Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22367
    Points : 22911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB on Mon Feb 24, 2014 9:56 am

    The old multi turreted tanks made sense when armour was thin and a 37mm or 45mm gun was enough to penetrate enemy tanks.

    The central gun was artillery while the odd turrets were MG equipped leaving two turrets with anti armour weapons in the form early on of 37mm and later 45mm guns.

    Personally, I thought two turrets in the front hull corners with a PKT MG and a 40mm grenade launcher would have been an excellent if expensive addition to the T-90 based BMPT shown.

    With light weapons the turrets could have a wide field of fire... perhaps up to 225 degrees horizontal and -15 to plus 90 degrees in elevation from very close in out to 1.2km for the PKT and 2.5km for the 40m grenade launcher.

    The BMPT vehicle had a crew of 5 anyway and with proper turrets instead of bow guns targets at greater angles could be engaged so the vehicle could fire upon more than just a couple of targets at once (ie in front and where ever the turret is pointed)...

    Most soft targets can be dealt with using 7.62mm fire and where targets are better protected or behind cover the small HE bursting grenades would do the job.

    Doing away with the bow guns you could get rid of the two extra gunners and with a crew of three perhaps a central front hull mounted small turret with a PKT and 40mm grenade launcher that is controlled by the driver might be useful.

    With a PKT on the commanders main sight this would pretty much mean each of the three crewmen would have access to a weapon to immediately fire on any target that wanders into view immediately without having to worry about turning the turret.

    In terms of size and weight a 23mm cannon based on the KPV (KPB?) mounted next to the MBTs main gun would offer cannon level HE power in a compact low recoil weapon whose compact ammo could be carried in large quantities.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5286
    Points : 5439
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:18 pm

    GarryB wrote:The old multi turreted tanks made sense when armour was thin and a 37mm or 45mm gun was enough to penetrate enemy tanks.

    The central gun was artillery while the odd turrets were MG equipped leaving two turrets with anti armour weapons in the form early on of 37mm and later 45mm guns.

    Personally, I thought two turrets in the front hull corners with a PKT MG and a 40mm grenade launcher would have been an excellent if expensive addition to the T-90 based BMPT shown.

    With light weapons the turrets could have a wide field of fire... perhaps up to 225 degrees horizontal and -15 to plus 90 degrees in elevation from very close in out to 1.2km for the PKT and 2.5km for the 40m grenade launcher.

    The BMPT vehicle had a crew of 5 anyway and with proper turrets instead of bow guns targets at greater angles could be engaged so the vehicle could fire upon more than just a couple of targets at once (ie in front and where ever the turret is pointed)...

    Most soft targets can be dealt with using 7.62mm fire and where targets are better protected or behind cover the small HE bursting grenades would do the job.

    Doing away with the bow guns you could get rid of the two extra gunners and with a crew of three perhaps a central front hull mounted small turret with a PKT and 40mm grenade launcher that is controlled by the driver might be useful.

    With a PKT on the commanders main sight this would pretty much mean each of the three crewmen would have access to a weapon to immediately fire on any target that wanders into view immediately without having to worry about turning the turret.

    In terms of size and weight a 23mm cannon based on the KPV (KPB?) mounted next to the MBTs main gun would offer cannon level HE power in a compact low recoil weapon whose compact ammo could be carried in large quantities.

    I know you've talked about compact telescopic ammo concerning a 45/57mm turret for next gen IFV's, and you mentioned the 23mm rounds are compact as they are...would telescopic 23mm ammunition be a good idea to invest in for compactness and increased ammo capacity, or are there draw backs to telescopic ammunition with smaller rounds? Like needing to design/redesign new guns?
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22367
    Points : 22911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty the idea behind telescoped ammo

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:40 am

    I know you've talked about compact telescopic ammo concerning a 45/57mm turret for next gen IFV's, and you mentioned the 23mm rounds are compact as they are...would telescopic 23mm ammunition be a good idea to invest in for compactness and increased ammo capacity, or are there draw backs to telescopic ammunition with smaller rounds? Like needing to design/redesign new guns?

    the idea behind telescoped ammo is to move away from the bottle shaped standard round. If you think about the bottle shaped round the projectile is relatively narrow compared with the body of the round so when you stack the rounds there is a lot of empty space around the projectile.

