Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Nice to see Zivo fighting the good fight still.... 
Correcting stupid people is a full time job...
Correcting stupid people is a full time job...
+71
Azi
sepheronx
Arkanghelsk
Podlodka77
Scorpius
Cheetah
Tingsay
Rasisuki Nebia
Shaun901901
Broski
Lennox
Swede55
Mir
ALAMO
RTN
jhelb
flamming_python
Russian_Patriot_
x_54_u43
Backman
limb
Kiko
TMA1
Lurk83
lyle6
The_Observer
Atmosphere
SeigSoloyvov
lancelot
mnztr
Stealthflanker
Viktor
JohninMK
Sujoy
xeno
Mindstorm
TheArmenian
d_taddei2
AlfaT8
dino00
thegopnik
ahmedfire
AJ-47
marcellogo
Arrow
PhSt
Kimppis
miketheterrible
BenVaserlan
Vann7
Cyberspec
william.boutros
Walther von Oldenburg
GarryB
kvs
bolshevik345
LMFS
Hole
hoom
medo
ult
The-thing-next-door
franco
George1
Big_Gazza
higurashihougi
calripson
magnumcromagnon
PapaDragon
Isos
kumbor
75 posters
[Official] Armata Discussion thread #5
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
GarryB wrote:Nice to see Zivo fighting the good fight still....
Correcting stupid people is a full time job...
It's a shit job but someone gotta do it
kvs- Posts : 14538
Points : 14677
Join date : 2014-09-11
Location : Turdope's Kanada
miketheterrible wrote:We have an Indian moron who thinks that gun stabilization on the armata is terrible this M1A1 is better tank. Lol
He was out in his place by someone talking about the fire control system.
https://twitter.com/VinodDX9/status/1177255553841582080?s=19
What a collection of retarded dick-stroking chauvinists. As if the designers of Russian/Soviet tanks never test targeting
accuracy with the thank jumping over obstacles. That's right, Russian tanks do firing while in full bore motion over rough
terrain and can fire while the tracks are not touching the ground.
Read the comments from these losers, one of them talks about the Armata being a "copy of the Ukrainian T-80U". So now Ukraine
was never part of the USSR and it's those stupid Russians copying the work of others. F*ck these South Asian chimps. You are
the clowns who after trying for decades are still copying and buying foreign tech.
Also note how these dicks are busy fellating Uncle Scumbag.
miketheterrible- Posts : 7391
Points : 7355
Join date : 2016-11-06
Indians still talk about how Arjun was superior. But of course they never ordered any
They just love huge tanks cause they think bigger = better
But if that the case, their woman would be running into arms of Dutch men.
They just love huge tanks cause they think bigger = better
But if that the case, their woman would be running into arms of Dutch men.
franco
franco- Posts : 6265
Points : 6291
Join date : 2010-08-18
Production of T-14 tanks. When and how much?
In 2015, the public was shown for the first time the promising main T-14 tank, built on the Unified Armata platform. Later, the first reports appeared about the launch of mass production of such equipment for various purposes. The industry carries out the orders received, and the military department is busy testing equipment. Nevertheless, some features of the Armata program may look like cause for concern. In addition, unhealthy sensations are sometimes made from known facts.
During production
By May 2015, NPK Uralvagonzavod had built several MBT T-14s for testing at once. These cars took part in a parade on Red Square and then returned to the testing ground. Probably, it was them who were subsequently repeatedly shown in various reports, at exhibitions, etc.
In the spring of 2016, news appeared in the domestic media about the purchase of 100 new tanks for military trials. In early September of the same year, the management of NPK "UVZ" clarified information on the release of equipment. Indeed, the production of tanks started, and the first vehicles were transferred to the customer. In total, it was planned to build 2300 tanks for our army. It could take several years to complete such an order. Such construction could be completed in 2020 or 2025, depending on various factors.
New information on purchases of armored vehicles on the Armata platform appeared only in August 2018. As part of the Army-2018 forum, the Ministry of Defense signed a contract to purchase an installation batch of 132 pieces of equipment. This number included MBT T-14, heavy BMP T-15 and repair and recovery vehicles T-16. The first nine cars were supposed to go to the customer last year. The completion of the contract is scheduled for 2021.
At the very end of last year, it announced the completion of factory tests and the early start of state tests. This stage of work was supposed to begin in 2019 and take some time. According to its results, a decision was expected on the future fate of tanks and other equipment.
No new messages on production contracts for the T-14 MBT have yet been received. In addition, industry and the army are in no hurry to disclose details of the implementation of existing contracts. Apparently, the customer has already received a certain number of tanks and other armored vehicles on a unified platform. Moreover, new models have not yet been officially adopted.
