General Main Battle Tank Technology Thread:

I thought the T-84 had a new bustle autoloader?
At the very least the T-84 Oplot-M does.

flamming_python wrote:I thought the T-84 had a new bustle autoloader?
At the very least the T-84 Oplot-M does.

No. Even Oplot-M has the same autoloader, that T-64/80 used. It's bustle doesn't have enough space for a new one.

To Zivo:

Thanks for the pictures  

Please pardon my uneducated guess o masters of defence related issues and tank design and forgive my poore soul for incroaching on your vapourware meditation ,but i would like to point out that that picture resembles the FRENCH LECLERC tank.
so the russians are now copying french tank design? 
they must be really desperate if they are copying  french white flag military... 

Rpg type 7v, may I ask, which tank part in particular was copied from Leclerc?

i was talking about autoloader.

Rpg type 7v, since you're so well informed about the Leclerc, perhaps you can help me find some diagrams that pertain to the details of it's autoloader and magazines.

Wait, did he really claim they copied the Leclerc's autoloader for the T-90?


Lmao. Wow, that is record level stupid for this forum.

TR1 wrote:Wait, did he really claim they copied the Leclerc's autoloader for the T-90?


Lmao. Wow, that is record level stupid for this forum.

Apparently so.

Nevertheless, let him back his claims. I'm waiting to see his info on the Leclerc autoloader.

Rpg type 7v wrote:i was talking about autoloader.

Well, doesn't the leclerc have NATO standart 120 mm one-peace ammunition? This would automatically dismiss any accusations, since 125mm is two-part, and requires a much different loading and storage mechanism, wouldn't it?

And that's not even mentioning that leclerc's a-loader is in the turret bustle, so that's a different place, isn't it?

That guy is just a low quality troll that doesn't even gives a shit about making at least to a certain degree clever trolls with his inferiority complex and russophobia.

Every idiot knows that Leclerc uses a horizontal autoloader and uses a one piece ammunition like mentioned before by etaepsilonk, in a capsouled autoloading and ammunition storage bustle.
And since every idiot knows that our russophobe must be a special version of an unintelligent organism.

The only similiarities between those autoloaders is they don't need a human to operate it.

Werewolf ,let up on the kid,dont be so harsh or mean.The only way to project this site is in a positive,corrective way.The videos of T-80 B did nothing but shame Russian foundries,poor quality is evident everywhere,finish of product exterior is fine . interior an issue.Leo 2A6 looks better each time a poor quality version of home grown tech is viewed.Get on the ball!I am a foundry worker that  work is done by trained monkeys in a meth lab....children could make better casts.

Pugnax wrote:Werewolf ,let up on the kid,dont be so harsh or mean.The only way to project this site is in a positive,corrective way.The videos of T-80 B did nothing but shame Russian foundries,poor quality is evident everywhere,finish of product exterior is fine . interior an issue.Leo 2A6 looks better each time a poor quality version of home grown tech is viewed.Get on the ball!I am a foundry worker that  work is done by trained monkeys in a meth lab....children could make better casts.

imma have to disagree with this, finishing touches for aesthetic reasons in a war machine does not make sense. If anything it just makes things even more expensive, and besides these things should look and work as rugged as possible. Hell, the crew should expect their tank to be as ripe for abuse as possible, the more confident they are with the equipment, the more confident they become to finish the mission and even take risks that lack of confidence in the machine they wouldnt take. And besides, T-/72B/80/90 have close to 60% of their weight as armour, M1Abrams, Challys, Leo2s , etc. dont even come close so if anything I have to ask why the other side focuses on aesthetics while it is armour that matters more.

Pugnax wrote:Werewolf ,let up on the kid,dont be so harsh or mean.The only way to project this site is in a positive,corrective way.The videos of T-80 B did nothing but shame Russian foundries,poor quality is evident everywhere,finish of product exterior is fine . interior an issue.Leo 2A6 looks better each time a poor quality version of home grown tech is viewed.Get on the ball!I am a foundry worker that  work is done by trained monkeys in a meth lab....children could make better casts.

I'm not very well aware of all this, but I suspect, that appearant crudeness of the Russian (or Ukrainian, Chinese and so on) tanks comes from the pipes, wiring and various devices being sticked on the walls of the interior. This is done for simplicity and safety reasons. All of these things can break or catch fire, in this case it would be easily seen, as opposed to when they're hidden, a small fire would be much harder to detect and put down (note, that the same scheme is applied to ships and submarines, and for the very same reasons).


