Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Zivo
    Zivo

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

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Zivo Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:30 pm

    That's a long gap between May and the beginning of 2016.

    I wonder if they're going to try to flesh out all the variants before they're handed over to the military for testing.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon Wed Dec 31, 2014 1:45 am

    ...Actually maintaining the range of 400 km makes a lot of sense, the Pentagon is threatening to redeploy land based cruise missiles to Europe with the possible end of the INF treaty...so having thousands of Armata vehicles with 400 km range AESA's capable of seeing low flying objects would be highly convenient, Armata based Pantsir's and Tor's would only benefit. The best solution is to keep the same range, but have toggable levels of power for different purposes. The jamming capability would be quite useful in defeating CAS aircraft like attack helicopters.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 E2zl7hO

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 PhpCHAN

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 0eAf23j

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 CBRJZCE

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Pft8769

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 J1wBvNr

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 KbZvBHs
    Zivo
    Zivo

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

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Zivo Wed Dec 31, 2014 2:26 am

    The roof mounted guns on the model don't appear to have a feed system. The artist should have added some.

    Aside from that, it's the best looking tank I've ever seen.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon Wed Dec 31, 2014 3:01 am

    Zivo wrote:The roof mounted guns on the model don't appear to have a feed system. The artist should have added some.

    Aside from that, it's the best looking tank I've ever seen.

    One of the best 'concept/fan art' that I've ever seen...but 2 to 3 pages back I already mentioned the flaws in this nice looking piece of fan art:

    1.) On the right side of the turret there seems to be a 4-barreled GSH-12.7 vulcan (like the ones you would see on Soviet Mil Mi-24's of the 80's) but the model shown to Rogozin was a 6-barreled GSH-6-23 vulcan. Several magnitudes more powerful in comparison than the one shown in the fan art.

    2.) On the left side there's seems to be a 30 mm autocannon, but the model shown to Rogozin is a 40 mm Balkan grenade launcher.

    3.) The main gun seems to be a high pressure smooth-bore 125 mm MBT cannon, while the model shown to Rogozin is a medium pressure rifled 120 mm artillery/mortar.

    4.) Another potential error may'be the chassis itself. It seems they used the T-90MS chassis, but no one knows (outside UVZ and the Russian MOD) what the final chassis will look like. There's also competing designs of the Armata chassis, even ones that look significantly different such as the heavy armor chassis shown at the bottom of the image on the right side of the photo:

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 JCGXt
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28986
    Points : 29516
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB Wed Dec 31, 2014 4:19 am

    The best solution is to keep the same range, but have toggable levels of power for different purposes. The jamming capability would be quite useful in defeating CAS aircraft like attack helicopters.

    There is no way the PAK FA main radar could detect low flying cruise missiles from 400km range while sitting on a runway at an airport. Once in the air that should be no problem but the armata wont get airborne so for very low flying targets like a cruise missile it will be limited to a range of less than 20km and depending on the terrain probably much less than 20km.

    Another aspect is the cost... a full power AESA radar is expensive and when you increase the range by 1/3rd you triple the volume that needs to be scanned and targets detected and tracked. ie going from 12km range to 18km range increases the volume of airspace by 3 times.

    It would be cheaper to use tethered airships to monitor airspace... especially in mountains or isolated regions.

    1.) On the right side of the turret there seems to be a 4-barreled GSH-12.7 vulcan (like the ones you would see on Soviet Mil Mi-24's of the 80's) but the model shown to Rogozin was a 6-barreled GSH-6-23 vulcan. Several magnitudes more powerful in comparison than the one shown in the fan art.

    The model shown to Rogozin was a BMPT, this appears to be MBT. The US 20mm gatling cannon fitted to most of its fighter aircraft and also used on the CIWS Phalanx is called Vulcan. Russian and Soviet gatlings are not called Vulcan.

    The 23 x 115mm round is certainly more powerful than the 12.7 x 108mm HMG round, but not several magnitudes more powerful. The heavier HE projectile is much more effective, but its 700m/s muzzle velocity is actually lower than the 12.7mm round.

    The ammo is very similar in size as the 23mm round is based on the slightly larger 14.5mm HMG round (14.5 x 114mm).

    A new 4 barrel 23 x 115mm gatling gun would be not too bad... the 10-12,000 rpm rate of fire of the 6 barrel 23mm gun was a bit excessive.

    2.) On the left side there's seems to be a 30 mm autocannon, but the model shown to Rogozin is a 40 mm Balkan grenade launcher.

    Because the model was a BMPT that would engage a range of targets... in many ways a 120mm rifled gun/mortar and 30mm cannon could be considered a replacement for the 100mm rifled gun and 30mm cannon of the BMP-3, with the 40mm grenade launcher as a bonus low velocity indirect fire weapon.

    3.) The main gun seems to be a high pressure smooth-bore 125 mm MBT cannon, while the model shown to Rogozin is a medium pressure rifled 120 mm artillery/mortar.

