[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

PapaDragon wrote:

flamming_python wrote:That hole in the left side of the Armata MBT does look pretty incriminating.

As in screaming - 'im just dyin for an autocannon here!'

The exciting thing is that it seems to be a modular add-on. So perhaps an autocannon could be attached, or a gatling gun, array of RPO missiles, MANPAD fitting, or whatever else might be called for.

Agreed, it has "plug & play" written all over it.

Remember when these things first showed up? None of them had side armor (APCs also). And now they all do.
I have a feeling same will be for guns.

They might install them on V-Day for the parade itself. That would awesome.

Left side of Armata turret, closer : http://cs543105.vk.me/v543105239/27a8/tPeimpUDkT8.jpg

The side gap is appearantly for a hatch so one of the crew can take them while another is handing them over so they reload the carousel.
A design from previous testbeds projects...



This little triangular hatch between those two gaps for (Radar/TIS) and the ammunition refilling hatch is probably the hatch for addiotnal weaponary which projects right to the frontal sphere.

EDIT: Btw both sides have this little triangular mounting, i am dead certain it is for weaponary.

Another view. Looks like the OPVT under the rear of the stowage cassette. I presume also mounting brackets for the fuel drums, or maybe the log, how can there be a tank without a log...
Now the canvas is off it raises even more questions...

The turret screams add on armour...Everywhere. That is one hell of a tank.

i recall the picture of the model has 30mm cannons on the sides of it. Could this possibly be mounts for such weapon?

My opinion/question/suggestion


The problem i see or what i think so far, is that what i believe to be weapon attachment points have no elevation possible unless they have some extention mounting for them.

I hope we will get a picture from above to see if it has APS tubes sunk into the turret since someone said they were "reloadable".

flamming_python wrote:That hole in the left side of the Armata MBT does look pretty incriminating.

As in screaming - 'im just dyin for an autocannon here!'

The exciting thing is that it seems to be a modular add-on. So perhaps an autocannon could be attached, or a gatling gun, array of RPO missiles, MANPAD fitting, or whatever else might be called for.

Yes agree. So we wont be seeing it full untill May 9.

I find that huge gap on left side of the gun which is most probably for gunner sights, really scary, the entire turret screams for an upgrading with ERA and moving the Targeting sights away from there.

It has rear facing AESA's, and no rear facing APS launchers.

I'm guessing they'll add some under the bustle?

Zivo wrote:It has rear facing AESA's, and no rear facing APS launchers.

I'm guessing they're add some under the bustle?

I think the little tube next to the rear facing AESA is the APS launcher for rear projection maybe even top attack weapon from the angle of AESA and tube... if it is AESA and APS tube, but what else what that be?

Werewolf wrote:

Zivo wrote:It has rear facing AESA's, and no rear facing APS launchers.

I'm guessing they're add some under the bustle?

I think the little tube next to the rear facing AESA is the APS launcher for rear projection maybe even top attack weapon from the angle of AESA and tube... if it is AESA and APS tube, but what else what that be?

It looks to me like there's four radars each covering 90 degrees. Like Trophy.

Notice that even the rearmost APS tube isn't perpendicular. That huge gap under the bustle is screaming for rear coverage APS like what burlak had.

Best pics yet from bastion-karpenko:
http://bastion-karpenko.ru/new-tehnik-parad-150504/

The entire turret is screaming for T-90MS ERA coverage.

Armata is really beautiful tank. Totally new design. With 4 radars on the turret Armata have full 360° coverage for active protection complex. Those radar antennas are facing upward so this complex could also engage top attack missiles. Maybe it also have charges looking upward. It will be interesting to see the roof of the turret.

it would be fine if Vitaly Kuzmin also post his pictures on this site. Anyone know, if he is the member here?

Werewolf wrote:

Zivo wrote:It has rear facing AESA's, and no rear facing APS launchers.

I'm guessing they're add some under the bustle?

I think the little tube next to the rear facing AESA is the APS launcher for rear projection maybe even top attack weapon from the angle of AESA and tube... if it is AESA and APS tube, but what else what that be?

Is it possible that what your describe as Aesa could in fact be the APS system like the one implemented by Rafael on the Trophy.

Romanian blogs posted the first Armata pics minutes after the MOD unveiled them. Someone pointed that the RWS might have a blind spot considering it's position right next to the thermal sight (that's a thermal sight right?). However, looking at the latest pics, is it me or it seems the RWS and the thermal sight are on the same mounting?! (so no blind spots then)

Boomerang looking soo good. Soo good.

Werewolf wrote:The entire turret is screaming for T-90MS ERA coverage.

Remember ERA armour is not healthy for the accompanying infantry. None of the new vehicles seems to have ERA armour. Perhaps they judged it's better to stick with other non-explosive forms of armour.

Oh btw, do we actually know if T-90MS's armour is ERA?

mack8 wrote:Romanian blogs posted the first Armata pics minutes after the MOD unveiled them.  Someone pointed that the RWS might have a blind spot considering it's position right next to the thermal sight (that's a thermal sight right?). However, looking at the latest pics, is it me or it seems the RWS and the thermal sight are on the same mounting?! (so no blind spots then)

RWS is same than with the 90MS it is enslaved to the TIS. So no blind spot. Also the lines of the T-14 are VERY similar to those of the add-on protection of the T90MS. Add-on package is probably similar.

mack8 wrote:Remember ERA armour is not healthy for the accompanying infantry. None of the new vehicles seems to have ERA armour. Perhaps they judged it's better to stick with other non-explosive forms of armour.

Oh btw, do we actually know if T-90MS's armour is ERA?

Ugh.... Isn't the hull fitted with ERA?

High-res: