[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

KoTeMoRe wrote:

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.

With this new images i do think it could be possible.

The triangular "hatch" is not a hatch and not for weapon ports it is the same APS part as seen on Kurganetz and T-15 Armata.




What now i think is that the Yellow part is Laser Warning Reciever, when you look through the higher resolution images of what medo has linked it looks just like LWR sensors.

The Blue indeed i now believe are APS launchers for top attack projection maybe reloadable like suggested. When you look at the images you can see that those Blue marked things have Wires left and right to it.

The Red one is the same APS detection part like seen on Kurganetz and T-15 Armata... so no additional weapons for BMT T-14, maybe we will see a BMPT version with 57mm,23-6 gatling and whatever.

EDIT:

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?

Sorry, but on battlefield armor is more important than one or two infantry guys and not to mention when an RPG hits the armor and infantry standing next to it they will get killed by blast of RPG more often than from ERA which has far less explosives in it then RPG/ATGM's.

The problem is there is no NxRA or NERA that would provide even remotley the protection ERA provides from every single AT weapon. NERA is a little bit good against HEAT but more or less useless against APFSDS at least NERA like fitted on Leopard 2.

Unless they haven't found a magical solution to increase the protective capability of NERA to levels of ERA that it can even reduce or even stop APFSDS rounds i doubt that we will have enough protection for the turret without ERA.

Werewolf wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

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.

With this new images i do think it could be possible.

The triangular "hatch" is not a hatch and not for weapon ports it is the same APS part as seen on Kurganetz and T-15 Armata.




What now i think is that the Yellow part is Laser Warning Reciever, when you look through the higher resolution images of what medo has linked it looks just like LWR sensors.

The Blue indeed i now believe are APS launchers for top attack projection maybe reloadable like suggested. When you look at the images you can see that those Blue marked things have Wires left and right to it.

The Red one is the same APS detection part like seen on Kurganetz and T-15 Armata... so no additional weapons for BMT T-14, maybe we will see a BMPT version with 57mm,23-6 gatling and whatever.

EDIT:

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?

Sorry, but on battlefield armor is more important than one or two infantry guys and not to mention when an RPG hits the armor and infantry standing next to it they will get killed by blast of RPG more often than from ERA which has far less explosives in it then RPG/ATGM's.

The problem is there is no NxRA or NERA that would provide even remotley the protection ERA provides from every single AT weapon. NERA is a little bit good against HEAT but more or less useless against APFSDS at least NERA like fitted on Leopard 2.

Unless they haven't found a magical solution to increase the protective capability of NERA to levels of ERA that it can even reduce or even stop APFSDS rounds i doubt that we will have enough protection for the turret without ERA.

I stand corrected, I just saw the pictures on the T-15 and yes i believe those are the APS arrays, there is a chance they could be the APS system per se, but lookig at the T15, it becomes doubtful. Time will tell. One thing is sure. Ural phones just exploded. Bi'dness is gunna be good.

On a side note, if thoe blue panels turn out to be the APS system, then the boys from Ural caught up pretty effin fast with the Rafael. This also means, Ural has had eyes and ears in Lubnan and Gaza. And the Russian MIC is effectively going for means to get through Trophy. Great Success.

Khepesh wrote: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...

What is that grating on the back of the bustle about anyhow? And why does everything look so chared below it? Do they dump charcoal into that space or what?
Hmm if I had a guess I'd say it's a mobile Barbaque set for the crew maybe?

Some details up for discussion:

(38Кб, 500x333)


 (31Кб, 500x333)


 (41Кб, 500x333)


 (51Кб, 500x333)



(36Кб, 500x333)


 (22Кб, 500x333)


 (96Кб, 800x533)


(43Кб, 500x333)



(43Кб, 367x333)

[quote="flamming_python"]

Khepesh wrote: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...


What is that grating on the back of the bustle about anyhow? And why does everything look so chared below it? Do they dump charcoal into that space or what?
Hmm if I had a guess I'd say it's a mobile Barbaque set for the crew maybe?

Very difficult to say what that is behind the grill. At first look I thought it was spare track links, but not really on the turret on a 21st century tank and on a closer look it is clear they are not track links. But what Maybe the hole in the left side of the turret is for a drinks and food cooler so we can all make some cool comment like "I'm drinking wine and eating cheese, and catching some rays, you know."

Khepesh wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

Khepesh wrote: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...