    The idea of a telescoped round is to move the projectile right back into the case yet extend the case forward a little too so the overall round is actually shorter but the shell case is longer and can contain more propellent but the nose of the round is a sabot which is attached to the projectile. When you fire the round the sabot is blown down the barrel and pulls the projectile down the barrel with it.

    the result is a round that stacks rather more efficiently, but is shorter than its old equivalent.

    Most importantly if you start with the 57mm round:

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 57_34710

    It is probably about 100mm in calibre in the propellent filled area, so if you drop its calibre to say 85mm, with high energy propellent and extend the shell case from the current 347mm to maybe 440mm the entire round would be shorter and narrower with the round  buried within the shell case.

    the point with propellent is that the high velocity anti armour darts take up little space so more propellent and higher velocities can be achieved. the lower velocity heavier HE and laser guided rounds fill the shell case more but they don't need as much propellent because they don't need very high velocity.

    The added advantage is that if you have an 85mm calibre shell case you can just change barrels to change calibre from 57mm to 65mm or up to 82mm rounds which means a heavier HE payload or a high velocity APFSDS round that can still penetrate lots of enemy armour.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22367
    Points : 22911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:20 am

    Armored Vehicles Wikipedia Launched by Russian Tank Maker

    online tank-themed encyclopedia, dubbed “Tankopedia,” has been launched in honor of Russia’s Defender of the Fatherland Day, the country’s largest armored vehicles producer said Monday.

    Nizhny Tagil-based Uralvagonzavod said the goal of the project, patterned on Wikipedia, is to create a user-editable repository of armored warfare facts and history, including cultural works inspired by or featuring tanks, such as movies, songs, poetry and games.

    Company deputy director Alexei Zharich said the website would “undoubtedly allow younger generations to become acquainted with the glorious history of the industry.”

    The website, tankopedia.org, had already gone live Monday with over 2,000 Russian-language articles related to armored fighting vehicles.

    The company says it intends to digitize the holdings of its museum in the Urals city of Nizhny Tagil, where the factory is located, which includes more than 50,000 items, including archival documents, photographs, drawings and blueprints.

    Uralvagonzavod’s output has made online splashes in the past, although perhaps not in a way the company would have preferred.

    A YouTube video a T-90 tank plowing through snowbanks at high speed onto a busy road in Nizhny Tagil became an Internet sensation last year.

    The company said the tank, crossing at a green light, broke no traffic rules and that oncoming traffic was at fault for ignoring a red light.

    In July, the tank maker, founded under the Soviet Union’s second five-year plan as a railway car factory, launched a line of clothing and fashion accessories under its brand name, Uralvagonzavod.

    The country celebrated Defender of the Fatherland Day on Sunday.

    Looks to me like this new wiki database wont be fan designed and edited but will be managed by UVZ.

    Sounds to me like a good thing.

    source: http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140224/187844232/Armored-Vehicles-Wikipedia-Launched-by-Russian-Tank-Maker.html


    BTW in another story it seems that western DIRCMs might not be as effective as they should be due to this:

    http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140224/187855734/Russia-Develops-Laser-Shield-for-Military-Optical-Devices.html
    http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20140224/187855734/Russia-Develops-Laser-Shield-for-Military-Optical-Devices.html
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1145
    Points : 1146
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 23
    Location : Roanapur

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Wed Mar 19, 2014 12:19 pm

    1 year more...  Twisted Evil 
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 868
    Points : 1035
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Wed Jun 18, 2014 11:29 pm


    Unified heavy platform "Armata" comfirm at today all technical requirements set by MoD.


    http://vpk.name/news/112104_gosispyitaniya_bronetankovoi_tehniki_armata_podtverzhdayut_tehharakteristiki_platformyi.html
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7446
    Points : 7843
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Austin on Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:32 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Unified heavy platform "Armata" comfirm at today all technical requirements set by MoD.


    http://vpk.name/news/112104_gosispyitaniya_bronetankovoi_tehniki_armata_podtverzhdayut_tehharakteristiki_platformyi.html

    Does that mean they have completed the trails of Armata and close to production.

