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


+70
fragmachine
par far
T-44
x_54_u43
JohninMK
ult
Khepesh
Project Canada
Neirdark
zg18
AlfaT8
OminousSpudd
Glyph
Cucumber Khan
Walther von Oldenburg
jhelb
PapaDragon
Berkut
Cyrus the great
VladimirSahin
Mak Sime
2SPOOKY4U
Mike E
Vann7
GunshipDemocracy
magnumcromagnon
Alex555
marcellogo
collegeboy16
Werewolf
Stealthflanker
Austin
volna
Brovich
berhoum
Big_Gazza
Cyberspec
George1
mack8
franco
THX-15
whir
Morpheus Eberhardt
Book.
Rmf
max steel
victor1985
Mindstorm
archangelski
Flanky
flamming_python
sepheronx
higurashihougi
Acheron
AJ-47
BKP
Kyo
Flyboy77
chicken
Viktor
KoTeMoRe
cracker
Dima
KomissarBojanchev
mutantsushi
kvs
alexZam
Zivo
Regular
xeno
74 posters

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 5420
    Points : 5444
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Mon May 25, 2015 12:53 am

    I did not know that hardened takers have also sense of humor till such degree Smile


    max steel wrote:
    US funded

    1. media outlet Diplomat

    2. runaway criminal  Sergei Guriev

    IS-2 bankrupted USSR - dr Goebbels, 30 April 1945 Laughing
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 17693
    Points : 18200
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  George1 Mon May 25, 2015 12:55 am

    sepheronx wrote:And the diplomat is a joke.  But let me entertain them:

    -$56B in cost deficit is nothing.  3% of GDP.  Which would mean that Russia's debt would still be far less than all the west.  Add in, their deficit is paid through the reserve funds.
    -$8M per tank is not necessarily the final price, actually, I never seen that high of a price mentioned.  As well, once production actually starts, prices tend to drop over time.
    -Purchasing military equipment stimulates the economy as it provides jobs, and equipment to various people.
    -As per Franco who pointed it out, they had not purchased any new tanks in recent years and thus could indicate that a large portion of money was saved for the Armata's
    -Chances of 2300 tanks by 2020 isn't gonna happen anyway, and it will probably be pushed back another 5 years.
    -Money is already allocated.  A huge part of it is actually.
    -The diplomat is a joke and couldn't even study economics if their life depended on it.
    -Russian government can start raining in the foreign reserve funds which is the third highest in the world.  This in turn can pay for projects and help stimulate growth.

    what will be the production numbers per year for Armata? does anyone know?
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7465
    Points : 7731
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 33
    Location : Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  sepheronx Mon May 25, 2015 12:59 am

    If anyone missed it, I edited my post to add this:
    If we figure it out, $8M per tank, at 2300 tanks is $18.4B dollars, divide that by 5 (5 years), and that comes out to $3.68B per year. $3.68B per year will NOT bankrupt Russia. They offered Ukraine alone over $20B prior to the Maiden. They have reserves in the hundreds of billions.

    When one actually does the math, you will start to see how TheDiplomat is stupid and a joke.

    So once one does the numbers, you will see how ridiculous the claims are. But of course, it is all BS.

    How many tanks per year? Who knows. It seems to be on average recently about 300 tanks per year in terms of upgrades/new. They said they can do 1000 tanks a year tops. I doubt that really myself and think maybe at least 500-800 per year. Regardless, I think they will opt for something like 300 per year just by looking at current rates.

    They could extend the deadline of it and purchase more upgrades in the mean time, something like getting T-72's to T-90MS levels.
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 5420
    Points : 5444
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Mon May 25, 2015 1:16 am

    sepheronx wrote:And the diplomat is a joke.  But let me entertain them:


    They talk but do not listen. This is called exceptionalizm   affraid Math in Russia does not work either. In West all R&D for military brings benefit to economy, all production also only in Russia economy is to be yukos-free resource exporter, no social benefits, no manufacturing sector then
    Russia fulfills intl obligations   lol!


