[Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

GarryB wrote:Maintainence does not occur in combat.

In a rear area where it is safe you do maintainence... there should be a few other troops around that could assist in maintainence... no need to haul them around all the time.

Of course a command vehicle or ATGM vehicle with Krisantema would be in bigger trouble as some of them only have two crew...

That makes sense and I think that the Armata will be significantly easier to maintain than tanks that were designed in the 70s, even with a 3 man crew so the Armata is superior to every tank in every regard. Question: If the Armata does eventually get a 152mm gun, how many rounds do you think it should be able to hold?

4t from what i at least belive includes cables + their protection aganist heat, moisture and even more importantly fuel and hydraulic liquid. Vehicles i served were always leaking Hydraulic fluids somewhere, either somewhere on lanes or on the pump. But it truly did say that M1A1 has 4t of cables and that A3 will use optic fiber based cabling wich will cut its weight by 2t. So i assume it includes cables + their protection.

Werewolf wrote:Well i wild hold against that claim. Computerized plattforms with many remote controlled functions, stations, and no direct access to most of the devices that make your plattform do what it was designed to do will always have higher maintenance hours and more intensive maintenance overhaul. Not to mention that 70's tanks are very primitive compared with Armata of any configuration. The 70's tanks required almost only mechanical maintenance which was relative short, primitve of requirement to skill and environment which is good to repair/maintain them in the field rather requiring specialized personal, equipment or even a hangar/"boxstop".

I don't know how many rounds it will hold but i think some number was floating somehwere around of 38 but it think that is to high and rounds will be somewhere ~32 which is actually more then enough. If anything stands after a 152mm rounds and that of 32 times engagement then you should shot your gunner or call hulk (if he is not the target).

Garry B wrote:

More to the point if they have problems maintaining tanks with only three crew WTF are they? Morons... by my reckoning they have had the T-64, T-72, T-80 and T-90 in service for more than 40 odd years and they haven't noticed they have been having maintainence problems?

BTW I don't recall any complaints in France about maintainance issues with the 3 man Leclerc..

..the K2 will be able not only to "sit", "stand" and "kneel", but to "lean" towards a side or a corner as well. "Sitting" gives the tank lower profile and offer better handling over roads. "Standing" gives the vehicle higher ground clearance and allows it to have better maneuverability over rough terrain. "Kneeling" increases the amount of angle that the tank's gun barrel can elevate and depress, which allows the tank to fire its main gun downhill—something that very few tanks, if there are any others at all, can do—and give it better ability to engage low-flying aircraft.

GarryB wrote:

The Armata will most likely eventually get a self-diagnostic system to help the crew identify areas that require immediate maintenance. I read that most maintenance is performed on the tracks anyway, but this will also extend to the autoloader.  

Why would you think it hasn't already got a self diagnostic system?

The introduction of the USB cable as a connector has done wonders for computing systems as it is a fully two way data and power bus system. Just like with the old SCART connector for connecting a video with a TV communication is two way so when you turn on the Video the TV could detect that through the SCART cable and automatically change to the Video channel (ie AV1 perhaps).

It is the same with the USB connector... not only can equipment send data to the main computers it can also send performance information and any errors that might have occured.

Considering the MiG-29SMT has training modes for its radar and self diagnostic systems to warn of problems and potential problems I would expect armata to have rather more than a light indicating it is time for an oil change...

GarryB wrote:

I like how the K2 Black Panther's suspension system allows it to "sit", "stand" and "kneel":

Being able to lower the height of the vehicle by a few decimetres would only have a fairly limited range of uses. Perhaps lowering it to go under a low bridge or to fit into an aircraft might be useful, but good ground clearance is likely more useful and the extra height allowing more movement in the suspension allowing for better shock absorption on rough surfaces at high speeds would be more useful than a very low profile.

The BMD series have long been able to crouch for getting into smaller aircraft and for parachuting.

This seems like it could be useful in the Armata and so would a short range [8km] onboard radar.

Garry B wrote:
Why would you think it hasn't already got a self diagnostic system?

Garry B wrote:

AFAIK there is no such thing as a 135mm or 140mm Russian main gun tank calibre.

NATO is experimenting with a 140mm gun but AFAIK the Russians have no equivalent.

Of course with experiments in EM weapons they might have a 90mm round perhaps or a 70mm round with very very high velocity...

Garry B wrote:
Being able to lower the height of the vehicle by a few decimetres would only have a fairly limited range of uses. Perhaps lowering it to go under a low bridge or to fit into an aircraft might be useful, but good ground clearance is likely more useful and the extra height allowing more movement in the suspension allowing for better shock absorption on rough surfaces at high speeds would be more useful than a very low profile.