Known Patterns
The exact number of T-14 tanks already built is unknown. The same applies to other equipment on the Armata platform. However, the available data allows us to determine at least the lower limit of the number of finished equipment. In addition, the possible maximum number of tanks required is known. All this allows us to make assumptions and make estimates.
It is known that at the time of the parade on Red Square NPK "UVZ" has built at least 20 experimental MBT and TBMP. 10 tanks and 10 infantry fighting vehicles participated in the celebrations, after which they returned for testing.
The status of the pilot batch of 100 cars, which was reported in 2016, is still unclear. The lack of accurate information does not allow attributing this batch to the well-known and used in the calculations.
Last year’s contract provides for the supply of 132 armored vehicles, with 9 planned to be built before the beginning of 2019. According to known data, 44 units are scheduled for delivery this year. Thus, at least a dozen cars are already ready under this contract, and about 120 will be built no later than 2021.
To date, with sufficient confidence we can talk about the release of at least 20 T-14 tanks. At least hundreds of new machines are provided for by the existing and ongoing contract. In the near future, new orders for hundreds of tanks and other armored vehicles may appear. However, before this, the existing equipment must complete the state tests and get the necessary assessment.
It should be noted that the actual number of promising armored vehicles at test sites and in parts may be significantly larger than the known. The high priority of the Armata project leads to corresponding secrecy. Not all news about the release or testing of such equipment reaches the press and the public.
Plans and production
During discussions of the state and prospects of the MBT T-14, they often recall the statements of the past and compare them with the latest news. So, in 2016, the management of Uralvagonzavod mentioned the need to build 2300 tanks of a new type by 2020-25. At the same time, real contracts provide for the delivery of more modest consignments - 132 cars by 2021.
This discrepancy of statements and actions can be interpreted in different ways. It is expected that they will try to make an unhealthy sensation out of him. The mismatch of numbers and deadlines is called the failure of the entire program, the threat to the country's defense, strategic miscalculation, etc.
At the same time, statements by officials on existing plans for the production of equipment are well known. They explain the current state of affairs and reveal the expected events of the near future. There are also grounds for various plausible assessments. However, all official explanations and realistic assessments are unlikely to be the reason for high-profile publications.
Reasons for the lag
The main reason for the insufficiently high production rates of the T-14 can be considered the overall complexity of the project. The Armata platform uses a number of new solutions for our industry that complicate the project. MBT based on such a platform is also quite complicated. All new ideas need refinement and refinement, which takes time and money.
The complexity of projects often leads to delays and the transfer of new stages. Nevertheless, such problems usually find a solution, and the project ends with the desired results. MBT T-14, having new unusual components, really could require a longer refinement, and this is not surprising. In accordance with the change in the schedule of work, the deadlines for serial production have shifted.
Last July, interesting features of the T-14 project were revealed by Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov. He pointed out that a promising tank is more expensive than existing models that have undergone modernization. At the same time, the updated equipment meets current requirements in terms of characteristics.
If the T-72B3 tanks were inferior to foreign technology, the Ministry of Defense would begin the full-scale construction of new T-14s. However, the current state of affairs allows you to take your time and calmly complete work on Armata. Thus, the army will receive a new tank in the right quantities - but this will happen later, but the car will be fully ready for service.
Earlier, reports on Armata featured plans to build 2,300 tanks in the foreseeable future. Apparently, it was a question of the maximum necessary quantity of equipment capable of ensuring the rearmament of the army. According to the results of such serial construction, ground forces could sharply reduce the share of old and modernized vehicles, and the new T-14 would become the basis of the tank fleet.
Nevertheless, the urgent implementation of such plans was abandoned. The construction of Armat MBT will not be forced, which will save money, and the modernized tanks of old models will support the defense capability. However, this approach does not preclude the construction of 2300 tanks of the new model - but the last of them will enter the army later than originally planned.
Desires, opportunities, plans and adjustments
Obviously, the Russian army needs a completely new tank, which is not a conversion of an existing armored car. Such a model of technology has already been created and is even being produced in a small series. Approximately in 2020, some units of the army will have to begin experimental military operation of the T-14 tanks ordered in 2018.
MBT T-14 is created with an eye to the distant future. According to current estimates and plans, such equipment will be operated almost until the middle of the XXI century. As a result of this, it should not only meet modern requirements, but also have a backlog for modernization in the future. Fulfillment of such requirements is associated with known difficulties, and work may be delayed. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the main T-14 tanks will go to the troops in the near future and officially enter service. The only question is the exact date and the exact amount of equipment in each individual batch.