    Last edited by GunshipDemocracy on Mon May 25, 2015 1:34 am; edited 1 time in total
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 5420
    Points : 5444
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Mon May 25, 2015 1:31 am

    sepheronx wrote:If anyone missed it, I edited my post to add this:
    So once one does the numbers, you will see how ridiculous the claims are.  But of course, it is all BS.

    How many tanks per year?  Who knows.  It seems to be on average recently about 300 tanks per year in terms of upgrades/new.  They said they can do 1000 tanks a year tops.  I doubt that really myself and think maybe at least 500-800 per year.  Regardless, I think they will opt for something like 300 per year just by looking at current rates.

    They could extend the deadline of it and purchase more upgrades in the mean time, something like getting T-72's to T-90MS levels.

    I´d say maybe now 300 per year but in 5years 1500? I would rather ask question about urgency of needs. The more urgent need of new tanks then production capabilities surely can grow steeper.
    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 13005
    Points : 13152
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Kanada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  kvs Mon May 25, 2015 1:53 am

    In America corporate welfare for the MIC is a good thing, but in Russia it is very, very bad. This is kindergarten level
    drivel.

    The spending on modernization will be a direct stimulus to the GDP. Western media rags should not preach to Russia about
    finances. The west has been stimulating GDP growth over the last three decades through pure debt accumulation. Russia's
    government has shown no indication it will follow this path and in fact has been overly zealous in trying to balance the budget.
    Budgets have to be balanced in the long term and not in the short term due to opportunity cost and due to the positive feedback
    between austerity and GDP contraction.

    Russia should not hold back spending on military upgrades and research. It will only benefit the Russian economy and at the
    same time increase its security against the western barbarians. The same ones yelling at it to stop spending. attack
    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 7465
    Points : 7731
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 33
    Location : Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  sepheronx Mon May 25, 2015 2:12 am

    kvs wrote:In America corporate welfare for the MIC is a good thing, but in Russia it is very, very bad.   This is kindergarten level
    drivel.  

    The spending on modernization will be a direct stimulus to the GDP.   Western media rags should not preach to Russia about
    finances.   The west has been stimulating GDP growth over the last three decades through pure debt accumulation.   Russia's
    government has shown no indication it will follow this path and in fact has been overly zealous in trying to balance the budget.
    Budgets have to be balanced in the long term and not in the short term due to opportunity cost and due to the positive feedback
    between austerity and GDP contraction.  

    Russia should not hold back spending on military upgrades and research.   It will only benefit the Russian economy and at the
    same time increase its security against the western barbarians.   The same ones yelling at it to stop spending.   attack

    It is almost like they don't know that funding military production facilities and such, creates jobs, and jobs, create wealth, which wealth in turn is taxed anyway (so is the company) and thus money ends up back in the government in the end, as well, workers spend money on goods which then these other companies pay taxes that end up back in Russian governments hands. So it is easy to look at the items as a single price, but they end up getting some of that money back in the end anyway.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe


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

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  KoTeMoRe Mon May 25, 2015 2:17 am

    max steel wrote:Read this latest piece by US funded media outlet Diplomat :

    Is Russia in trouble? Is the 'World’s Deadliest Tank' Bankrupting Russia?
     




    Moscow is overspending on its armed forces and still might not get the military it wants by 2020.  


    Russia is expected to spend more money on its military in 2015 than in any previous year in its entire post-Soviet history.

    According to an analysis conducted by Forbes Magazine, Russia will spend an estimated 5.34 percent of its economic output on defense in 2015. This estimate is based on the assumption that the Russian economy will contract by 3 percent and a 15 percent hike in the real value of the military budget.

    However, another estimate quoted in the Wall Street Journal  based on Russian government data notes that country’s GDP may even decrease by 4.6 percent largely due to lower oil prices and Western sanctions. Consequently, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev recently announced that this year’s 3.3 trillion rubles military budget will need to be adjusted and cut by five percent or 157 billion rubles.