    Makes sense if the new model is a MBT and the old model is a BMPT.

    medo
    medo

    Posts : 4094
    Points : 4178
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  medo Wed Dec 31, 2014 1:11 pm

    Interesting pictures of Armata tank. But one thing they forget to draw on it, gunners sight. it only have commanders rotating sight. Other question is, what elevation will have Gatling and 2A42 gun?
    AbsoluteZero
    AbsoluteZero

    Posts : 81
    Points : 105
    Join date : 2011-01-29
    Age : 32
    Location : Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  AbsoluteZero Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:50 pm

    question: why are the wheels on the other half of the tank exposed and has rail armor instead? why cant they just extend the plate covering all the way to the rear? im not a tank expert so it might be for a reason? thanks!
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16

    Posts : 1145
    Points : 1146
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 24
    Location : Roanapur

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  collegeboy16 Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:28 pm

    AbsoluteZero wrote:question: why are the wheels on the other half of the tank exposed and has rail armor instead? why cant they just extend the plate covering all the way to the rear? im not a tank expert so it might be for a reason? thanks!
    the rail armor for the back half of the side is for rpgs striking perpendicularly - while the "plate" armor on the front half is to cover the hull sides exposed from the front according to safe maneuvering angle.

    and what is safe maneuvering angle? afaik it is 60 degrees of the frontal arc of a vehicle(30 degrees on both sides left and right from an axis that bisects the tank hull or turret, depending on what you want, and centered at the back). if you look at pic. 3 and 4 and the last of the tank you will see that the frontal half covered with "plate" protects the vital parts - crew space, ammo storage and engine compartment while the rail doesnt protect anything.
    avatar
    AJ-47

    Posts : 192
    Points : 195
    Join date : 2011-10-05
    Location : USA

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  AJ-47 Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:10 am

    There are some things that caught my eyes
    1. The turret of the T-14 looks like the turret on the BMPT that we saw in an earlier show. So maybe the picture of the BMPT is basically the T-14.
    Both barrels have Fume Extractor and that’s mean high pressure gun usually tank’s gun or heavy artillry gun not a mortar.

    2. One of the reasons to have the secondary weapons out of the turret is the need to give them high elevation, usually to fight in urban war. If that’s the case, I would like to use the GSh-23-2L instead of the 0.5”, and also use the 45mm gun (when it will be available) instead the 30mm.
    avatar
    Vann7

    Posts : 4834
    Points : 4936
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Vann7 Mon Jan 05, 2015 5:05 am


    another 3d render ,but not exactly accurate.

    George1
    George1

    Posts : 16083
    Points : 16580
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  George1 Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:40 am

    The time to see the new tank is close!!

    Military will receive the first batch of tanks "Armata" in February
    OminousSpudd
    OminousSpudd

    Posts : 902
    Points : 909
    Join date : 2015-01-02
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  OminousSpudd Fri Jan 16, 2015 10:17 pm

    I'll be interested to see how the Western propaganda machine handles this one.

    Either it'll be the angle of - "Evil kleptocratic/fascist Putin regime has spent billions on designing a new generation MBT that defence experts (Pentagon/NATO shills) are calling irrelevant in today's warfare, this comes after the Russian economy continues to spiral into stagnation."

    Or, the fear perspective (only to be used in moderation) - "New MBT challenges the previously uncontested ground that American armour has held up until now, how will the West meet this challenge?"

    On another note

    Jane's International Defence Review 7/2007, pg. 15:

    "IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION"

    By Richard M. Ogorkiewicz

    Claims by NATO testers in the 1990s that the armour of Soviet Cold War tanks was “effectively impenetrable” have been supported by comments made following similar tests in the US.

    Speaking at a conference on “The Future of Armoured Warfare” in London on the 30th May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US Army tests involving firing trials on 25 T-72A1 and 12 T-72B1 tanks (each fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour [ERA]) had confirmed NATO tests done on other former Soviet tanks left behind in Germany after the end of the Cold War. The tests showed that the ERA and composite Armour of the T-72s was incredibly resilient to 1980s NATO anti-tank weapons.

    In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles, anti-tank missiles, and anti-armour rotary cannons. Explosive reactive armour was valued by the Soviet Union and its now-independent component states since the 1970s, and almost every tank in the eastern-European military inventory today has either been manufactured to use ERA or had ERA tiles added to it, including even the T-55 and T-62 tanks built forty to fifty years ago, but still used today by reserve units.

    "During the tests we used only the weapons which existed with NATO armies during the last decade of the Cold War to determine how effective such weapons would have been against these examples of modern Soviet tank design. Our results were completely unexpected. When fitted to the T-72A1 and B1 the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU (Depleted Uranium) penetrators of the M829A1 APFSDS (used by the 120 mm guns of the Cold War era US M1 Abrams tanks), which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles. We also tested the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger (the gun of the A-10 Thunderbolt II Strike Plane), the 30mm M320 (the gun of the AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter) and a range of standard NATO Anti Tank Guided Missiles – all with the same result of no penetration or effective destruction of the test vehicles. The combined protection of the standard armour and the ERA gives the Tanks a level of protection equal to our own. The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” – U.S. Army Spokesperson at the show.