The BMD series have long been able to crouch for getting into smaller aircraft and for parachuting

Gary B wrote:
Krisantema has radar for engaging targets out to about 6km in any conditions including white out or brown out. I would think armata ATGM platform has a similar system and it will likely have unified the radar in the target detection role with the self defence radar in the APS self defence role to detect incoming projectile threats. Together with optical (ie video and IR systems) and of course audio systems to detect enemy gunfire and to locate enemy positions based on the trajectories of incoming rounds by radar and audio signature... It will likely also have an active laser system to deal with enemy optics too... the FSB uses them in a relatively small binocular device...

Werewolf wrote:
Kamov has already self diagnostic due to modular based avionic systems and subsystems that provide pilot with information of any subsystem if does not work like intended he gets a message on the Selfdiagnostic monitor called Ekran Bite aswell the standard Ekran system that warns pilots via audio if they fly to fast towards ground, their angle of attack to notify (stall) before it happens and dozen other notifications. I would expect Armata would have such system installed especially if they plan to make a robot out of it at sometime.

Garry B wrote:The problem here is do the tank developers like UVZ see such a technology as necessary or is it just a gimmick and unneeded. You would need to train crew new tactics, when to use it when not to use it, how to use it and all that while it puts higher stress on supply chain and maintenance time. If you do not train your crew how to use it, it will end only up as a rarely if ever used gimmick. I don't expect Armata's being airborne deployed to battlefields. So they are mostly useless.

Now that's what you call advanced. The more I find out about Russian weapon systems, the more I love them. This tank will be the death-knell to American arrogance when it comes to tanks. Unlike American tanks, Russian tanks have auto trackers and already have long range ATGMs [Sokol-1] with a range of 12km. That's insane. I was surprised to find out that the Abrams still doesn't have an external phone, which the Russians have had since WWII.

It looks like the Armata will have capabilities usually only seen in aircraft. The French and the Germans better develop the Leopard 3 very soon, which the Americans will then predictably take components from and make the 'best tank in the world'. LOL!

Werewolf wrote:

Now that's what you call advanced. The more I find out about Russian weapon systems, the more I love them. This tank will be the death-knell to American arrogance when it comes to tanks. Unlike American tanks, Russian tanks have auto trackers and already have long range ATGMs [Sokol-1] with a range of 12km. That's insane. I was surprised to find out that the Abrams still doesn't have an external phone, which the Russians have had since WWII.

They have an infantry telephone in M1A2Sep TUSK2 upgrade.

It looks like the Armata will have capabilities usually only seen in aircraft. The French and the Germans better develop the Leopard 3 very soon, which the Americans will then predictably take components from and make the 'best tank in the world'. LOL!

That, i have no doubt, will never come to light. Before germany and france cooperate and result in a succesful Tank there will be lightsabers. It will never be finished, and even if they are threatend or blackmailed to work on a tank together it will never reach any sort of success as a project.

x_54_u43 wrote:I hope you guys realize that Armata does have active suspension, which by definition can increase or decrease the vehicles height.





Don't worry GarryB, you no longer have to make excuses, for Armata already has it.

Werewolf wrote:

Now that's what you call advanced. The more I find out about Russian weapon systems, the more I love them. This tank will be the death-knell to American arrogance when it comes to tanks. Unlike American tanks, Russian tanks have auto trackers and already have long range ATGMs [Sokol-1] with a range of 12km. That's insane. I was surprised to find out that the Abrams still doesn't have an external phone, which the Russians have had since WWII.

They have an infantry telephone in M1A2Sep TUSK2 upgrade.

It looks like the Armata will have capabilities usually only seen in aircraft. The French and the Germans better develop the Leopard 3 very soon, which the Americans will then predictably take components from and make the 'best tank in the world'. LOL!

That, i have no doubt, will never come to light. Before germany and france cooperate and result in a succesful Tank there will be lightsabers. It will never be finished, and even if they are threatend or blackmailed to work on a tank together it will never reach any sort of success as a project.

Garry B wrote:

developing a whole new calibre is expensive... they would not have developed a 152mm round if a 140mm round would have done the job.

Garry B wrote:
Don't worry... US Strong Internet warriors will rely on the fact that anything good that is Russian is either a copy of a US system or a lie.

The Abrams wont be the best tank in the world but it will be the best combat proven tank in the world.... hahaha... and then they will talk about the next gen US tank being the best and they can make up all sorts of capabilities for that tank because it wont exist.

Cyrus the great wrote:
Militarov

I was reading up on the M1A3 development and it is there that they spoke of the need to integrate an external phone onto the tank so I assumed that they didn't have it on any current Abrams. It's strange that they had it on all their tanks and withdrew that feature in the Abrams only to reinstate recently. A million thanks for going to all the trouble of providing the pictures to the forum.  Thanks, mate.

Cyrus the great wrote:
Dmitry Rogozin said that the 152mm could penetrate a meter of steel
 

Sunbeam wrote:

Cyrus the great wrote:
Dmitry Rogozin said that the 152mm could penetrate a meter of steel
 

Didn't they say it about 125mm on Armata and round for it?

GarryB wrote:Knowing they are a force for good in the world helps them sleep at night... it is just sad that they care for the truth. they are living the dream...