    Even worse, according to newly published budget data of the first three months of 2015, military expenditure exceeded 9 percent of quarterly GDP – almost twice the amount cited in Forbes Magazine.

    The verdict is simple: Russia cannot afford military expenditures at such scale in the long-run. “The modern Russian economy just does not generate enough resources to finance the current 2011-2020 rearmament program. This seriously reduces the ability to efficiently renew the Russian armed forces’ equipment,” a recent analysis by the Moscow-based defense think tank CAST notes.

    The only way for Russia to currently finance its growing military expenditure is to tap into the country’s reserve fund – money the Kremlin put aside over the last few years when oil prices were high and meant to cushion the economy against shocks. With the help of the reserve fund – worth approximately six percent of the country’s total GDP – Russia could maintain a 3.7% deficit for less than two years, according to the economist Sergei Guriev.

    Yet, this calculation may perhaps be too optimistic, the Russian-born scholar admits, given the Kremlin’s exorbitant spending on defense: “Russia has already spent more than half of its total military budget for 2015. At this rate, its reserve fund will be emptied before the end of the year.”

    In a recent article, he recounts what some Russian spectators have said when Russia’s newest main battle tank, the T-14 Armata, abruptly grounded to a halt during a rehearsal for Moscow’s big May 9 Victory Day parade on Red Square (see: “Did the ‘World’s Deadliest Tank’ Just Break Down?”): “The Armata truly has unprecedented destructive power; a battalion can destroy the entire Russian budget!”

    By 2020, Russia plans to produce 2,300 T-14 Armata models.  Each tank costs about $ 8 million. The Russian military intends to replace 70 percent of its tank corps with the new tracked vehicle, replacing the older T-72 and T-90 main battle tanks. Overall, Russia military spending plan called for the modernization of 30 percent of the armed forces’ weapons this year.

    Back in 2010, President Vladimir Putin launched a massive 20 trillion rubles military modernization project aimed to replace 70 percent of Soviet-era military hardware by 2020, including 50 new warships for the navy, hundreds of new fighter jets and thousands of new vehicles for the ground forces.

    However, in April this year, Putin admitted that “the [defense] industry is not entirely ready to produce certain types of weapons on time.”  Yet, he immediately added: “But without a doubt, the program will be fulfilled.”

    According to Russian military expert Dmitry Gorenburg, Moscow may want to slow down the acquisition process until oil prices have recovered, because, “with cost overruns, the money allocated may not be sufficient to build what they want to build.” Additionally, he noted that “regarding what it is they want to build, they won’t get as many of them, they may take longer to build, but the programs will keep running as they are now.”

    Yet, Sergie Guriev’s verdict on Russia’s military spending should it continue at current rates is grim:  ”If Russia could not afford a 4%-of-GDP defense budget in good times, it cannot possibly manage such a high rate of military spending now, when it confronts rock-bottom oil prices, Western sanctions, and economic recession(…) like the T-14 in Red Square, Putin’s luck may be about to stall out.”


    http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/is-the-worlds-deadliest-tank-bankrupting-russia/

    reserve fund is 152 bln USD (which is 20% higher in value towards Euro and 70% higher towards RUB) Therefore the Reserve fund (and oil prices) generally will even out at 10%. Furthermore, 157 bln RUB =3.2 bln USD which is IMO quite a slash over the 65 bln USD expected budget. Anyway, there's a big issue about the budget here. Russian aramament is having a huge PR boost and wars around the globe are currently tailored to Russian catalog. Low intensity warfare, with low overall technology and long runs are as good as ever. The worst predicament from that piece is that Russian econmy may shrink in 2015 but will grow back again in 2016. All this while not counting the oil resurgence. If everything goes accordng to the plan, Russia might have a 75 USD/bbl by November with an USD that will be at 50 RUB. Which is better as 100 USD bbl at 30 RUB/USD (3750 vs 3000 RUB/bbl). Do these people take us for idiots?

