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


+87
Book.
triphosgene
franco
eridan
Flanky
JohnSnow
calripson
:JunioR:
indochina
Captain Nemo
Zhukov-Patton
AbsoluteZero
Mindstorm
NITRO
TheGeorgian
nobunaga
auslander
Swede55
BKP
Siempre_Leal
KoTeMoRe
Shadåw
Khepesh
ebobat
zg18
Neutrality
archangelski
Alex555
Big_Gazza
Strizh
PapaDragon
Vympel
macedonian
rtech
Flyboy77
Mefesto
Acheron
alexZam
Bolt
sheytanelkebir
Redboy
medo
Orocairion
Austin
Cpt Caz
mack8
Kyo
MilSpec
kvs
Viktor
cracker
max steel
2SPOOKY4U
xeno
ult
Mike E
volna
smerch24
tanino
TheArmenian
Brovich
chicken
mutantsushi
Morpheus Eberhardt
jhelb
sepheronx
Regular
Dima
etaepsilonk
Cyberspec
VladimirSahin
KomissarBojanchev
AJ-47
Stealthflanker
victor1985
collegeboy16
Vann7
higurashihougi
George1
runaway
akd
flamming_python
Werewolf
GarryB
TR1
Zivo
magnumcromagnon
91 posters

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Stealthflanker
    Stealthflanker


    Posts : 1346
    Points : 1426
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 35
    Location : Indonesia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Stealthflanker Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:01 am

    Vympel wrote:

    Like a dream? That depends. A lot of it sounds great. 2 man crew? No. Driving, fighting, and commanding the tank is too much work for two men.

    Computer or sort of smart scheme will take care of the fighting part. More serious consideration however is in the maintenance department, a whole new scheme must be devised to ensure that 2 man tank can still be maintained adequately without exhausting the crew.

    2 man tank scheme was already devised as early as 1980's. The main weaknesses observed was maintenance and the fact that computer at that time was not ready to fully replace the gunner.


    Dima
    Dima


    Posts : 1218
    Points : 1229
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Dima Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:20 am

    alexZam wrote:Just gonna live this here.... Wink

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 16693949334_0a7b4c1d24_o

    (с)Денис Давыдоv
    Good one.
    The turret slowly revealing its shape. But I hope this tease continue till 9th may.

    Check the two long boxes on the edges....its a single piece unit. One is APU for sure, what could be the other one of same length be, another APU due to increased power consumption?
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe


    Posts : 4212
    Points : 4227
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Location : Krankhaus Central.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  KoTeMoRe Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:00 am

    There is a suspicious cutaway of the tarp. ON the turret...like a bulkhead.
    Dima
    Dima


    Posts : 1218
    Points : 1229
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Dima Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:04 am

    Vann7 wrote:Well. for me it looks like Armata pretty much was designed by Amateurs ,with zero experience
    in aesthetics.. when it comes to visual look of the armored vehicles.. with the exception of
    boomeran and koalition..  T-15 and T-14.. if it was a contest of exterior design.. will get
    a score of 4 of 10.  that is not horrible but very amateurish.  Specially the T-15.. that you don't know whether the vehicle is finished or if it is missing parts. No
    I quite like the Armata MBT as far as looks go...but I like the looks of T-90M better, the welded turret...clean lines..  
    Designed by amateurs?  Dont think so, when talking about amaterurs designing tank....first thing that comes to mind is Leopard series. basically the engine installation. Germans are known for their automotive industry, but tanks need different solutions not a V-12 stuffed in the engine bay like your beemer or merc and on top of it two massive air filters. Its the worst of designs for a tank! That whole thing called as the power pack is the single factor that contributed to the design need of a 7th wheel and hence a longer hull and weight associated with that extra volume.

    there is also serious design issues in armata ..that pose a major danger to soldiers lives outside.. for example the barbeque grill protecting the air vents on the sides of T-14.. are too far from the tank, If the tank moves , while soldiers are very near the tank.. they will get impaled or dismembered an arm by the grill. if that is the final version of Armata t-14 then definitively is a really bad design..  and t-15 looks like they just slapped covers on the sides to make it look like weird plane.  i really don't understand what the were thinking with such
    protection placed that way.. covers only half .
    First thing to note is that when tank and soldiers are moving together the speed of tank is too low and the soldiers mainly take the rear end cover or side cover. So the chance of the grills dragging a soldier is negligible. Other case is of the tank in real motion in which soldiers wont be near to it and the chances of a soldier getting injured or killed by a tank hit is even greater.