    Newer KE penetrators have been designed since the Cold War to defeat the Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well). As a response the Russian Army has produced a new type of ERA, “Relikt”, which is claimed to be two to three times as effective as Kontakt-5 and completely impenetrable against modern Western warheads.

    Despite the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Tank industry has managed to maintain itself and its expertise in armour production, resulting in modern designs (such as the T-90, the T-95 and mysterious Black Eagle) to replace the, surprisingly, still effective Soviet era tanks. These tests will do much to discount the argument of the “Lion of Babylon” (the ineffective Iraqi version of the T-72M) and export quality tanks being compared to the more sophisticated and upgraded versions which existed in the Soviet military’s best Tank formations and continue to be developed in a resurgent Russian military industrial complex."


    This is why I'm looking forward to seeing what the new Relikt ERA can do. Found this hilarious, coming from Janes.
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-18
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Mike E Fri Jan 16, 2015 11:28 pm

    Well, the West can spin anything they want to... Just read an article about the "Yasen's biggest flaw" being that Russia can't build 30 of them... and that they are too expensive.... Cause, you know, it is way too expensive at 1/2 the cost of the US equivalent. It is as if Goebbels never died! And at least his propaganda was actually good!
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 16083
    Points : 16580
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  George1 Wed Jan 21, 2015 9:03 am

    New armored vehicle launched bridge can be built upon a "Armata"
    Viktor
    Viktor

    Posts : 5814
    Points : 6449
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 40
    Location : Croatia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Viktor Wed Jan 21, 2015 8:10 pm

    Nice thumbsup

    "Uralvagonzavod" agreed the price with the military on the tank "Armata"

    "Armata" will be cheaper
    Viktor
    Viktor

    Posts : 5814
    Points : 6449
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 40
    Location : Croatia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Viktor Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:14 pm

    Armata machine gun will be remtely recharged Very Happy

    Machine gun for "Almaty was" to be recharged remotely
    Viktor
    Viktor

    Posts : 5814
    Points : 6449
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 40
    Location : Croatia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Viktor Fri Jan 23, 2015 8:17 pm

    New generation Shtora system developed for Armata

    "Armata" will get a new system of electronic suppression
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28986
    Points : 29516
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  GarryB Sat Jan 24, 2015 7:49 am

    All the weapons on the Armata will need to be remotely charged they will be mounted in an unmanned turret...
    Mike E
    Mike E

    Posts : 2640
    Points : 2676
    Join date : 2014-06-18
    Location : Bay Area, CA

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Mike E Sat Jan 24, 2015 6:11 pm

    TR1 wrote:The price Sevmash is asking for each Yasen is astronomical, no getting around it.

    Btw, nice new quote. Story of my life lately.
    No doubt... But an American source claiming Russian systems are too expensive is pure hypocrisy.

    Yep, it's the truth for most of us!
    Viktor
    Viktor

    Posts : 5814
    Points : 6449
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 40
    Location : Croatia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Viktor Sun Jan 25, 2015 6:46 pm

    Nice article about the upcoming Armata based tank thumbsup

    "Armata" against "Leopard 2" and "Abrams"

    George1
    George1

    Posts : 16083
    Points : 16580
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  George1 Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:14 pm

    Good news!! thumbsup
    Defense Ministry in February will receive more than 20 cars of platform "Armata"
    Stealthflanker
    Stealthflanker

    Posts : 931
    Points : 1011
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 33
    Location : Indonesia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Stealthflanker Wed Jan 28, 2015 7:26 am

    George1 wrote:Good news!! thumbsup
    Defense Ministry in February will receive more than 20 cars of platform "Armata"

    we need leaked image :3
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5489
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Thu Jan 29, 2015 5:49 pm

    "Uralvagonzavod" agrees with the military demonstration fighting qualities of the new track platform "Armata" at the exhibition Russia Arms Expo 2015 (RAE-2015), which will be held in September in Nizhny Tagil. It is reported by Tass quoted the deputy director general of the corporation Vyacheslav Khalitova.
    "The general public would like to see the car not only in the Victory Parade, but with a demonstration of the firing properties and the properties of the mobility of the exhibition in Nizhny Tagil. Now comes the agreement of the Department of Defense, "- said Halitov.
    Earlier, the head of "Uralvagonzavod" Oleg Sienko said that the demonstration of the new platform to the public will be the main task of RAE-2015. Prior to that, "Armata" can be seen at the Victory Parade in Moscow on May 9, 2015.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  magnumcromagnon Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:22 am

    Interesting, according to Gurkhan T-95's radar had a range of 10km, so in all likeliness T-14 Armata should at least have equal range.

    http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2015/01/14-21.html
    Werewolf
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5288
    Points : 5489
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Werewolf Fri Jan 30, 2015 3:12 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:Interesting, according to Gurkhan T-95's radar had a range of 10km, so in all likeliness T-14 Armata should at least have equal range.

    http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2015/01/14-21.html

    Sounds nice.

    Sponsored content

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 30 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed May 12, 2021 11:19 am