    BTW the contracting price of 8 million is something of a joke. Economies of scale would probably bring the initial batch price at about 5 million, which was the price for the rolling train of LEO2A7SA initially prepared for the 800 tank mega sale to KSA.


    Last edited by KoTeMoRe on Mon May 25, 2015 2:22 am; edited 1 time in total
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8159
    Points : 8304
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  magnumcromagnon Mon May 25, 2015 2:19 am

    ZOMG-RUZZIA-IZ-BANKRUPT!!!1! Is that why Russia has one of the lowest Debt/GDP ratios of the top 10 largest economies in the world? lol1
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5482
    Points : 5679
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Werewolf Mon May 25, 2015 2:21 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:ZOMG-RUZZIA-IZ-BANKRUPT!!!1! Is that why Russia has one of the lowest Debt/GDP ratios of the top 10 largest economies in the world? lol1

    Black is White and White is Black

    18 trln USD debts is best economy on planet while 3.4 trln with one of the lowest debts is a collapsing country.
    KoTeMoRe
    KoTeMoRe


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

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  KoTeMoRe Mon May 25, 2015 2:39 am

    sepheronx wrote:If anyone missed it, I edited my post to add this:
    If we figure it out, $8M per tank, at 2300 tanks is $18.4B dollars, divide that by 5 (5 years), and that comes out to $3.68B per year. $3.68B per year will NOT bankrupt Russia. They offered Ukraine alone over $20B prior to the Maiden. They have reserves in the hundreds of billions.

    When one actually does the math, you will start to see how TheDiplomat is stupid and a joke.

    So once one does the numbers, you will see how ridiculous the claims are.  But of course, it is all BS.

    How many tanks per year?  Who knows.  It seems to be on average recently about 300 tanks per year in terms of upgrades/new.  They said they can do 1000 tanks a year tops.  I doubt that really myself and think maybe at least 500-800 per year.  Regardless, I think they will opt for something like 300 per year just by looking at current rates.

    They could extend the deadline of it and purchase more upgrades in the mean time, something like getting T-72's to T-90MS levels.

    The level of upgrade don't compare with the level of production. UVZ has stated that initial run will be around 40 a year to streamline assembly line and iron out the biggest issues of the assembly. If needed the output can be brought up to 100 a year. The other problem is that the T90 iterations (MS/Proriv-2 turrets) are still on the way of the T-14 production. There is still a lot of life in the T-90 tree especially with the Proriv-2 turret and MS and foreign customers will look to buy a very promising package until the T-14 breaks cover fully.
    avatar
    Vann7


    Posts : 5355
    Points : 5459
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Vann7 Mon May 25, 2015 3:43 am

    George1 wrote:

    what will be the production numbers per year for Armata? does anyone know?


    Russian media ,reports say that the armata company claims  500 tanks per year ,they can produce.. so that means that if production start in 2017 as they estimated ,they could make
    1500 tanks by end of 2020. and 2,300 tanks by 2023.. but if tank really as good they wanted..
    they will end making many more.. , 2,300 is the initial order.. not the last one. Russia will need
    no less than 5,000 of them ,while maintaining their T-90s and T-72b3s..  

    Ideally Russia should order 10,000 Armata tanks alone for all Russia federation territory needs.
    3,000 in the west..from Sochi to St Petersburg, and ,1,000 in Central Russia another 2,000 in far east and 5,000 in reserve.  In world war 2 Russia used no less than 30,000 tanks.. so its not crazy numbers..

    Then about 15,000 T-15 ifv.. and they all travel in group with every T-14 armata..

    So a group formation could be , 6x T-72 or T-90  + 1 T-14 and 3 T-15 to protect the tanks..  

    russia needs also to replace all their old APCs and build like  30,000 armata APCs.. between Kuganets and Boomerans.

    T-72s should continue to be upgraded and mostly made for exports orders.. their price
    and performance is good and T-14 and T-15s never sold for exports.. only for domestic use..

    and upgraded T-72 and T-90 with new gun and better defenses being produced only for exports.


