The problem i see here is that GLATGM are slower than MANPAD purposed missiles and the costs for GLATGM is not lower than what a much more capable MANPAD costs.
What makes you think GLATGMs are slower?
Time of flight to 5km for Svir is 17.6 seconds... so 17.6 divided by 5 equals 1km per 3.5 seconds... or pretty much approximately supersonic most of the way.
You are a smart guy... I don't need to explain how an M16 bullet can leave the muzzle of a rifle at 3 times the speed of sound and be subsonic at 600m range because after it leaves the muzzle it starts to slow down rapidly... it would be the same for this unpowered missile.
the point is that a MANPAD wont get to the target that much quicker and most importantly most MANPADs look at the target do flares become a problem... SVIR looks back at the tank it was launched from...
The Commander would need to communicate with the gunner to point him for that target so that the gunner could aim his cannon to shoot the GLATGM towards the target while the Commander still has to Laser Beam that target.
On the T-90M the commander can aim and fire the gun himself... on the armata the driver can probably do it too.
Why create a separate launcher for a new type of ammo and a new weapon when vehicles supporting your unit will be close behind with them anyway?
And you will have GLATGMs anyway.
IMO such vertical launchers even for 2nd Gen MANPADS would greatly enhance survivability of high value tanks like Armata especially since the West is pushing for war and the helicopter fleets tend to grow.
Dedicated air defence vehicles will be rather more effective and efficient... for the very occasional situation where a tank might have to fight with a helo there are missiles that already exist and likely the new missiles will be even more effective.
If the Kornet-EM can kill targets at 10km a GLATGM should be able to do even better... which is 5km more reach than any MANPAD Russia deploys.
No. it is not.
It is subsonic and can hit target at >8km range.
The guy who wrote this report was drunk...
Kornet-E flys at 300m/s, as does the anti tank model of the Kornet-EM, the HE armed Kornet-EM is supersonic with a flight speed of 320m/s.
The E model can hit targets at 5.5km, the anti armour EM at 8.5km and the HE EM at 10km.
1.) The menagerie of polygon shapes are indication of a low-observable stealthy turret, designed to counter the formidable artillery radar/MLRS combination.
2.) The turret bustle looks independent and detachable. Likely used to add ammo quickly, and when struck it will likely be ejected (with the help of charges) some ten meters behind the T-14 as one of the many safety pre-cautions.
3.) The current turret design isn't a 'End-all-be-all', there's likely several different configurations such a ERA-heavy 'clam-shell' turret.
...This is just a sample of my thoughts, I'll add significantly more to these points later...
Agree... and that hole in the side is intriguing... I very much doubt it is for empty shell cases... it is a 90 degree angle to the ammo feed, which in itself is awkward.
The best I hope for is it is the location for a weapon mount that could be a self contained gatling (ie weapon and ammo bin) in either 12.7 x 108mm or 14.5 x 114mm or 23 x 115mm calibre... or perhaps a 30mm or 40mm or 57mm grenade launcher...
BTW that is the one... thanks Cyberspec...
Possibly T-72B4? A new turret for the T-72 sounds like a very sensible idea.
As for the the T-90 I'd be very suprised to see them develope yet another turret, especially when the T-90MS/AM essentially fulfills every requirement for the next few decades.
Working with new materials and new systems I am sure they will have learned a few new tricks they could apply to the old dogs...