Oh, that leclerc discussion reminds me of one thing. There was a joint tank project between Germany and France, which preceded Leclerc, but never materialized (it was called like "Napoleon" or something). Anyone know more details about it?

ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.
next question: will the armata have one piece ammo?

Rpg type 7v wrote:ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.
next question: will the armata have one piece ammo?

The question that i ask myself all the time is, do you have any piece that is known to mankind as a brain?

Werewolf wrote:

Rpg type 7v wrote:ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.
next question: will the armata have one piece ammo?

The question that i ask myself all the time is, do you have any piece that is known to mankind as a brain?

Maybe he's not actually a person, but rather, some experimental AI computer program  .... Beta version, I suspect.

Rpg type 7v wrote:ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.

The T-90A has a welded turret.

For the sake of your own credibility, do a little research before making inflammatory comments. If you don't know, ask, but be nice about it.

Falsely accusing UVZ of theft of intellectual property wont win you any favors.

will the armata have one piece ammo?

Very little is known about the Armata MBT's autoloader.

Rpg type 7v wrote:ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.
next question: will the armata have one piece ammo?

What do You want them to do? Weld the ammo together.
You are the funniest person here, darling.

Regular wrote:

Rpg type 7v wrote:ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.
next question: will the armata have one piece ammo?

What do You want them to do? Weld the ammo together.
You are the funniest person here, darling.

one-piece ammo is passe, havent you heard? next gen tanks with 140mm and 125mm will all have two-piece rounds or maybe even liquid propellant rounds.  
Also, I dont see how one can confuse T-series autoloader w/ Leclerc's.

Regular wrote:

Rpg type 7v wrote:ok i said in advance i dont know much about tanks, but the outline on that picture didnt look like t-72 t-90 ,more like leclerc. but whatever and obnoxious comments i dont read.
next question: will the armata have one piece ammo?

What do You want them to do? Weld the ammo together.
You are the funniest person here, darling.

so you dont know?
thanks for the insults...

will the armata have one piece ammo?

No one actually knows but the first one will have a 125mm gun so I suspect the two piece ammo will continue to be used as standard.

The larger calibre 152mm ammo will require two piece ammo just like the proposed NATO 140mm ammo would require two piece ammo AND an autoloader as the two parts become too heavy to handle inside a turret.

122/125mm ammo is about the limit... the 2S1 has manual loading of shells (122mm) , while 2S3 uses automatic loading (152mm).

The main reason is that 122-125mm shells weigh 21.8kg and 23kg respectively for the HE shells, while the 152mm HE shells weigh over 40kgs.

Rpg type 7v wrote:
thanks for the insults...

What insults, I never insulted You and I couldn't care less. You make a good laugh by spitting stereotypes over and over again. 
And YES, I don't know if they will bring one piece ammo or not. 
But as of today Russia is using two piece ammo and it's pretty safe to assume that Armata with 125 mm will be utilising same ammunition. 
And I think Garry puts everything in clear, but as with new Russian projects we know very little about them.

We know the new Armata tank vehicle will initially use a 125mm main gun and there would be ZERO sense in adapting the newly developed ammo for it into one piece ammo because that would make it not compatible with the vast number of 125mm guns already in service (except the towed guns).

Making the ammo one piece would just make it longer and heavier and not really offer much of an advantage in combat terms.

The next generation gun will be 152mm calibre or something similar... they might call it 155mm or 156mm so it doesn't get confused with 152mm artillery rounds... just like the BMP-1 is fitted with a 73mm calibre rocket launcher when western use of standard calibres would have meant it would have been a 76.2mm weapon... even though the ammo are not related and not compatible.

The weight and size of the new ammo will demand two piece ammo.

then armata wont have any better armour penetration, then current russian tanks right?
Leclerc uses single piece ammo in 120mm ,so how much heavier is 125mm ammo compared to it?

Rpg type 7v wrote:then armata wont have any better armour penetration, then current russian tanks right?
Leclerc uses single piece ammo in 120mm ,so how much heavier is 125mm ammo compared to it?

Leclerc tank has a carosel autoloader in rear of turret, behind gun where there is space in the large turret. Russian autoloader is under gun and smaller, thats why ammo is two pieces.
And both no and yes, armour penetration may be better with APFSDS if muzzle speed is higher.

When west upgrades to 140mm they will have to use autoloader. When they do, they can reduce weight by 8 tons by having 3 man crew like they did with Leclerc. And for sure both new 140 and 152 will have two piece ammo.