    Last edited by Vann7 on Mon May 25, 2015 3:49 am; edited 1 time in total
    George1
    George1


    Posts : 17693
    Points : 18200
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  George1 Mon May 25, 2015 3:44 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    George1 wrote:

    what will be the production numbers per year for Armata? does anyone know?


    Russian media ,reports say that the armata company claims  500 tanks per year ,they can produce..

    i think this number is too optimistic
    collegeboy16
    collegeboy16


    Posts : 1145
    Points : 1146
    Join date : 2012-10-05
    Age : 25
    Location : Roanapur

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  collegeboy16 Mon May 25, 2015 3:51 am

    collegeboy16 wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    2A82M1 muzzle velocity of APFSDS is 2km/s? Suspect

    With existing ammunition or newly made?

    I guess the later...
    mango Razz but prolly Vacuum-1 since they list BPS(btw what does this acronym mean, i assume its something Russian, provide trans. to eng too, thanks) penetration of up to 1m.

    Werewolf wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 52ysqujn

    its vacuum-1/2 shot from 2a82-1m. all the 125mm rounds are shot from old 125 gun so performance is gimped.
    Werewolf
    Werewolf


    Posts : 5482
    Points : 5679
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Werewolf Mon May 25, 2015 4:14 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    George1 wrote:

    what will be the production numbers per year for Armata? does anyone know?


    Russian media ,reports say that the armata company claims  500 tanks per year ,they can produce.. so that means that if production start in 2017 as they estimated ,they could make
    1500 tanks by end of 2020. and 2,300 tanks by 2023.. but if tank really as good they wanted..
    they will end making many more.. , 2,300 is the initial order.. not the last one. Russia will need
    no less than 5,000 of them ,while maintaining their T-90s and T-72b3s..  

    Ideally Russia should order 10,000 Armata tanks alone for all Russia federation territory needs.
    3,000 in the west..from Sochi to St Petersburg, and ,1,000 in Central Russia another 2,000 in far east and 5,000 in reserve.  In world war 2 Russia used no less than 30,000 tanks.. so its not crazy numbers..

    Then about 15,000 T-15 ifv.. and they all travel in group with every T-14 armata..

    So a group formation could be , 6x T-72 or T-90  + 1 T-14 and 3 T-15 to protect the tanks..  

    russia needs also to replace all their old APCs and build like  30,000 armata APCs.. between Kuganets and Boomerans.

    T-72s should continue to be upgraded and mostly made for exports orders.. their price
    and performance is good and T-14 and T-15s never sold for exports.. only for domestic use..

    and upgraded T-72 and T-90 with new gun and better defenses being produced only for exports.

    500 would be the total amount of tanks leaving the plant, modernized T-72B3, + production models.
    Cyberspec
    Cyberspec


    Posts : 2907
    Points : 3062
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Cyberspec Mon May 25, 2015 6:04 am

    Never mind the Diplomat and it's stories....there's new info and some confirmation of previous speculative reports.

    From Gur Khan (George posted part of the info on the previous page) regarding some details on the T-14

    Combat weight …………….........48 tons  -->  combat operations in a city .................... 53 tons

    So the T-14's Urban warfare kit weighs 5 tons

    ----

    New generation dynamic armour + multispectral smoke screen launcher that also features EMP grenades capability (as previously hinted) for upper hemisphere protection.....anti-mine protection for the crew

    Protection combined - modular set of universal dynamic protection

    APS "Afghanit" + multispectral screens launch system
    Upper hemisphere protection system with electromagnetic protection system and a complex for suppression of radio controlled fuses.

    Anti-Mine protection underneath the crew section

    Source: http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2015/05/blog-post_45.html

    ------

    From the UVZ website...

    Original silhouette of the turret in conjunction with a special coating greatly reduces the visibility of the machine in the thermal  and radar spectrum.

    The armor of the Armata is able to withstand an attack of any existing anti-tank weapons .