    OR State Trials of Armata is still to be completed
    avatar
    Asf

    Posts : 472
    Points : 491
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Asf on Thu Jun 19, 2014 2:44 pm

    State Trials of Armata is still to be completed

    This. I don't think they will be complited till 2015. It a large amount of work
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22367
    Points : 22911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:12 am

    I suspect the MBT models are likely ready and being tested by the Army, but the other vehicle types are probably also yet to be tested.

    they mentioned showing armata next year at the may parade...
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7446
    Points : 7843
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Austin on Fri Jun 20, 2014 6:29 pm

    New Tank "Armata" has no foreign counterparts
    http://vpk-news.ru/news/20753


    "This new generation tank. It has no analogues neither we nor abroad. The crew is completely isolated from the crew compartment in a peculiar bronekapsuly. Manage the most computerized.


    The tank is fitted satellite navigation. The obtaining of information from unmanned aerial vehicles. "Armata" fits well with the concept of network-centric battle management. It really is a breakthrough in terms of tank implemented in the technologies involved, and a real breakthrough tank "- said O.Sienko.


    He noted that "Armata" is designed as a single platform for a wide range of combat vehicles for various purposes ranging from engineering to health and artillery and rocket. "
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 868
    Points : 1035
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:10 pm

    Austin wrote:New Tank "Armata" has no foreign counterparts

    Yes Austin but , in mine opinion, the most interesting news coming out from the full interview


    http://www.arms-expo.ru/news/aviasalony_i_vystavki/gendirektor_uralvagonzavoda_oleg_sienko_svoimi_vagonami_my_gordimsya_ne_menshe_chem_tankami/

    is the specifics (and some hints the its CONOP) of the 57 mm АУ-220М mounted now on ATOM IFV : it show an engagement range of 16 km and seem that its selection has been the fruit of analysis showing high capability to engage aerial targets and in particular UAVs on any kinds




    Олег Сиенко wrote:Пушка отличается высокой скорострельностью и точностью стрельбы на дальности до 16 км. Она может уверенно поражать не только наземные цели, но и воздушные


    Олег Сиенко wrote:Между тем наши расчеты показали, что именно 57 мм пушки должны хорошо работать практически по всем типам беспилотных летательных аппаратов


    This simple factor - capability to engage very cheaply and at enormously exapanded ranges small flying vehicles ,such UAVs, capable to change quickly direction in the 3D - point openly :


    1) To the capability, by part of similar veichles to capitalise the vastly increased capabilities of its main weapon system through the authonomous acquisition and processiing -through mostly optical channel and improved ballistic computing systems - or through third party reception of networked informations stream on target positional data , also for flying vehicles like UAV/UCAV capables to swiftly change position in the 3D axis.


    2) To the capability to engage reliably PGMs ,in particular high precision gliding bombs, characterized by very limited closing speed and almost not existent capability to "challenge" the defeating zone of the 57 mm АУ-220М's bursts, moving outside the computed kill zone with sharp maneuvers. .
    Equally important : the greatly exapanded kill zone will not only allow the re-engagements on all the incoming flying targets eventually survivng the first attempt but also to engage some kind of PGMs (at example a CBU-97) long before them will come in the zone useful for the delivering of theirs sub-munitions



    Very likely those impovements (together with new depelopments in the munition technology in this particular class of guns) will deeply influence not only the caliber of choice for the main medium caliber weapon of the future Armata/Kurganet/Boomerang brigades but the same basis concept of ground force protection's doctrine for the foreseeable future.

    avatar
    Asf

    Posts : 472
    Points : 491
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Asf on Sat Jun 21, 2014 1:19 pm

    high capability to engage aerial targets and in particular UAVs on any kinds 

    57 mm calibre ammo was designed for soviet AA guns btw
    avatar
    Austin

    Posts : 7446
    Points : 7843
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Austin on Sat Jun 21, 2014 2:05 pm

    Thats quite interesting , The Gun of 57 mm has great potential if its backed by a good radar and intelligent ammo.