What is that grating on the back of the bustle about anyhow? And why does everything look so chared below it? Do they dump charcoal into that space or what?
Hmm if I had a guess I'd say it's a mobile Barbaque set for the crew maybe?

Very difficult to say what that is behind the grill. At first look I thought it was spare track links, but not really on the turret on a 21st century tank and on a closer look it is clear they are not track links. But what  Maybe the hole in the left side of the turret is for a drinks and food cooler so we can all make some cool comment like "I'm drinking wine and eating cheese, and catching some rays, you know."

Considering the turret is unmanned, maybe it's some sort of a cooling system for those electronic components or am I thinking too far?

http://bastion-karpenko.ru/new-tehnik-parad-150504/

^ Click link and theres a dozens of pictures of the T-14 Armata, Kurgenats-25, T-15, Bumerang, and what else.

Shadåw wrote:http://bastion-karpenko.ru/new-tehnik-parad-150504/

^ Click link and theres a dozens of pictures of the T-14 Armata, Kurgenats-25, T-15, Bumerang, and what else.

Outstanding collection... I'll 1+ when possible. 

Im sorry , but i really don't like Armata T-14.. looks like the tanks was done by different
designers ,  the Turret by one team , and the body by another.. and neither one follows
a similar pattern..  anyone  architect or car designer will tell you how much the tank fail
in the fluidity of the design. Is obvious that for the Russians aesthetics means shit for them..
and they all look is if it works or not..  The barbeque Grill extended on the sides ,looks cheap as hell..and it even fails in ergonomics because people caught in a small arm fire ,that seeks cover from the tank will have to be really careful to not be impaled by the vent grill if the tank in motion.. Honestly i will have fired the designers team of armata..  Is not a disaster ,but it
so so .. disappointing as a next generation tank.  and it even create doubts about its protection
capabilities.. that tiny turret with holes doesn't look like will survive a direct hit of any M1a2 tank.. with so few armor ..  it give the impression a single sabot hit in the turret is all that it takes to put out of combat the tank.. overall the tank looks was done by Amateurs and people with not much experience in design..  Russia should have hired a french designed to correct
the fail ergonomics and questionable design of the tank..

Notice the side of Leclerc tank..  it follows a fluid design and do not have the barbeque side grill
extended..so people get stuck ,or wounded if tank in motion.  This are very basic things that in
the west Engineering is practiced.. Ergonomics  ,for safe interaction of people with machines or technology.. the leclerk was done like a modular tank..



Noone will get stuck or impaled by barbeque grills,if cover behind a leclerck in motion..
Oddly enough Russia got it right with KUganets..Boomerang.. a very uniform fluid design..
probably because they copy french designs?  with no extended parts posing a risk for safety of people or looking incredibly amateurish..

also I really hope the active protection defenses of armata is Godly amazing and revolutionary ,because neither it looks like such tiny turret of armata tank with big holes and empty spaces
will stand a chance to take a direct hit of any sabot round of nato tanks. we will see..
I hope the Armata performance is far better than its amateurish design.

APS - top attack ???

It looks like Armata is equipped with radars for APS, LWR and MAWS sensors.

medo wrote:It looks like Armata is equipped with radars for APS, LWR and MAWS sensors.

MAWS? Where did you spot those?

Some more details #2:

Vann7 wrote:
Im sorry , but i really don't like Armata T-14.. looks like the tanks was done by different
designers ,  the Turret by one team , and the body by another.. and neither one follows
a similar pattern..  anyone  architect or car designer will tell you how much the tank fail
in the fluidity of the design. Is obvious that for the Russians aesthetics means shit for them..
and they all look is if it works or not..  The barbeque Grill extended on the sides ,looks cheap as hell..and it even fails in ergonomics because people caught in a small arm fire ,that seeks cover from the tank will have to be really careful to not be impaled by the vent grill if the tank in motion.. Honestly i will have fired the designers team of armata..  Is not a disaster ,but it
so so .. disappointing as a next generation tank.  and it even create doubts about its protection
capabilities.. that tiny turret with holes doesn't look like will survive a direct hit of any M1a2 tank.. with so few armor ..  it give the impression a single sabot hit in the turret is all that it takes to put out of combat the tank.. overall the tank looks was done by Amateurs and people with not much experience in design..  Russia should have hired a french designed to correct
the fail ergonomics and questionable design of the tank..

Notice the side of Leclerc tank..  it follows a fluid design and do not have the barbeque side grill
extended..so people get stuck ,or wounded if tank in motion.  This are very basic things that in
the west Engineering is practiced.. Ergonomics  ,for safe interaction of people with machines or technology.. the leclerk was done like a modular tank..