    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8159
    Points : 8304
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  magnumcromagnon Mon May 25, 2015 7:21 am

    Cyberspec wrote:Never mind the Diplomat and it's stories....there's new info and some confirmation of previous speculative reports.

    From Gur Khan (George posted part of the info on the previous page) regarding some details on the T-14

    Combat weight …………….........48 tons  -->  combat operations in a city .................... 53 tons

    So the T-14's Urban warfare kit weighs 5 tons

    ...The chassis is said to be capable of supporting up to 65 tons, so it's possible that if deemed necessary that the T-14 could be beefed up even more than the 53 tons stated...

    Cyberspec wrote:From the UVZ website...

    Original silhouette of the turret in conjunction with a special coating greatly reduces the visibility of the machine in the thermal  and radar spectrum.

    The armor of the Armata is able to withstand an attack of any existing anti-tank weapons .

    http://www.uvz.ru/product/70/88

    ...Well I got to pat myself on the back, I was probably the first person to point out that the polygon shaping on the turret was purposely done for stealth/low-observable reasons. respekt
    Cyberspec
    Cyberspec


    Posts : 2907
    Points : 3062
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Cyberspec Mon May 25, 2015 7:40 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    ...Well I got to pat myself on the back, I was probably the first person to point out that the polygon shaping on the turret was purposely done for stealth/low-observable reasons. respekt

    You da Man Very Happy

    I'll toot my horn as well, since I said it looked like an F-117 on tracks when the turret was unveiled
    higurashihougi
    higurashihougi


    Posts : 2571
    Points : 2660
    Join date : 2014-08-13
    Location : A small and cutie S-shaped land.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  higurashihougi Mon May 25, 2015 8:29 am

    collegeboy16 wrote:i smell an MBT-70 in the making. both sides have arguably different priorities, Germany focuses on home defence while France leans on expeditionary.

    besides Leclercs are still good for 10 years more in 2030 if we are to take the lifetime of tanks as 50 years before it needs to be urgently replaced.

    MBT-70 is like this. The USSR made breathtaking and impressive technological breakthrough with T-62 (smoothbore cannon) and T-64 (composite armour, autoloader). With all of these events the West was effectively lagged behind and had no hope of catching up. The West had no choice but to beg Germany for a new design.

    Germany, being the best technological stronghold and most advanced country in Western Europe, came up with a great design which eventually evolved into Leo 2 and other current Western tanks. But corrupted body like White House and Pentagon twisted the design of Germany and created a degenerated version like M1 Abrams and Challenger xx.

    So this situation is similar. With the appearance of Armata, Russia again made the technological breakthrough and the West is severely lagged behind. Not to mention that no Western tank can match the current Russian T-90xxx. The West again begs Germany for a new tank. And again Germany come up with Leo 3. But the corrupted goverments of countries like UK, France, US will twist Germany design to create a stupid, degenerated version of Leo 3.

    Well of course, my prediction will be wrong if a revolution come up in France and US, to create a clean and effective bureaucracy similar to Germany and countries in Central and Northern Europe.
    Cyberspec
    Cyberspec


    Posts : 2907
    Points : 3062
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Cyberspec Mon May 25, 2015 10:03 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Cyberspec wrote:Never mind the Diplomat and it's stories....there's new info and some confirmation of previous speculative reports.

    From Gur Khan (George posted part of the info on the previous page) regarding some details on the T-14

    Combat weight …………….........48 tons  -->  combat operations in a city .................... 53 tons

    So the T-14's Urban warfare kit weighs 5 tons

    ...The chassis is said to be capable of supporting up to 65 tons, so it's possible that if deemed necessary that the T-14 could be beefed up even more than the 53 tons stated...



    From what I gather, the 65 ton capacity is in-built taking into account future upgrades....among other things, possibly a 152mm gun
    2SPOOKY4U
    2SPOOKY4U


    Posts : 276
    Points : 287
    Join date : 2014-09-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  2SPOOKY4U Mon May 25, 2015 10:14 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    ...Well I got to pat myself on the back, I was probably the first person to point out that the polygon shaping on the turret was purposely done for stealth/low-observable reasons. respekt

    Wow, first one to point out things that don't need to be pointed out for anyone relevant!