Author: Ryabov Kirill
In 2015, the public was shown for the first time the promising main T-14 tank, built on the Unified Armata platform. Later, the first reports appeared about the launch of mass production of such equipment for various purposes. The industry carries out the orders received, and the military department is busy testing equipment. Nevertheless, some features of the Armata program may look like cause for concern. In addition, unhealthy sensations are sometimes made from known facts.
During production
By May 2015, NPK Uralvagonzavod had built several MBT T-14s for testing at once. These cars took part in a parade on Red Square and then returned to the testing ground. Probably, it was them who were subsequently repeatedly shown in various reports, at exhibitions, etc.
In the spring of 2016, news appeared in the domestic media about the purchase of 100 new tanks for military trials. In early September of the same year, the management of NPK "UVZ" clarified information on the release of equipment. Indeed, the production of tanks started, and the first vehicles were transferred to the customer. In total, it was planned to build 2300 tanks for our army. It could take several years to complete such an order. Such construction could be completed in 2020 or 2025, depending on various factors.
New information on purchases of armored vehicles on the Armata platform appeared only in August 2018. As part of the Army-2018 forum, the Ministry of Defense signed a contract to purchase an installation batch of 132 pieces of equipment. This number included MBT T-14, heavy BMP T-15 and repair and recovery vehicles T-16. The first nine cars were supposed to go to the customer last year. The completion of the contract is scheduled for 2021.
At the very end of last year, it announced the completion of factory tests and the early start of state tests. This stage of work was supposed to begin in 2019 and take some time. According to its results, a decision was expected on the future fate of tanks and other equipment.
No new messages on production contracts for the T-14 MBT have yet been received. In addition, industry and the army are in no hurry to disclose details of the implementation of existing contracts. Apparently, the customer has already received a certain number of tanks and other armored vehicles on a unified platform. Moreover, new models have not yet been officially adopted.
Known Patterns
The exact number of T-14 tanks already built is unknown. The same applies to other equipment on the Armata platform. However, the available data allows us to determine at least the lower limit of the number of finished equipment. In addition, the possible maximum number of tanks required is known. All this allows us to make assumptions and make estimates.
It is known that at the time of the parade on Red Square NPK "UVZ" has built at least 20 experimental MBT and TBMP. 10 tanks and 10 infantry fighting vehicles participated in the celebrations, after which they returned for testing.
The status of the pilot batch of 100 cars, which was reported in 2016, is still unclear. The lack of accurate information does not allow attributing this batch to the well-known and used in the calculations.
Last year’s contract provides for the supply of 132 armored vehicles, with 9 planned to be built before the beginning of 2019. According to known data, 44 units are scheduled for delivery this year. Thus, at least a dozen cars are already ready under this contract, and about 120 will be built no later than 2021.
To date, with sufficient confidence we can talk about the release of at least 20 T-14 tanks. At least hundreds of new machines are provided for by the existing and ongoing contract. In the near future, new orders for hundreds of tanks and other armored vehicles may appear. However, before this, the existing equipment must complete the state tests and get the necessary assessment.
It should be noted that the actual number of promising armored vehicles at test sites and in parts may be significantly larger than the known. The high priority of the Armata project leads to corresponding secrecy. Not all news about the release or testing of such equipment reaches the press and the public.
Plans and production
During discussions of the state and prospects of the MBT T-14, they often recall the statements of the past and compare them with the latest news. So, in 2016, the management of Uralvagonzavod mentioned the need to build 2300 tanks of a new type by 2020-25. At the same time, real contracts provide for the delivery of more modest consignments - 132 cars by 2021.
This discrepancy of statements and actions can be interpreted in different ways. It is expected that they will try to make an unhealthy sensation out of him. The mismatch of numbers and deadlines is called the failure of the entire program, the threat to the country's defense, strategic miscalculation, etc.
At the same time, statements by officials on existing plans for the production of equipment are well known. They explain the current state of affairs and reveal the expected events of the near future. There are also grounds for various plausible assessments. However, all official explanations and realistic assessments are unlikely to be the reason for high-profile publications.
Reasons for the lag
The main reason for the insufficiently high production rates of the T-14 can be considered the overall complexity of the project. The Armata platform uses a number of new solutions for our industry that complicate the project. MBT based on such a platform is also quite complicated. All new ideas need refinement and refinement, which takes time and money.
The complexity of projects often leads to delays and the transfer of new stages. Nevertheless, such problems usually find a solution, and the project ends with the desired results. MBT T-14, having new unusual components, really could require a longer refinement, and this is not surprising. In accordance with the change in the schedule of work, the deadlines for serial production have shifted.
Last July, interesting features of the T-14 project were revealed by Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov. He pointed out that a promising tank is more expensive than existing models that have undergone modernization. At the same time, the updated equipment meets current requirements in terms of characteristics.
