This also might mean that the turret isnt unmanned, as cameras might not be as beneficial as human eyesight and instinct in some cases, since afterall MBT's serve as essentially the "frontline" of the unit, like a robbery happening in a mall, the guard panics nd doesnt know which screen to look at. Sensors serve better on a 2nd tier unit like the Koalitsiya , as they are way behind enemy lines.
The turret will definitely be unmanned, this has already been stated.
Regarding looking at monitors... it is actually rather likely that the commanders panoramic sight will have stereo cameras and the images from those cameras will be displayed in a helmet mounted display system for a virtual view of the outside world. Only the commander needs that sort of view, the driver and gunner would find it distracting from their duties, though occasionally popping up and getting a good high view of the terrain in front of the vehicle might be useful for the driver it is most important for the commander.
Panic is part of war. Training is what allows the crewman to focus on their job at hand and use the available sensors and equipment to determine what is happening... potentially including live video feed from nearby vehicles or even UAVs.
The gun might be a 152mm, due to the reinforced mantlet of the gun, whic might hinder gun changing if it needs be, but the russians probably thought of that.
Modern very high velocity tank guns wear out and lose performance... and that includes smoothbores. Changing a gun barrel is a routine thing that should be possible in the field and not require the vehicle to be taken out of service for a long period.
The chassis appears to have 6 roadwheels, as expected, and with that shape of the turret and length, it supplements the notion that the T-99's turret is inded akin to a more western design, essentially having an overhanging bustle.
Turret bustles are not "western" inventions. The T-34 had a turret bustle of sorts. Western turrets have three crew, this turret has zero. Look at the plastic models of all the vehicles... the pictures I looked at show three crew around an engine compartment at the front... Kurganets, Boomerang, and Armata.
The 45mm, seems like a rapid departure to the more traditional HMG, but as the back of the turret cannot be seen, I cannot say anythig much. So the 45mm cannon probably will be used to engage softer targets like IFV's and APC;s, so the 152mm gun wouldnt need to waste ammunition. Another modification that could be made was the 45mm essentially firing a grenade round, making it useful for engaging enemies in urban environments. Though what worries me about thr 45mm cannon is the amount of ammunition. Might not be an issue, since T-99 MBT's will have back up in the form of like BMP-T variant to support it.
We need to translate this correctly:
Said Victor Ivanovich wants a little more precise: in the picture all the same machine is not a 57mm gun and 45mm with the latest automatic weapon with a telescopic ammunition. The same module will not only stand on the platforms, "Kurgan" and "Boomerang" but the "Armata" in the form of heavy infantry fighting vehicles.
The key issue is that the 30mm cannon on the Russian IFV is intended to deal with enemy IFVs and helos and other problems. It has been the case that the 30mm is not adequate to deal with 30 ton western IFVs so the BMP-4 was to have gone either for a 45mm or 57mm gun which is nothing like a grenade launcher... we are talking about a high velocity powerful round with armour penetration figures in the 200-300mm range at 1,500m.
Keep in mind that this 45/57mm weapon will have an entire unmanned turrets space for ammo so it should be able to carry plenty of ammo.
The quote above says that the IFV in each family will have either a 45mm or 57mm calibre gun... and that is in the kurgan, the boomerang, and the Armata families IFV. With this weapon these vehicles will be able to take care of enemy Warriors and Bradleys and Pumas etc. For use against enemy tanks of course there will be 125mm gun armed boomerangs, kurgans, and armatas.
The question is will this 45/57mm round be brand new using telescoping ammo for powerful but compact and easy to load ammo, or old 57mm powerful but bulky rounds?
The laser homing rounds developed for the old 57mm could be adapted to a new 57mm round of course that is more compact and uses far more powerful propellent and more effective projectiles.
By the look of the photos of the models the Boomerang and Kurgan both have their engine in the front right corner with three crew positions around it in the hull which likely means unmanned turrets, which is more room for ammo and sensors.