    Whatever, I'm just aggressive cuz drinking, have an upvote.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 3520
    Points : 3518
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Big_Gazza Mon May 25, 2015 12:33 pm

    kvs wrote:In America corporate welfare for the MIC is a good thing, but in Russia it is very, very bad.   This is kindergarten level
    drivel.  

    The spending on modernization will be a direct stimulus to the GDP.   Western media rags should not preach to Russia about
    finances.   The west has been stimulating GDP growth over the last three decades through pure debt accumulation.   Russia's
    government has shown no indication it will follow this path and in fact has been overly zealous in trying to balance the budget.
    Budgets have to be balanced in the long term and not in the short term due to opportunity cost and due to the positive feedback
    between austerity and GDP contraction.  

    Russia should not hold back spending on military upgrades and research.   It will only benefit the Russian economy and at the
    same time increase its security against the western barbarians.   The same ones yelling at it to stop spending.   attack

    It should probably be noted that defense spending in Russia will be a positive stimulus as long as the national budget remains in surplus (or with a small deceit) AND is spent almost exclusively in state/public owned or controlled enterprises where the performance metric can be enforced as value-for-money for purchaser (government) rather than profit. The expenditure will create jobs and the money will go predominantly into the salaries of the personnel involved, ie will be quickly spent and generate demand within the local domestic economy (and a portion immediately returned by taxation).

    This doesn't work in the West as US/EU governments BORROW to support their large deficits and maintain military outlays, and their MIC enterprises are private profit-making entities that inflate costs and depress wages. The lift of the domestic economy is small compared to the sums spent, and the profits flow chiefly to the ultra-wealthy investor class who use it to further their stranglehold over the national polity. In the West, "defence" spending is a DRAIN on the national economies, while its true purpose is to redistribute public wealth into the pockets of the Ruling Elite.

    Part and parcel of this must be the extermination of corruption in Russia. Public funds MUST NOT be allowed to be stolen by corrupt businesses or officials. IMHO, Russia should embark on a few high-profile anti-corruption cases and make them a public show like the Chinese CCP is doing. Despite the absurd blatherings of Western MSM that the Chinese anti-corruption drive is only for show, in reality, the CCP is DEADLY SERIOUS. You don't execute once-omnipotent officials of the Party over mere internal power struggles, and I think that Russia should enact similar proceedings where appropriate (without the capital punishment however, as the moral high ground over the Uh'Muricans in this regard cannot be sacrificed).
    berhoum
    berhoum


    Posts : 117
    Points : 128
    Join date : 2015-05-19
    Age : 64
    Location : France

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty fil [officiel] Armata Discussion

    Post  berhoum Mon May 25, 2015 1:06 pm

    La tourelle du pelées (analysé) T-14 ...
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon


    Posts : 8159
    Points : 8304
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  magnumcromagnon Mon May 25, 2015 1:50 pm

    2SPOOKY4U wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:

    ...Well I got to pat myself on the back, I was probably the first person to point out that the polygon shaping on the turret was purposely done for stealth/low-observable reasons. respekt

    Wow, first one to point out things that don't need to be pointed out for anyone relevant!

    Whatever, I'm just aggressive cuz drinking, have an upvote.

    Expect quite a few people came to the same conclusion after I brought it up... Very Happy
    GunshipDemocracy
    GunshipDemocracy


    Posts : 5420
    Points : 5444
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  GunshipDemocracy Mon May 25, 2015 2:43 pm

    berhoum wrote:La tourelle du pelées (analysé) T-14 ...


    so T-14 has a coax after all! wow 1:03 . Tadam
    I wonder why coax virtually never is 12,7mm?

    Sponsored content


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3 - Page 11 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Jul 03, 2022 7:25 am