If the T-72B3 tanks were inferior to foreign technology, the Ministry of Defense would begin the full-scale construction of new T-14s. However, the current state of affairs allows you to take your time and calmly complete work on Armata. Thus, the army will receive a new tank in the right quantities - but this will happen later, but the car will be fully ready for service.
Earlier, reports on Armata featured plans to build 2,300 tanks in the foreseeable future. Apparently, it was a question of the maximum necessary quantity of equipment capable of ensuring the rearmament of the army. According to the results of such serial construction, ground forces could sharply reduce the share of old and modernized vehicles, and the new T-14 would become the basis of the tank fleet.
Nevertheless, the urgent implementation of such plans was abandoned. The construction of Armat MBT will not be forced, which will save money, and the modernized tanks of old models will support the defense capability. However, this approach does not preclude the construction of 2300 tanks of the new model - but the last of them will enter the army later than originally planned.
Desires, opportunities, plans and adjustments
Obviously, the Russian army needs a completely new tank, which is not a conversion of an existing armored car. Such a model of technology has already been created and is even being produced in a small series. Approximately in 2020, some units of the army will have to begin experimental military operation of the T-14 tanks ordered in 2018.
MBT T-14 is created with an eye to the distant future. According to current estimates and plans, such equipment will be operated almost until the middle of the XXI century. As a result of this, it should not only meet modern requirements, but also have a backlog for modernization in the future. Fulfillment of such requirements is associated with known difficulties, and work may be delayed. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the main T-14 tanks will go to the troops in the near future and officially enter service. The only question is the exact date and the exact amount of equipment in each individual batch.
Author: Ryabov Kirill
calripson- Posts : 733
Points : 788
Join date : 2013-10-26
It's real simple - the monetarist economists and bean counters want to pinch pennies despite the fact that Russia should be sitting on a reserve fund of about $148 billion by year end. Putin is more afraid of an economic downturn and domestic political instability than of NATO tanks. Just to replace the armored vehicles in the 1rst Guard Tank Army at this rate will take ten years. Not to mention no word about Kurganets nor Boomerang going into production. It is absolutely ridiculous.
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The problem I have is that the Armata is a vehicle family... so do they mean 2,300 tanks, or do they mean 2,300 vehicles.
Does anyone have a list of vehicles in a current Russian Tank or Motor Rifle Division?
From that we could probably work out how many divisions they would have with 2300 T-14s or 2300 vehicles of the type armata.
If there are 100 tanks on average in a tank division then we would be talking about 23 divisions roughly, but if we are talking about 300-400 vehicles per division then we are talking about 6-8 divisions.
Does anyone have a list of vehicles in a current Russian Tank or Motor Rifle Division?
From that we could probably work out how many divisions they would have with 2300 T-14s or 2300 vehicles of the type armata.
If there are 100 tanks on average in a tank division then we would be talking about 23 divisions roughly, but if we are talking about 300-400 vehicles per division then we are talking about 6-8 divisions.
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
An Armoured Brigade has about 90-100 tanks...a Division (depending on it's make up) would have at least 200 - 300 tanks
Kimppis- Posts : 617
Points : 617
Join date : 2014-12-23
It's 2300 MBTs. That's how many were in active service circa 2014.
Although I got the impression that the "2300 T-14s by 2020" plan was always a misunderstanding. It was always 2300 modern tanks, which includes upgraded T-72s well... right? Otherwise mass production would've only lasted a few years, which makes no sense, and Russia doesn't operate like that.
This is a PR shitshow though, same with the Su-57. 60 -> 12 -> Borisov's pathetic "We don't actually need them" spin (just shut up) -> "trololololololol the gas station had to cancel it!111" -> now it's around 80 by 2028 (don't get me wrong, that's pretty good actually, great news).
Armata: "2300 by 2020," early parade appearances (in hindsight: why!?) -> Borisov at it again -> "Upper Volta with missiles had to cancel again hahaha." Currently: ????????
Or was it not a mistranslation/misunderstanding? In that case, even worse... much worse. 2300 T-14s by 2021? Were they crazy? How? Why? Why did they start modernizing T-72s?
Either way, well done guys...
Although I got the impression that the "2300 T-14s by 2020" plan was always a misunderstanding. It was always 2300 modern tanks, which includes upgraded T-72s well... right? Otherwise mass production would've only lasted a few years, which makes no sense, and Russia doesn't operate like that.
This is a PR shitshow though, same with the Su-57. 60 -> 12 -> Borisov's pathetic "We don't actually need them" spin (just shut up) -> "trololololololol the gas station had to cancel it!111" -> now it's around 80 by 2028 (don't get me wrong, that's pretty good actually, great news).