    Anyway disappointed with the designers of Armata ,looks like their first tank .. or maybe the final version of the tank will be much different its design.. it doesn't look like anything we saw on the first page..models in plastic, that looked very modern and futuristic.

    T-14 looks totally different to the plastic models they had in display for generals.
    Something that really looked like a future tank..

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Vh0c5

    any case im sure the tank protection will be best in the world.. and this is what really matters
    in the end..
    Installation of additional ERA/NERA will change the looks and the front might look closer to that model. Consider the plain T-72 to that of UVZ upgrade and you will see the difference on the glacis.
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 1920px10

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 T-72m110
    Dima
    Dima


    Posts : 1218
    Points : 1229
    Join date : 2012-03-22

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Dima Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:17 am

    Werewolf wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 M37m32ey
    thumbsup
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 35308
    Points : 35832
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  GarryB Thu Apr 30, 2015 1:45 pm

    Like a dream? That depends. A lot of it sounds great. 2 man crew? No. Driving, fighting, and commanding the tank is too much work for two men.

    Normally I would agree... but with an autotracker and an autoloader and therefore just needing to place the aim point on the target and fire the gun the gunners job is largely automated and could be performed by the fire control system while the driver drives and the commander continues to search for targets....

    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5765
    Points : 5962
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf Thu Apr 30, 2015 1:54 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Like a dream? That depends. A lot of it sounds great. 2 man crew? No. Driving, fighting, and commanding the tank is too much work for two men.

    Normally I would agree... but with an autotracker and an autoloader and therefore just needing to place the aim point on the target and fire the gun the gunners job is largely automated and could be performed by the fire control system while the driver drives and the commander continues to search for targets....


    We have seen T-90MS driving with Okhotnik an image processing system that can autotrack and autolockon, if the Armata further got its upgrades with a better working Okhotnik a broad angle TIS so the system can automatically search and track for targets like an IRST or like Shkval did that would already do most of the job. To ease up the workload and to give even basic equipment to even enable a 2 man crew, it would need at least a radar or better Radar and the Anti Sniper Device of russians to detect Optical devices from vehicles, spotters, ATGM teams and co that would give the least amount of necessary equipment to simplify the workload on Commander/Gunner and give him enough space to plan, communicate with other forces (aviation,artillery or infantry) and that certainly would reflect much better on morality. Sitting in a 2 man tank and being the commander must be shitload of workload, taking responsibility alone for all actions, while driver is relying only on you without a 2nd or 3rd crew member to boost his morality.

    Repairs on vehicle with only two is probably also a burden in the field when you have to fix snapped gears or lift heavy equipment or even basic reloading of the tank, one stay in the tank turret for reloading the other is running like a madman carrying around heavy huge rounds.
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon


    Posts : 12706
    Points : 12764
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  PapaDragon Thu Apr 30, 2015 2:23 pm

    Dima wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 M37m32ey
    thumbsup

    From this angle turret definitely looks like that scale model on the table... Cool
    avatar
    Strizh


    Posts : 131
    Points : 130
    Join date : 2014-05-06

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Strizh Thu Apr 30, 2015 2:24 pm

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 16693949334_c645fbb9c6_c

    Neutral Does it looks like that there is a hatch on top of the turret and the turret is not unmanned?
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt


    Posts : 1928
    Points : 2037
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt Thu Apr 30, 2015 2:28 pm

    Strizh wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 16693949334_c645fbb9c6_c

    Neutral  Does it looks like that there is a hatch on top of the turret and the turret is not unmanned?

    Even for an unmanned turret you most probably have to have service hatches and ammunition replenishment hatches.

    Also the hatch is right behind the gun, not a suitable location for human presence, ingress, or egress.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4099
    Points : 4097
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:19 pm

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:
    Strizh wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 16693949334_c645fbb9c6_c

    Neutral  Does it looks like that there is a hatch on top of the turret and the turret is not unmanned?

    Even for an unmanned turret you most probably have to have service hatches and ammunition replenishment hatches.

    Also the hatch is right behind the gun, not a suitable location for human presence, ingress, or egress.

    What makes you think its a hatch? Because it looks like one? Well, I think that is exactly the purpose of dis-info campaigns - to mislead the adversaries analysts....
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4099
    Points : 4097
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:22 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    Dima wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 M37m32ey
    thumbsup

    From this angle turret definitely looks like that scale model on the table... Cool  

    Bingo. That turret has a MUCH lower aspect than the other vehicles on the practice yards. Clear evidence that the shape beneath the tarpaulin is not an accurate indicator of the actual turret shape.
    medo
    medo


    Posts : 4367
    Points : 4449
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  medo Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:26 pm

    Strizh wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 16693949334_c645fbb9c6_c

    Neutral  Does it looks like that there is a hatch on top of the turret and the turret is not unmanned?