Oddly enough Russia got it right with KUganets..Boomerang.. a very uniform fluid design.. with no extended parts posing a risk for safety of people or looking incredibly amateurish.. also
I really hope the active protection defenses of armata is Godly amazing and revolutionary,because neither it look like such tiny turret with big holes and empty space
will stand a chance to take a direct hit of any sabot round of nato tanks

Side of Leclerc looks fluid? Are you on drugs? This is what the AMX 56 looked like as a testbed...

Here you can see how the French use caches for the equipment that would be apparent. See the cache over the smoke dischargers.

Notice the uncovered gaps.

Furthermore the AMX 56 is very compact (6.85m hull)

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.

Sorry if i missed the discussion if it happened earlier, but what do you think the large aperture next to the cannon on the left is for? Maybe a coaxial cannon that was not ready yet? Optronics/electronics?

What in Swarogs world is this Madmax of ERA equipped looking monster in the background?

It looks like a vehicle you would place in an Arena of Machine vs Machine(s)...

Sorry if i missed the discussion if it happened earlier, but what do you think the large aperture next to the cannon on the left is for? Maybe a coaxial cannon that was not ready yet? Optronics/electronics? wrote:

Targeting sights of Gunner.
It has two armored doors that open whenever the gunner needs them to, that is why it looks like an empty spot.

Neutrality wrote:

Khepesh wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

Khepesh wrote: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...


What is that grating on the back of the bustle about anyhow? And why does everything look so chared below it? Do they dump charcoal into that space or what?
Hmm if I had a guess I'd say it's a mobile Barbaque set for the crew maybe?

Very difficult to say what that is behind the grill. At first look I thought it was spare track links, but not really on the turret on a 21st century tank and on a closer look it is clear they are not track links. But what  Maybe the hole in the left side of the turret is for a drinks and food cooler so we can all make some cool comment like "I'm drinking wine and eating cheese, and catching some rays, you know."

Considering the turret is unmanned, maybe it's some sort of a cooling system for those electronic components or am I thinking too far?

The top rear of the turret is clean, no grills or anything except the lights, so whatever it is I doubt any sort of cooling vents as they would be blocked by whatever is stowed in the basket. Looking at some very good close ups, though not of that particular area, the turret seems badly assembled with parts not fitting together properly. I'm suspecting that when we eventually see production models they will look different and maybe this ugly duckling will turn into beautiful swan by next year....

Werewolf wrote:

What in Swarogs world is this Madmax of ERA equipped looking monster in the background?

It looks like a vehicle you would place in an Arena of Machine vs Machine(s)...

IDF modification of Centurion, don't remember what they call this variant tho.

Werewolf wrote:

What in Swarogs world is this Madmax of ERA equipped looking monster in the background?

It looks like a vehicle you would place in an Arena of Machine vs Machine(s)...

That's a Nagmachon (APC based on the Centurion hull) with an armored OT. See how "non-fluid' the lines of the Nag are, and how heavily protected it is...If Rasha takes a page from Iz, we're into something really interesting. So far, we've seen Ural take on the Trophy, and Namer. I say good job.

Also see Nakpadon panels...

Khepesh wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

What in Swarogs world is this Madmax of ERA equipped looking monster in the background?

It looks like a vehicle you would place in an Arena of Machine vs Machine(s)...

IDF modification of Centurion, don't remember what they call this variant tho.

Never seen something uglier than that thing...

No wonder it needs so much ERA on it, it just screams "KILL ME!"

Well that thing saves lives against your local durkadurka hipster

Some video..

(1942Кб, 640x640)

 (2234Кб, 640x640)

 (2146Кб, 640x640)

 (2264Кб, 640x640)

KoTeMoRe wrote:Well that thing saves lives against your local durkadurka hipster

I did not say anything about its protection, first time i hear about that "thing", but it certainly is an eye catcher...like an car accident.

mack8 wrote:Sorry if i missed the discussion if it  happened earlier, but what do you think the large aperture next to the cannon on the left is for? Maybe a coaxial cannon that was not ready yet? Optronics/electronics?

IMO it is gunner's sight as nothing else is visible to be a sight or mounting for a sight, except for commanders panoramic. BUT, I cannot see why such a large hole is made in the front of the turret when it is better for the sight to protude from turret roof. There are a lot of rivets on the front turret roof which also do not make sense, at the moment.