    Any idea what is the effective altitude of this 57 mm Gun , The range is 16 km but what is the max effective altitude ?

    Also the Atom-2 is interesting , it wont be French which other country it will be ? China ?
    avatar
    Asf

    Posts : 472
    Points : 491
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Asf on Sat Jun 21, 2014 2:35 pm

    Any idea what is the effective altitude of this 57 mm Gun , The range is 16 km but what is the max effective altitude ?

    Old ZSU-57-2 were used for around 4 km attitudes. But it had old ammunition


    Also the Atom-2 is interesting , it wont be French which other country it will be ? China ?

    Atom is just a concept. IRL the russian industry will make boomerangs which are similar in their role. And the gun is totaly russian, there is no need of french designers
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5286
    Points : 5439
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Jun 21, 2014 7:41 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    Austin wrote:New Tank "Armata" has no foreign counterparts

    Yes Austin but , in mine opinion,  the most interesting  news coming out from the full interview


    http://www.arms-expo.ru/news/aviasalony_i_vystavki/gendirektor_uralvagonzavoda_oleg_sienko_svoimi_vagonami_my_gordimsya_ne_menshe_chem_tankami/

    is the specifics (and some hints the its CONOP) of the 57 mm АУ-220М mounted now on ATOM IFV : it show an engagement range of 16 km and seem that its selection has been the fruit of analysis showing high capability to engage aerial targets and in particular UAVs on any kinds  




    Олег Сиенко wrote:Пушка отличается высокой скорострельностью и точностью стрельбы на дальности до 16 км. Она может уверенно поражать не только наземные цели, но и воздушные


    Олег Сиенко wrote:Между тем наши расчеты показали, что именно 57 мм пушки должны хорошо работать практически по всем типам беспилотных летательных аппаратов


    This simple factor - capability to engage very cheaply and at enormously exapanded ranges small flying vehicles ,such UAVs, capable to change quickly direction in the 3D - point openly :


    1) To the capability, by part of similar veichles to capitalise the vastly increased capabilities of its main weapon system through the authonomous acquisition and processiing -through mostly optical channel and improved ballistic computing systems - or through third party reception of networked informations stream on target positional data ,  also for flying vehicles like UAV/UCAV capables to swiftly change position in the 3D axis.


    2) To the capability to engage reliably PGMs ,in particular high precision gliding bombs, characterized by very limited closing speed and almost not existent capability to "challenge" the defeating zone of the 57 mm АУ-220М's bursts, moving outside the computed kill zone with sharp maneuvers. .
    Equally important : the greatly exapanded kill zone will not only allow the re-engagements on all the incoming flying targets eventually survivng the first attempt but also to engage some kind of PGMs (at example a CBU-97) long before them will come in the zone useful for the delivering of theirs sub-munitions



    Very likely those impovements (together with new depelopments in the munition technology in this particular class of guns) will deeply influence not only the caliber of choice for the main medium caliber weapon of the future Armata/Kurganet/Boomerang brigades but the same basis concept of ground force protection's doctrine for the foreseeable future.
     

    You know what would really be amazing if the Armata T-99 would have a 125mm-57mm load out similar to BMP-3's 100mm-30mm load out, maybe with turret elevation of (-5) degrees and 85 degree elevation, combined with encoded data links to Russian AWACS allowing limited (but effective) AA capability (good for glide bombs, helicopters and attack drones), and encoded data links with Su-34's combined with guided 57mm and 125mm shells, where the "HELLDUCK" conducts flying guided shell traffic right on the top armor of a M1 Abrams tanks!
    Zivo
    Zivo

    Posts : 1488
    Points : 1514
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Zivo on Sat Jun 21, 2014 8:13 pm

    IMO, the 57mm was adopted to take on the west's new generation of heavy IFV's.

