk District and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Territory) will be formed for the Arctic Army Group. "The Arctic troops will be equipped with off-road two-modules transport vehicles, snowmobiles, air-cushion vessels, special purpose armaments and gear. The combat training will be organized taking into account the climatic conditions," the commander added. Before 2020, the Russian Land Forces will get a total of 5,000 new and 6,000 upgraded combat vehicles, and around 14.000 modern trucks. Those would include T-72B3 MBTs that revealed their outstanding capabilities during the tank biathlon and Vostok-2014 (East 2014) exercises, BMP-3 and upgraded BMP-2 IFVs, and BTR-82 APCs, the commander said. He pointed out that "the procurement of BMP-3s is resumed. We are planning to supply the Land Forces with (several) battalion complements next year."


    Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/february_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/the_first_batch_of_32_t-14_armata_main_battle_tanks_will_enter_in_service_with_russian_army_10302163.html
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5609
    Points : 5650
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Militarov on Thu Feb 04, 2016 5:06 pm

    "The new Russian T-14 Armata main battle tank (MBT) is equipped with a new-generation ERA armor, according to a source in JSC Tractor Plants. The ERA was developed by NII Stali (a subsidiary of Tractor Plants). "It (the new ERA) can be described as an innovative one. Its specifications exceed those of Contact-1, Contact-5 and Relict", said the source. He didn't provide further details, saying only that the ERA has "no known world analogues". The source said that the new armor's resistance to armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot rounds (APFSDS) was significantly increased in comparison with the older ERA systems. "The high protective characteristics of the new armor aren't provided by the simple increase of explosive mass in its containers", said the source. He pointed out, that the detonation of an ERA container wouldn't damage the electronics and other equipment installed under armor.

    "The new ERA can resist to the anti-tank gun shells adopted by the NATO countries, including the state-of-the-art APFSDS DM53 and DM63 developed by Rheinmetall. It also resists to prospective anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM) with high-explosive anti-tank warheads" the source told. T-14 is also equipped with bar-slat armor located at the rear part of the hull. It was also developed by NII Stali, the source told. "It provides the protection from 50-60% of RPG grenades", he said.



    Armata is also equipped with metal-ceramic plates as basic armor. Novosibirsk-based enterprise NEVZ-Ceramics has already launched the serial production of such elements, told the head of the company's armored ceramics bureau Andrey Nikitin. "We finished the trials this year, and the elements revealed their declared capability", he said. Nikitin pointed out, that the armor-ceramic plates resistance is in one and half time higher, than of the full-metall ones. According to his words, the new armor plates will be installed not only on T-14 tank, but also on T-15, Kurganets-25 and Bumerang infantry combat vehicles.

    The decision to equip the new T-14 Armata with ERA armor seems to be in line with previous tank-developing concept. The first Soviet-designed ERA, namely Contact-1, was introduced in the early 1980s and installed on T-72B. The modern Russian tanks T-72B3, T-80UE-1 and T-90 are equipped with Contact-5 or Relict ERAs. But the installation of them on the armor leave some key areas, for instance, rooftop and driver's hatch, vulnerable to HEAT munitions and ATGMs. T-14 has ERA integrated in its armor construction. This measure significantly increases the Armata's resistance to modern anti-tank weapons."


    Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/russian-made_main_battle_tank_t-14_armata_protected_with_new_generation_of_era_armor_10402161.html

    par far

    Posts : 1485
    Points : 1644
    Join date : 2014-06-26

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  par far on Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:02 pm

    What are the chances that Armata 14 will be tested in Syria? Not right now but say at the end of 2016.

    Also can someone please shed light on the Urban version of the Armata 14.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5609
    Points : 5650
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Militarov on Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:20 pm

    par far wrote:What are the chances that Armata 14 will be tested in Syria? Not right now but say at the end of 2016.

    Also can someone please shed light on the Urban version of the Armata 14.

    Very slim. As much as field testing would help, its not really needed at this point, also imagine one being destroyed or captured or anything similar, it would affect possible sales alot as propaganda is powerful tool today. We might live to see newer variants of T90 tho.

    Urban version as heavy IFV T15?
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1747
    Points : 1787
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Fri Feb 05, 2016 10:45 pm

    Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Every action causes reaction. IF Russia feels threatened by a major conventional war, more funds will be allocated to the military and as a result, armament production will increase.

    Putin is pumping money to arms production not because Russia is aggressive but because he knows US is pushing for war before goets bankrupt. Tanks? in vast Russian steppes tanks are quite useful tools. Helicopters or planes will no move all supplies/ammo and infantry needed to keep terrain.



    Militarov wrote: We might live to see newer variants of T90 tho.

    Urban version as heavy IFV T15?

    I bet on Terminator 2 or its development as most suitable tool for Syrian theatre


    Last edited by GunshipDemocracy on Fri Feb 05, 2016 10:49 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3939
    Points : 3966
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Fri Feb 05, 2016 10:46 pm

    Why use Armata on such à clusterfuck of environnement ?
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Fri Feb 05, 2016 11:40 pm

    BMPT is the most likely vehicle that will be used in Syria for purposes of combat evaluation of established doctrines and its value for improvement in urban warfare.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Feb 06, 2016 3:47 am

    KoTeMoRe wrote:Why use Armata on such à clusterfuck of environnement ?

    Especially considering the T-90 is having a field day in Aleppo.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  GarryB on Sat Feb 06, 2016 7:19 am

    Would like to see them experiment with several variations of armament for the Terminator... but not the Armata based model... the T-90 based model would suffice.


    _________________
    “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
    KoTeMoRe

    Posts : 3939
    Points : 3966
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  KoTeMoRe on Sat Feb 06, 2016 12:53 pm

    There are a couple of issues with any kind of vehicle sent to Syria.