    Most probably a door for ammo reloading and repairs.
    alexZam
    alexZam


    Posts : 343
    Points : 399
    Join date : 2015-04-23
    Location : SoCal

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  alexZam Thu Apr 30, 2015 7:33 pm

    KoTeMoRe wrote:There is a suspicious cutaway of the tarp. ON the turret...like a bulkhead.

    That one is easy: it's just an access door to the turret's internal mechanism. For service and maintenance purposes. IMHO. afro
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  TR1 Thu Apr 30, 2015 8:33 pm

    The word on Russian forums has been that the MOD would not compromise on a requirement that the turret needed to be able to be accessed by the crew for field repairs and such.

    Past that, wait and see, no-one knows for sure.
    Stealthflanker
    Stealthflanker


    Posts : 1346
    Points : 1426
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 35
    Location : Indonesia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Stealthflanker Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:11 pm

    The image of Armata being transported by that KAMAZ 65525 was really helpful. put it in to corel draw and make some "measurement" based on it. So..

    The total length of Armata is around 9.5-10 meter, Hull length is 8 m, width is 3 m without ballistic skirt and 3.45m with ballistic skirt, total height is 2.9-3 m, roadwheel diameter is indeed the same 670mm as T-80. Turret length is 4 meter with 2.72 m wide though may not be accurate since it's still under tarps.

    Looks reasonable enough for me. but i would love to see better estimate.
    avatar
    Vann7


    Posts : 5409
    Points : 5513
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Vann7 Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:49 pm




    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5765
    Points : 5962
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:41 pm

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 PARAD_MOSKVA_150429_20

    What are those two closed circle like fittings on the back side?
    alexZam
    alexZam


    Posts : 343
    Points : 399
    Join date : 2015-04-23
    Location : SoCal

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  alexZam Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:43 pm

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 PARAD_MOSKVA_150429_14

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 PARAD_MOSKVA_150429_15

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 PARAD_MOSKVA_150429_19

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 BMPT_Armata_0032

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 BMPT_Armata_0040


    Last edited by alexZam on Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:05 pm; edited 2 times in total
    alexZam
    alexZam


    Posts : 343
    Points : 399
    Join date : 2015-04-23
    Location : SoCal

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  alexZam Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:47 pm

    Stealthflanker wrote:The image of Armata being transported by that KAMAZ 65525 was really helpful. put it in to corel draw and make some "measurement" based on it. So..

    The total length of Armata is around 9.5-10 meter, Hull length is 8 m, width is 3 m without ballistic skirt and 3.45m with ballistic skirt, total height is 2.9-3 m, roadwheel diameter is indeed the same 670mm as T-80. Turret length is 4 meter with 2.72 m wide though may not be accurate since it's still under tarps.

    Looks reasonable enough for me. but i would love to see better estimate.

    Roadwheels are apparently 700mm. So your measurements +5-6%..

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 KLry9
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5765
    Points : 5962
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:09 pm

    So my measurements were more accurate based on 700mm wheels.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Nnz4ooxs
    flamming_python
    flamming_python


    Posts : 8013
    Points : 8089
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  flamming_python Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:27 pm

    Wouldn't it be funny if they revealed that the Armata MBT doesn't actually have an unmanned turret after all Laughing
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Morpheus Eberhardt


    Posts : 1928
    Points : 2037
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:43 pm

    flamming_python wrote:Wouldn't it be funny if they revealed that the Armata MBT doesn't actually have an unmanned turret after all Laughing


    Due to the reason that it has hatches to replenish the ammunition?

    There has to be at least a hole, somewhere on the tank, for replenishment.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5765
    Points : 5962
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Werewolf Fri May 01, 2015 12:19 am

    In the end it is just a TT-14 (Teletank) completley unmanned and shoots ammunition which each ammunition have its own railgun. Rolling Eyes
    TR1
    TR1


    Posts : 5536
    Points : 5542
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  TR1 Fri May 01, 2015 1:17 am

    The non-ERA protected plate above the beak is IMO not heavily armored at all. The engine is well below the actual plate, and the protection probably comes into play for the most part right in front of the crew hatches.

    Weird solution, but that would make sense from what I have seen so far, IMO.


    Sponsored content


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2 - Page 18 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Jan 28, 2023 1:49 am