Armata: "2300 by 2020," early parade appearances (in hindsight: why!?) -> Borisov at it again -> "Upper Volta with missiles had to cancel again hahaha." Currently: ????????
Or was it not a mistranslation/misunderstanding? In that case, even worse... much worse. 2300 T-14s by 2021? Were they crazy? How? Why? Why did they start modernizing T-72s?
Either way, well done guys...
miketheterrible- Posts : 7391
Points : 7355
Join date : 2016-11-06
They underestimated the project.
They figured it was going to be a simple project using existing technology. While it ended up looking great, in the end it required a lot of retooling and now sourcing for large production of parts, with ultimately negotiating cost.
Uralvagonzavod as I pointed out multiple times has undergone bankruptcy this year. Rostec refused to take in both Ural and Kurganomash in am armored holding till the companies proceed with their bankruptcy. Afterwards, Rostec swallowed them up and has formed or is still forming a armored holding company.
So much all this in together and you realize that it will take much longer than previously thought.
Plus in the times since, NATO has become rather aggressive and moved large assets to Russias borders. So in turn, Russia needed to act fast. Only way to resolve the major gap between the two, Russia had to come out with a relatively cheap yet effective tank upgrade. But that didn't go smooth either with France stopping all transfer of Matrices for the thermal imagers. So then NPO Orion, part of Schwab (Rostec) created the TPK thermal imaging devices that are more or less similar performance to the Catherine XP thermal imagers and started to put those on in existing tanks since last year.
There is also fact that Russia has a lot of tank repair plants which also faced bankruptcies. So this was a way to get jobs to nearly everyone and get the necessary equipment out in numbers.
T-14 will end up taking time regardless. It will eventually replace all other tanks in 20 years or so like Su-57 design will replace all T-10 designs but that is also not for a while either.
Things may change too. Armata platform family will probably stay the same but the weapon systems and what not may change dramatically over time.
They figured it was going to be a simple project using existing technology. While it ended up looking great, in the end it required a lot of retooling and now sourcing for large production of parts, with ultimately negotiating cost.
Uralvagonzavod as I pointed out multiple times has undergone bankruptcy this year. Rostec refused to take in both Ural and Kurganomash in am armored holding till the companies proceed with their bankruptcy. Afterwards, Rostec swallowed them up and has formed or is still forming a armored holding company.
So much all this in together and you realize that it will take much longer than previously thought.
Plus in the times since, NATO has become rather aggressive and moved large assets to Russias borders. So in turn, Russia needed to act fast. Only way to resolve the major gap between the two, Russia had to come out with a relatively cheap yet effective tank upgrade. But that didn't go smooth either with France stopping all transfer of Matrices for the thermal imagers. So then NPO Orion, part of Schwab (Rostec) created the TPK thermal imaging devices that are more or less similar performance to the Catherine XP thermal imagers and started to put those on in existing tanks since last year.
There is also fact that Russia has a lot of tank repair plants which also faced bankruptcies. So this was a way to get jobs to nearly everyone and get the necessary equipment out in numbers.
T-14 will end up taking time regardless. It will eventually replace all other tanks in 20 years or so like Su-57 design will replace all T-10 designs but that is also not for a while either.
Things may change too. Armata platform family will probably stay the same but the weapon systems and what not may change dramatically over time.
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Where is the big shock... do you really expect the US to buy 3,000 F-35s?
How many Zumwalts do you think they need right now?
The fact is that they have developed a tank that is a generation ahead of anything NATO currently has or is likely to have in the next 5 to 10 years.
But Armata is NOT A TANK.
The T-14 is THE ARMATA TANK.
Armata is a series of vehicles with a T designation followed by a two digit number that indicates a vehicle with tank level armour that will likely include every vehicle type in a Russian armoured division.
If we information from this thread:
https://www.russiadefence.net/t5271-russian-army-military-districts-units-locations-equipment-and-re-armaments
Namely: (138 Gv OMSBr) 138th Guards "Krasnoselskaya" Detached Motor Rifle Brigade (Kamenka, Leningrad region)
So a motor rifle Brigade from Leningrad, it is equipped as follows:
So there are 41 tanks, plus 159 tracked APCs, 11 wheeled APCs, four wheeled scout cars, plus 36 self propelled guns, 18 truck mounted rocket launchers, 12 towed mortars, 12 towed anti tank guns, 27 ATGM sets, 12 ATGM tracked vehicles, 12 command guided missile SAMs, plus 6 IR guided SAMs, and 6 gun/missile platforms, plus 27 MANPADS.