    A 57mm APFSDS would make swiss cheese of anything that doesn't have MBT frontal level protection. It wouldn't make much sense to use a 57/125mm coaxial configuration as the 125 is the main anti-armor weapon.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5286
    Points : 5439
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sun Jun 22, 2014 1:14 am

    Zivo wrote:IMO, the 57mm was adopted to take on the west's new generation of heavy IFV's.

    A 57mm APFSDS would make swiss cheese of anything that doesn't have MBT frontal level protection. It wouldn't make much sense to use a 57/125mm coaxial configuration as the 125 is the main anti-armor weapon.

    Remember the Armata MBT will be modular in nature and it'll probably have multiple load outs. The 125mm gun will be for enemy tanks while the 57mm gun would be for everything else, in a low intensity conflict fighting an asymmetrical insurgency the Armata BMPT will pick up most of the slack while Armata MBT will still play a role. Future conflicts may see cheap suicide mini-helicopter drones being employed by insurgents with shaped charges strapped to the bottom of them for the purpose of landing on top of armor and blowing up, and most likely will be employed in swarms, so future MBT's will likely have to evolve to have some kind of limited AA capability. A secondary 57mm gun with telescopic ammo, ANIET proximity fuzes, and guided shells will be an adequate answer for asymmetrical suicide mini-drones.
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1145
    Points : 1146
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 23
    Location : Roanapur

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Jun 22, 2014 5:17 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Remember the Armata MBT will be modular in nature and it'll probably have multiple load outs. The 125mm gun will be for enemy tanks while the 57mm gun would be for everything else, in a low intensity conflict fighting an asymmetrical insurgency the Armata BMPT will pick up most of the slack while Armata MBT will still play a role.
    as one of GarryB's yes men ill have to say the the armata ifv filled with ammo instead of infantry would be enough for a BMPT.
    while you lose on the raw explosive(but overkill most of the time) power and Non-LOS capability( which can be remedied by a GL) you increase the number of targets that can be engaged and gain anti-aircraft capability.
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Future conflicts may see cheap suicide mini-helicopter drones being employed by insurgents with shaped charges strapped to the bottom of them for the purpose of landing on top of armor and blowing up, and most likely will be employed in swarms, so future MBT's will likely have to evolve to have some kind of limited AA capability. A secondary 57mm gun with telescopic ammo, ANIET proximity fuzes, and guided shells will be an adequate answer for asymmetrical suicide mini-drones.
    The afghan or standard APS would suffice for such small, close-in threats.

    Anyway im curious to see what new russky APFSDS looks like in metal as well as its capability on the internet. would be funny if it turns out to be a match even for M1A3, hehehe.
    Zivo
    Zivo

    Posts : 1488
    Points : 1514
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Zivo on Sun Jun 22, 2014 6:45 am

    Remember the Armata MBT will be modular in nature and it'll probably have multiple load outs. The 125mm gun will be for enemy tanks while the 57mm gun would be for everything else, in a low intensity conflict fighting an asymmetrical insurgency the Armata BMPT will pick up most of the slack while Armata MBT will still play a role. Future conflicts may see cheap suicide mini-helicopter drones being employed by insurgents with shaped charges strapped to the bottom of them for the purpose of landing on top of armor and blowing up, and most likely will be employed in swarms, so future MBT's will likely have to evolve to have some kind of limited AA capability. A secondary 57mm gun with telescopic ammo, ANIET proximity fuzes, and guided shells will be an adequate answer for asymmetrical suicide mini-drones.

    The 57mm rounds will significantly affect the 125mm round count compared to smaller weapons. This is a major problem.  It will have the same elevation as the main gun. Armata will have decent range of elevation compared to other MBT's, but it will still be inadequate.