Just looking at this photo for example:
From left to right you can see the corner of the Taifun truck, but the next two wheeled vehicles are clearly Boomerangs with the first having what appears to be a 120mm mortar in a turret and the second a 45/57mm turret denoting a Mortar Boomerang-25 and IFV Boomerang-25 respectively, the next vehicle has the same IFV turret with a 45/57mm gun, but the chassis is tracked so this is a Kurganets-25 IFV. The same turret on an Armata chassis is what the Armata IFV will look like and all three vehicles will have the same sensors and weapons and ammo and electronic suites. There is likely a 4 and 6 wheel version of Boomerang that will also have the same turret for the IFV version.
The next vehicle in line I suspect is the tank version of the Kurganets-25 as it is tracked, but is not armata and the gun will therefore likely be initially a 125mm gun, later to be a 152mm gun if possible with that chassis. There will likely be a boomerang-25 with a similar turret and an armata with a similar turret too. I rather suspect it is stripped of its electronics and defences like ARENA and Shtora and its UAV system, but this is what the bare bones turret will look like.
Who said Armata will have 45mm cannon in addition to main caliber ?
The purpose of a 30mm cannon on T-95 was to allow the engagement of targets the main gun of a tank could not elevate to engage like rocket launchers on the 5th floor of a building.
Looking at the elevation of the main gun for the tank vehicle I would say there would be no need for a 45/57 or 30mm cannon if the main gun can elevate that far.
Of course the whole idea of the BMPT was that BMPs and BTRs were not able to operate where tanks operate, so Armata doesn't need a high elevation weapon of any kind as it will be operating with BMPs and BTRs with the same level of protection with weapons easily able to elevate to hit all sorts of threats and targets. Having said that a high elevation weapon certainly wouldn't hurt in the guise of a 30mm or 40mm automatic grenade launcher or 14.5mm HMG or light cannon like a 30mm. I think a 45/57mm is getting too big and its ammo would take up too much room.
I do however like the idea the Israelis apply where they add a 60mm mortar to their tanks for engaging targets with HE without wasting tank main gun ammo.
Low velocity ammo with a very curved trajectory is often useful against a range of threats like an enemy firing from behind strong frontal cover... it is often more effective to lob low velocity shells over the cover to land on their heads rather than waste ammo trying to bash through their frontal protection.
Often in urban situations there will be a staging area back from the fighting area where the enemy group and prepare for combat. You might get no direct line of sight of that sort of activity from your tank even though it is only a couple of blocks away. With live footage from a UAV however you could direct a burst of 40mm grenades to come raining down on the enemies heads. Standard 40mm grenades for the new Balkan grenade launcher have a range of 2.5km but it would certainly be rather easy to have special grenades designed with larger warheads and less propellent that have a range of 600m or less with really steep trajectories especially for the purpose of engaging targets that are close.
Note the whole purpose of a howitzer was for that steep plunging fire. A gun generally has long range and high velocity and therefore a very flat trajectory. It also has an angle limit so it can't shoot at high angles. This means that a target on the ground between buildings in a city is actually quite safe from a gun because the shallow angle of impact means it will hit a building in front of them rather than the ground next to them.
The other issue is that the HE shell tends to hit at an angle so half the fragments go into the ground and a quarter go straight up in the air so only a few fragments go sideways and are effective when shooting at targets at close range.
A howitzer on the other hand, has a multi charge propellent, which means when firing at something close by you can reduce the charge weight so the shell doesn't go up as high or stay in the air so long so it is much more accurate because it spends less time being blown off course by the wind. It also gets to the target quicker and tends to land nearly vertically, which means with a fuse in the nose and the sides of the shell creating the fragments you get a nice circular spread of fragments that are much more effective... more effective still if you fit it with a proximity fuse and detonate it above ground and spread the fragments over a wider area.
If you want to kill people then go for a howitzer... if you want to kill enemy artillery (ie howitzers) then go for guns as they have superior range.
Interesting from the photos of the models it seems there is a truck mounted Coalition and presumably a tracked model on an Armata chassis and that it seems to have a single gun. That gun will be 152mm in calibre of course and with current ammo have a range of 40km and with new ammo 80km with Glonass guidance kits for accuracy of 10m CEP at max range... which is pretty good.