The transition for this force would be for the 41 tanks to be replaced with new vehicles... the point is that this is not a front line force... most likely the 41 tanks will ultimately be replaced with Kurganets "tanks", the MTLBs will be replaced with Kurganets IFVs, the BTR-80s will be replaced with Kurganets APCs, the four wheeled scout cars will be replaced by Kurganets light models with a HMG turret most likely, the 36 self propelled guns will be Kurganets based gun vehicles, the towed mortars might be replaced by mortar carriers or a prime mover version of the Kurganets could support new model mortars and towed anti tank guns... Kurganets engineer vehicles like the various existing types based on other vehicles could carry engineer troops and ATGM teams, while a version of the Kurganets with an ATGM system built in... perhaps Kornet, or Krisantema will replace the Shturm system on the MTLB or Kornet system on the BMP-3 currently. TOR-M3 and SOSNA-R and Pantsir-SM on the Kurganets will round out the force.
They might start using mixed forces while the extra components are not ready yet... I doubt they could have a full Armata brigade ready simply because they may not have had time to develop all the different platforms they are going to need based on it yet so you might start off with a brigade with Armata tanks and Armata IFVs.
The point behind the different vehicle families was to allow different levels of performance without making it too expensive to contemplate.
Replacing every armoured vehicle in the Russian armour park with some version of Armata would not work... it would be way too expensive for a start and lack the necessary mobility.
Boomerangs on the other hand should be much quicker and easier and cheaper to produce, and will likely form the vast majority of armoured units, together with the Kurganets also being lighter and cheaper than the Armata vehicles.
They have shown drawings of 152mm artillery gun armed Boomerangs and Kurganets, so why is it so hard to think they might put the 125mm gun turret from the T-14 Armata tank onto the K-14 Boomerang tank and the B-14 Kurganets tank.
They have shown a HMG turret with a single 12.7mm HMG, they have shown a 30mm cannon armed turret, they have shown a high velocity 57mm gun armed turret, and the T-14 with its 125mm main gun... they have said they are building vehicle families and that the unmanned turrets are standardised... once they have perfected a MBT turret for the Armata why on earth would they want to develop a different turret for the MBT version of the Boomerang or Kurganets?
Once they have the 57mm high velocity gun and missile armed turret for Kurganets IFVs why change anything for the Boomerang IFV or Armata IFV?
How many Zumwalts do you think they need right now?
The fact is that they have developed a tank that is a generation ahead of anything NATO currently has or is likely to have in the next 5 to 10 years.
But Armata is NOT A TANK.
The T-14 is THE ARMATA TANK.
Armata is a series of vehicles with a T designation followed by a two digit number that indicates a vehicle with tank level armour that will likely include every vehicle type in a Russian armoured division.
If we information from this thread:
https://www.russiadefence.net/t5271-russian-army-military-districts-units-locations-equipment-and-re-armaments
Namely: (138 Gv OMSBr) 138th Guards "Krasnoselskaya" Detached Motor Rifle Brigade (Kamenka, Leningrad region)
So a motor rifle Brigade from Leningrad, it is equipped as follows:
-Equipment: 40 T-72B3 MBTs, 1 T-72BK battalion commander's MBT, 159 MT-LB APCs, 11 BTR-80 APCs, 4 BRDM-2 armored scout cars, 36 2S3 Akatsiya 152mm self-propelled howitzers, 18 BM-21 Grad MLRS systems, 12 2B16 Nona-K 120mm towed mortars, 12 MT-12 Rapira 100mm towed AT guns, 27 9K38 Metis portable ATGMs, 12 9P149 Shturm-S self-propelled ATGM systems, 12 9K331 Tor-M2U SAM systems, 6 9K34/35 Strela-10 SAM systems, 6 2S6M Tunguska SAM/SPAAG systems, 27 9K38 Igla shoulder-launched SAMs
So there are 41 tanks, plus 159 tracked APCs, 11 wheeled APCs, four wheeled scout cars, plus 36 self propelled guns, 18 truck mounted rocket launchers, 12 towed mortars, 12 towed anti tank guns, 27 ATGM sets, 12 ATGM tracked vehicles, 12 command guided missile SAMs, plus 6 IR guided SAMs, and 6 gun/missile platforms, plus 27 MANPADS.
The transition for this force would be for the 41 tanks to be replaced with new vehicles... the point is that this is not a front line force... most likely the 41 tanks will ultimately be replaced with Kurganets "tanks", the MTLBs will be replaced with Kurganets IFVs, the BTR-80s will be replaced with Kurganets APCs, the four wheeled scout cars will be replaced by Kurganets light models with a HMG turret most likely, the 36 self propelled guns will be Kurganets based gun vehicles, the towed mortars might be replaced by mortar carriers or a prime mover version of the Kurganets could support new model mortars and towed anti tank guns... Kurganets engineer vehicles like the various existing types based on other vehicles could carry engineer troops and ATGM teams, while a version of the Kurganets with an ATGM system built in... perhaps Kornet, or Krisantema will replace the Shturm system on the MTLB or Kornet system on the BMP-3 currently. TOR-M3 and SOSNA-R and Pantsir-SM on the Kurganets will round out the force.
