medo wrote:KoTeMoRe wrote:medo wrote:Vann7 wrote:KoTeMoRe wrote:Vann7 wrote:Mike E wrote:Vann... My gosh man...
Tanks are NOT about how they look, at ALL. It is completely un-relevant to how will they perform in battle.
"Fluidity in design" means nothing.
THe turret also looks really fragile.. is not only looks.. how is the T-14 turret going to survive
a direct hit of a sabot round with such small turret with holes and spaces? it looks like the
turret was not made to survive a tank direct hit.. anyway enough of rant.. just a little disappointed with the design decisions of the tank.
Actually the turret looks very good, it will be up-armored with a full suite of either applique armour or downright ERA array. This is what makes me like this tank, the design is one of prospective combat, drop in turret with several levels of up-armouring. Nevermind this tank is going to evolve, so far it is being a real technology show with Russia mustering they're not behind, at all when it comes to fielding up to date technologies.
The armata tank turret looks good ,yes.. even stealthy ..but also looks very fragile too ,because is tiny ,have holes and spaces and seems like sheet armor covers the turret ,and this is my major complain.. weak turret .
the body looks ok but with very bad ergonomics.. ie.. the extended grill , dangerous for people near when tank in motion. So if i had to choose one..ill prefer they make a more stronger turret.. like western latest tanks.
Armata turret doesn't have crew inside. It have armor around gun, ammunition and vital parts, but why to place armor to protect empty space and increase weight, where it is not needed? Those tinner plates just make a shape of turret and maybe help to reduce thermal and radar picture, but protect nothing.
You will need extra armour (roughly 2 more tons) to ensure the frontal arc of the turret isn't butter to a cutter. I agree that for most logical threats (bar Tank on tank engagements) the T-14 has it all, APS, radar etc, but when it will come down to taking out another tank, the goal will be to be able to take a hit and survive.
So there will be a heavier turret, that's for sure.
Why? Outside turret is only the gun and it have armor around. All other vital components are under gun inside vehicle and protected by vehicles armor. On the sides of the gun is nothing, empty space, because there is no crew in turret. The frontal size of turret against other tanks is very small, only gun. On the sides of the gun are just tin plates and if enemy tank hit those side plates, nothing will happened, because there is nothing behind to be destroyed. This is the point to have a crewless turret.
Once again, light armour on turret frontal arc isn't an optimum, since the tank needs to be able to operate at all costs. Crewless turret only takes out the human cost of the penetration, but if your turret gets penetrated at each engagement, leading to loss of operational capability (IE you can't fight back), the result is the same as you losing the crew to a penetration. So yes, I fully expect the turret to be able to withstand a hit and keep firing.
Plus the turret looks well armoured when you take into account the absence of crew. Those top down shots, wow, SUPER Sexy.
Last edited by KoTeMoRe on Mon May 04, 2015 11:58 pm; edited 1 time in total