    IMO, the best solution would be to simply make a BMPT addon for the stock Armata MBT's. The stock MBT's will probably have a RWS positioned directly on the center of the turret, this is the optimum location for the weapon. It will either be a 12.7 or 7.62mm gun. The BMPT modification would be a single, self contained bolt-on unit that includes a bustle magazine, replacement GSh-23 RWS with a heavy frame, and a armored feed system that extends from the bustle, across the top of the roof, and into the replacement RWS. The large armored feed system would also serve as a "adapter" to accommodate the heavier framed 23mm RWS raising the RWS roof mount up a few inches to accommodate the feed system and low profile RWS turret substructure. The BMPT system would be non-penetrating, and would tie into the stock RWS wiring. Making the modification cheap and modular in nature. Another major advantage to the system, there's no sacrifice to the MBT count. The disadvantage, it would increase the weight of one MBT in the unit.

    Armata chassis will be expensive, cutting MBT's for purpose built BMPT's just doesn't seem smart. I believe the best solution would be to simply increase the lethality of the RWS on the group's lead MBT.
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1145
    Points : 1146
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 23
    Location : Roanapur

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  collegeboy16 on Sun Jun 22, 2014 8:14 am

    Zivo wrote:
    Armata chassis will be expensive, cutting MBT's for purpose built BMPT's just doesn't seem smart. I believe the best solution would be to simply increase the lethality of the RWS on the group's lead MBT.
    they could also design a new shortened HE shell for the new armata MBTs. Maybe if they could bury the bulky fin assembly into the shell case itself they could shorten it to about 450-500mm at the cost of a few hundred grams of explosives, just enough to stack two HE shells in an autoloader case.
    avatar
    Asf

    Posts : 472
    Points : 491
    Join date : 2014-03-27

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Asf on Sun Jun 22, 2014 10:02 am

    Armata chassis will be expensive, cutting MBT's for purpose built BMPT's just doesn't seem smart. 

    Armata IFV will be a vehicle with autocannon and ATGMs. BMPT is a questionable concept
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22367
    Points : 22911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:42 am

    57 mm calibre ammo was designed for soviet AA guns btw

    And that shell is enormous.

    There is talk of a telescoped 45mm round going up against the 57mm round fired by the S-60 57mm AAG... the 45mm round being far more compact but the 57mm round offering rather more internal space for guided rounds and lots of HE filler.

    Personally I was hoping for a new telescopic 57mm round but that would be rather expensive I guess.

    Any idea what is the effective altitude of this 57 mm Gun , The range is 16 km but what is the max effective altitude ?

    I would suspect 6-8km altitude.

    Old ZSU-57-2 were used for around 4 km attitudes. But it had old ammunition

    The old ammo was fairly low performance in comparison with modern ammo, though it was a very powerful round with that sort of case capacity and shell capacity its HE payload could have been substantially improved and of course an APFSDS round was never developed...

    You know what would really be amazing if the Armata T-99 would have a 125mm-57mm load out similar to BMP-3's 100mm-30mm load out,

    Interesting... but the reason the 100/30 combination on the BMP-3 works is because the two weapons are so different... the 100mm is low velocity but with a powerful HE capacity and also allows tube launched anti tank missiles to be carried. the 30mm on the other hand is high velocity flat shooting with armour piercing and HE rounds available. Different roles, different targets.

    the 125mm and 57mm guns would be too similar to be useful together... actually you might find this hard to believe but the 100mm HE round of the BMP-3 would probably suite the armata MBT better because the 125mm gun is a high velocity weapon, while the 100mm 2A70 gun of the BMP-3 is low velocity with a good HE payload but compact ammo... probably smaller than the 57mm S-60 ammo in fact, plus the low velocity means the 100mm shells could be lobbed over cover the 125mm HE rounds would just whizz past.

    IMO, the 57mm was adopted to take on the west's new generation of heavy IFV's.

    Agreed... the 57mm gun was developed first and foremost to penetrate the armour of NATO IFVs and will likely be carried by Armata IFVs. The fact that it has guided rounds able to hit aerial targets suggests the replacement for Tunguska might have 20km range SAMs from Pantsir and a 57mm gun with 16km range.

    The 23mm and 30mm guns used high rate of fire to create a shotgun blast of rounds on target in a burst of fire to compensate for any flight manouvers the target might have made between firing the rounds and the rounds arriving on target.

    The 57mm rounds would not need to be fired in bursts because after being fired they can manouver to compensate and compensate more accurately so direct hits could be considered normal... meaning very short bursts of 1-3 shells and much less ammo needed for a kill so despite having more expensive ammo and fewer rounds ready to fire it should be a very effective weapon system for bringing down targets.

    A secondary 57mm gun with telescopic ammo, ANIET proximity fuzes, and guided shells will be an adequate answer for asymmetrical suicide mini-drones.

    The ammo size just makes that not a good idea... an Armata MBT needs to defeat enemy heavy armour so the 125mm gun should have lots of ammo. A 30mm gun able to elevate to 90 degrees and minus 25 degrees would be handy... in fact a 23 x 115mm gun with those elevation limitations would be better because the ammo is smaller and cheaper and still hits hard, while the single barrel KPB takes up little space on the vehicle, which leaves more space for 125mm shells.

    The armata division will have plenty of firepower... if anything a low velocity 40mm auto grenade launcher would be a useful addition too.. cheap, light, compact, relatively powerful with good range (2.5km) without taking up space for main gun ammo.

    as one of GarryB's yes men ill have to say the the armata ifv filled with ammo instead of infantry would be enough for a BMPT.
    while you lose on the raw explosive(but overkill most of the time) power and Non-LOS capability( which can be remedied by a GL) you increase the number of targets that can be engaged and gain anti-aircraft capability.

    I personally think the MBT should focus on enemy armour, but a light cannon like the 23 x 115mm KPB would be useful... as would a 40mm grenade launcher... offering different trajectories for different targets.
    The IFV Armata would have the 57mm gun to engage a range of targets including enemy IFVs and aircraft, while the BMPT/mortar carrier could use a long barrel 120mm rifled gun/mortar with a 23mm gatling and a 40mm grenade launcher for local firepower and indirect fire, which leaves the APC which might have a single 30mm cannon or 23mm KPB cannon in a reduced size turret area with an extended troop compartment as a troop carrier. the 100mm gun of the BMP-3 could be replaced by the 120mm gun/mortar of the mortar carrier/BMPT vehicle...

    The afghan or standard APS would suffice for such small, close-in threats.

    Or indeed the 23 x 115mm KPB single barrel cannon would have plenty of hitting power yet use ammo the size of HMG ammo for the job.

    Armata will have decent range of elevation compared to other MBT's, but it will still be inadequate.

    Having a much smaller light cannon mounted coaxially would allow better elevation options for the smaller weapon... a single barrel KPB firing 23 x 115mm ammo would be ideal IMHO.

    Armata IFV will be a vehicle with autocannon and ATGMs. BMPT is a questionable concept

    The whole idea of the BMPT is a fire power vehicle to support tanks in places that light vehicles like IFVs and APCs wont last long. the Armata concept is IFVs and APCs with the same level of protection as MBTs so the idea of an armata BMPT is contradictory... yet such a vehicle would be useful for situations where a fire power vehicle is needed with tank level protection... like convoy protection, or COIN operations where the enemy is known not to have armour of any kind.

    the BMPT concept model shown earlier in this thread showing a 120mm gun/mortar, with a 23mm gatling gun and a 40mm grenade launcher would be ideal for such a role IMHO as an excellent combination of different types of fire power with direct and indirect fire from the 120mm gun including laser guided shells of 120 and 122mm weapons that it is compatible with, plus direct fire 23mm high rate of fire weapon but with compact ammo, while the 40mm grenade launcher offers high elevation fire power to 2.5km with compact ammo and weapon.