They might start using mixed forces while the extra components are not ready yet... I doubt they could have a full Armata brigade ready simply because they may not have had time to develop all the different platforms they are going to need based on it yet so you might start off with a brigade with Armata tanks and Armata IFVs.
The point behind the different vehicle families was to allow different levels of performance without making it too expensive to contemplate.
Replacing every armoured vehicle in the Russian armour park with some version of Armata would not work... it would be way too expensive for a start and lack the necessary mobility.
Boomerangs on the other hand should be much quicker and easier and cheaper to produce, and will likely form the vast majority of armoured units, together with the Kurganets also being lighter and cheaper than the Armata vehicles.
They have shown drawings of 152mm artillery gun armed Boomerangs and Kurganets, so why is it so hard to think they might put the 125mm gun turret from the T-14 Armata tank onto the K-14 Boomerang tank and the B-14 Kurganets tank.
They have shown a HMG turret with a single 12.7mm HMG, they have shown a 30mm cannon armed turret, they have shown a high velocity 57mm gun armed turret, and the T-14 with its 125mm main gun... they have said they are building vehicle families and that the unmanned turrets are standardised... once they have perfected a MBT turret for the Armata why on earth would they want to develop a different turret for the MBT version of the Boomerang or Kurganets?
Once they have the 57mm high velocity gun and missile armed turret for Kurganets IFVs why change anything for the Boomerang IFV or Armata IFV?
calripson- Posts : 733
Points : 788
Join date : 2013-10-26
Russia is the only major economy that has a government debt to GDP ratio of circa 15%: most major economies are over 100%. Business and personal debt levels are also at least 1/3 of other major economies. Additionally, at current oil prices Russia runs a surplus of over $2 billion per month - adding to what should be a reserve fund balance approaching $150 billion (if it is not stolen or mismanaged).
Major economies including Germany and Japan now borrow at negative interest rates - they get paid to borrow money!
Basket case economies like Greece and Italy borrow at effectively zero.
Unfortunately for Russia, they got kicked out of the party - that was one of the major goals of the whole Ukrainian set up - to cut Russia off from the funny money printing press via sanctions.
Putin knowing this listens to his economic team. He wants a buffer in case oil prices tank.
It is a self-defeating and growth limiting approach. Much like many of their half-measures in demographics, it is too timid and will not fundamentally change the underlying reality.
Major economies including Germany and Japan now borrow at negative interest rates - they get paid to borrow money!
Basket case economies like Greece and Italy borrow at effectively zero.
Unfortunately for Russia, they got kicked out of the party - that was one of the major goals of the whole Ukrainian set up - to cut Russia off from the funny money printing press via sanctions.
Putin knowing this listens to his economic team. He wants a buffer in case oil prices tank.
It is a self-defeating and growth limiting approach. Much like many of their half-measures in demographics, it is too timid and will not fundamentally change the underlying reality.
miketheterrible- Posts : 7391
Points : 7355
Join date : 2016-11-06
calripson wrote:Russia is the only major economy that has a government debt to GDP ratio of circa 15%: most major economies are over 100%. Business and personal debt levels are also at least 1/3 of other major economies. Additionally, at current oil prices Russia runs a surplus of over $2 billion per month - adding to what should be a reserve fund balance approaching $150 billion (if it is not stolen or mismanaged).
Major economies including Germany and Japan now borrow at negative interest rates - they get paid to borrow money!
Basket case economies like Greece and Italy borrow at effectively zero.
Unfortunately for Russia, they got kicked out of the party - that was one of the major goals of the whole Ukrainian set up - to cut Russia off from the funny money printing press via sanctions.
Putin knowing this listens to his economic team. He wants a buffer in case oil prices tank.
It is a self-defeating and growth limiting approach. Much like many of their half-measures in demographics, it is too timid and will not fundamentally change the underlying reality.
You dont pay much attention do you?
The reserve funds and additional money is going to nation projects. Which is supposed to drastically increase investment opportunities in Russia's far east which is poorly developed. This development will bring lots of benefits to the country since it is rich in resources and land.
Building tanks of newer design doesn't on the other hand do that. Building tanks in general does as it keeps people employed and more development for the companies getting paid for this equipment (Rostec). But overall, it doesnt plow land, doesnt build schools, etc.
you need to go on sdelanounas.ru more often and read up to educate yourself rather than assuming.