    1. T90. Russia has probably used it in Ukraine to the same extent (even to a far more conventional role) than it is using it in Syria. It already knows most of the tricks in the bag for such an AFV. It's more of a deepening of its "battle-test" rather than a test for it.
    2. It might use elements, rather than whole systems (like we're seeing on those pickups/APC's/Tanks).
    3. I don't thing there's any spot for the Terminator right now. Most of the "urban" combat we're seeing takes/has taken place because the SAA was unable to deliver enough firepower on target area. You can see that once the damn bombs and rockets start hitting there's not much of a resistance from our favourite moderate be-headers. I'm not saying that airpower is winning this war (after all airpower is only a tool in the toolbox) just that the people who use the AP have a plan and a clue about what they are doing.
    4. They have to address valid threats, not be just a rolling lab. For instance the BMPT unless equipped with longer range missiles and a standoff warning suite, will be as much as risk as many of the vehicles Russia has been sending.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5358
    Points : 5587
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Feb 06, 2016 2:10 pm

    On otvaga they claim that this is part of the elektromagnetic protective suite against elektromagnetic detonators in some ATGM's and mines.




    Cables running around the hull to induce a magnetic field to fool electromagnetic detonators of the actual position of the tank and by that detonate with some distance to the tank itself making such mines and ATGM's ineffective.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5743
    Points : 5847
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Feb 06, 2016 2:48 pm

    Werewolf wrote:BMPT is the most likely vehicle that will be used in Syria for purposes of combat evaluation of established doctrines and its value for improvement in urban warfare.

    BMPT has been dropped by Russian Army. It's future equivalent is T-15. Same thing but with more armor and troop transport capability.
    avatar
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2149
    Points : 2250
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  higurashihougi on Sat Feb 06, 2016 3:22 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:BMPT is the most likely vehicle that will be used in Syria for purposes of combat evaluation of established doctrines and its value for improvement in urban warfare.

    BMPT has been dropped by Russian Army. It's future equivalent is T-15. Same thing but with more armor and troop transport capability.

    I just remember some opinions say that "BMPT is a BMP uparmoured and uparmed" - although many of us do not agree with these opinions...
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 1747
    Points : 1787
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Sat Feb 06, 2016 5:19 pm

    GarryB wrote:Would like to see them experiment with several variations of armament for the Terminator... but not the Armata based model... the T-90 based model would suffice.

    This would have also commercial value. Kinda machine that destroyed terrorist in urban warfare.

    IMHO merging tank chassis with urban kits (bulldozer to break thru barricades and debris) high elevation rapid fire gun (57mm) and gatling 12,7 HMG for suppression fire. complemented by thermobaric RGP/missiles and eventually 40mm grenade launcher. Is exactly what is needed to fight terrorist in hard terrain or urban env.
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4488
    Points : 4661
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Feb 06, 2016 6:49 pm











    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Feb 06, 2016 8:12 pm

    avatar
    higurashihougi

    Posts : 2149
    Points : 2250
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  higurashihougi on Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:18 am


    The technology is just a step away from the ability to create 3D-printed titanium parts several meters in length.

    Is it possible ? Titanium melting point is f***ing high, and the titanium processing is much more difficult than other metals.
    avatar
    zepia

    Posts : 131
    Points : 138
    Join date : 2015-05-05
    Location : Bangkok

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  zepia on Sun Feb 07, 2016 3:51 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:

    The technology is just a step away from the ability to create 3D-printed titanium parts several meters in length.

    Is it possible ? Titanium melting point is f***ing high, and the titanium processing is much more difficult than other metals.


    Definitely possible.
    The process is actually "weld" metal dust layer by layer.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16865
    Points : 17473
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 08, 2016 4:56 am

    BMPT has been dropped by Russian Army. It's future equivalent is T-15. Same thing but with more armor and troop transport capability.

    You don't understand.

    BMPT is a tank support vehicle.... and APC and an IFV are two types of troop transports.

    If a vehicle is transporting troops then it can't be a BMPT, because a BMPT is supposed to be protecting the tanks from infantry... not hauling around troops... that is what IFVs and APCs are for.

    From what I have read they are still deciding on whether they need a BMPT or not... the concept was to have the BMPT as a support vehicle with the same level of mobility and armour as a MBT but with its firepower optimised for dealing with targets other than enemy heavy armour. A good example of that would be an IFVs armament... ie 100mm low pressure gun and 30mm auto cannon, or just heavy high rate of fire weapons like the Shilkas four 23mm cannon.

    The obvious issue is that the IFV of armata meets that criteria already, though the rear hull can be utilised to carry more ammo, but the separation of the crew in the front armoured capsule, the separate area for the weapons in the turret and the rear troop area all being sealed off from each other mean having extra ammo in the rear troop compartment is not so useful as you need to be able to move it to the centre section where the weapons are without having to have the crew leaving their armoured capsule.

    this suggests to me that a new design with the weapons and troop transport section just separated by a firewall to allow ammo to be passed into the weapon area would be a good design addition.

    The rear area that was the troop area in the T-15 IFV could be modified to take pallets of ammo so it could be loaded all in one go with a forklift... the first pallet could have its ammo transfered into the weapons section automatically and then the pallet removed and a new full pallet fitted so in combat it would have two full loads of ammo ready to go and able to be transferred in combat without the crew needing to get out of the vehicle.

    Another option could be to use the rear troop area for other things like RWS and UCAV launchers and also ground based robots that can be sent ahead or launched for a better view of the battlefield.

    The RWS will mean both the weapon area and the troop area will contain ammo, but both areas are still separated from the crew compartment anyway.


    _________________
    “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: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 14, 2017 9:51 pm