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 22367
    Points : 22911
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 22, 2014 11:47 am

    16km range laser guided 57mm HE shells will be a very powerful anti aircraft and anti ground target weapon... with all your IFVs equipped and also your air defence vehicles carrying them too then there will be plenty of fire power in every unit.

    I would expect the pattern of IFV weapons would continue with a mix of 57mm main gun for the IFV to penetrate enemy IFVs and likely Kornet-EM for use against enemy tanks would be standard.

    For APCs a lighter armament... perhaps totally external to increase internal troop capacity without making the chassis longer... a 23mm cannon and a 40mm grenade launcher as standard with a couple of ready to fire Kornets.

    The very lightest units might have a 12 ton vehicle with a 57mm main gun and kornet-EM missiles as its MBT because a 125mm gun might not be possible/practical.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 868
    Points : 1035
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Mindstorm on Sun Jun 22, 2014 2:02 pm

    GarryB wrote:16km range laser guided 57mm HE shells will be a very powerful anti aircraft and anti ground target weapon... with all your IFVs equipped and also your air defence vehicles carrying them too then there will be plenty of fire power in every unit.

    I would expect the pattern of IFV weapons would continue with a mix of 57mm main gun for the IFV to penetrate enemy IFVs and likely Kornet-EM for use against enemy tanks would be standard.


    It is absolutely right Garry, but i continue to believe that the major impact that such kind of new generation of medium caliber 45/57 mm guns will produce  (even more if provided with single round beamriding-laser guidance ,very efficient against aerial targets and almost impossible to jam , or HEAD-like warheads with domestic level laser fuses ) will be to challenge the same foundations and trends in foreign air to ground operations ,even outside the  classical air-defense concept and roles.

    In particular the capability by part of a very high percentage of the new generation of domestic ground vehicles not purposely commited to Army's air defense roles (even more when inserted in the totally integrated BMS, allowing remote and third party target designation and engagement ) to potentially destroy scarcely manoeuvrable/limited speed PGMs at enormous ranges of engagements will put an enormous burden on the new concepts of air to ground operations in western Air Forces , just in those years engaged in a progressive removing from service of high persistence flying vehicles capable to carry big amount of ordnances and capable to deliver them from very reduced ranges ( such as A-10 and Tornado IDS ) with very low persistence, frail "low observable" aircraft tasked to carry and deliver from medium ranges a very limited amount of ordnances (those compatible with the strict volumetric limits of internal weapon bays ).

    That concept of operation will find itself suddenly obsolete, for the simple reason that the big range and altitude of delivery of those few ordanances carried in the internal weapon bays will allow the easy engagement of those by part of even only IFVs and BMPT of opposing ground forces.
    Even worse those mostly low subsonic PGMs will be prevented also to reach the area useful for dispersion of their eventual submution's load.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 5286
    Points : 5439
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Jun 26, 2014 3:37 am

    If people are wondering what a glimpse of a 57mm gun system may look like than just take a look at the Thales RAPIDFire air defence system:



    The main difference is that instead of 40mm shells were talking about 57mm shells with literally 4 times the performance of the former, 40mm shells having 4km range where the 57mm shell will have a range of 16km, a much heavier warhead and room for much more advanced electronics. Probably the same amount of variety of shells, 57mm shells will probably both have airburst and guided flight programmed within many of the same shells. Pure missile systems have vastly superior air target engagement, but ground target engagement is non-existent, so gun systems still exist in navy's and ground forces because they can both engage air and ground targets due to their greater flexibility (hence the reason why Pantsir has both systems). Shells are significantly cheaper than missiles, and I can see a Typhoon-K truck with a 57mm gun system, with 100-200 shells, and if telescopic ammo is created than the Typhoon truck will probably carry significantly more. It'll literally be the perfect system to counter drone swarming tactics.

    Sponsored content

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 22 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Nov 18, 2019 9:17 pm