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
They could afford it easily if they needed to but they don't need to.
There are a lot of other things they can do with the money including nothing that would be a better use of that money.
In the long term it makes sense to introduce new vehicle families and have vehicle family brigades and divisions that are modern and mobile and powerful...
some might say a Kurganets based tank force will be so weak and pathetic or a Boomerang based tank force will also be weak and pathetic, but with modern ceramic armours, modern NERA armours and active protection systems, not to mention modern all weather day night sensors and UAV supported vision systems, audio detection systems telling you where gunshots are coming from and locating the shooting position immediately on a map for you to engage and other modern systems even a Boomerang force will be powerful and remember the new Boomerang is much much better armoured than the BTR... its armour is probably as good or better than a current BMP.
Also a current unit has vehicles from T-90s through to BRDM-2s and BTR-80s with just bullet proof armour, while a Boomerang vehicle should be totally bullet resistant and protected from some cannon rounds too, so while the heaviest armour is weaker the average armour is much better and the sensors and weapons are all dramatically improved as will be communications and of course night and all weather performance. Dust and smoke should not be a problem now... and that was always a problem for armour, and long range accuracy and engaging point targets at extended ranges should not be an issue... most IFVs will have 10km range Kornet missiles and likely be able to call in airstrikes and artillery and attack helicopters much more readily, day or night.
They will likely want a set number of heavy brigades per district and probably go for 20% Armata heavy divisions (Tank and Motor Rifle), and probably 35% Kurganets medium tracked divisions, and 45% Boomerang medium wheeled divisions, because the wheeled vehicles will be faster and cheaper to make and to operate. The airborne and naval infantry will likely go for a mix of Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon light vehicles, while spetsnaz and recon units might also go for Typhoon and Boomerang based platforms for their speed and mobility, but there will also be lighter vehicles like Tigrs and Scorpions and even lighter doon buggie types as well.
We know already that there is no rigid structure or vehicle list for a tank or motor rifle force from brigade to div, but that is OK because different places and different terrains and weathers and enemies require different solutions.
Arctic forces might use the twin cab vehicles like the D-30 and other platforms that are fully amphibious and able to operate in arctic environments and indeed likely soft ground places like estuaries and swamps.
There are a lot of other things they can do with the money including nothing that would be a better use of that money.
In the long term it makes sense to introduce new vehicle families and have vehicle family brigades and divisions that are modern and mobile and powerful...
some might say a Kurganets based tank force will be so weak and pathetic or a Boomerang based tank force will also be weak and pathetic, but with modern ceramic armours, modern NERA armours and active protection systems, not to mention modern all weather day night sensors and UAV supported vision systems, audio detection systems telling you where gunshots are coming from and locating the shooting position immediately on a map for you to engage and other modern systems even a Boomerang force will be powerful and remember the new Boomerang is much much better armoured than the BTR... its armour is probably as good or better than a current BMP.
Also a current unit has vehicles from T-90s through to BRDM-2s and BTR-80s with just bullet proof armour, while a Boomerang vehicle should be totally bullet resistant and protected from some cannon rounds too, so while the heaviest armour is weaker the average armour is much better and the sensors and weapons are all dramatically improved as will be communications and of course night and all weather performance. Dust and smoke should not be a problem now... and that was always a problem for armour, and long range accuracy and engaging point targets at extended ranges should not be an issue... most IFVs will have 10km range Kornet missiles and likely be able to call in airstrikes and artillery and attack helicopters much more readily, day or night.
They will likely want a set number of heavy brigades per district and probably go for 20% Armata heavy divisions (Tank and Motor Rifle), and probably 35% Kurganets medium tracked divisions, and 45% Boomerang medium wheeled divisions, because the wheeled vehicles will be faster and cheaper to make and to operate. The airborne and naval infantry will likely go for a mix of Kurganets and Boomerang and Typhoon light vehicles, while spetsnaz and recon units might also go for Typhoon and Boomerang based platforms for their speed and mobility, but there will also be lighter vehicles like Tigrs and Scorpions and even lighter doon buggie types as well.
We know already that there is no rigid structure or vehicle list for a tank or motor rifle force from brigade to div, but that is OK because different places and different terrains and weathers and enemies require different solutions.
Arctic forces might use the twin cab vehicles like the D-30 and other platforms that are fully amphibious and able to operate in arctic environments and indeed likely soft ground places like estuaries and swamps.
dino00- Posts : 1677
Points : 1714
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 35
Location : portugal
The first batch of Armata tanks will enter the troops in late 2019 - early 2020
The head of Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, said that the preparation of production is being completed, a pilot batch has been manufactured
DUBAI / UAE /, November 19. / TASS /. The first experimental-industrial batch of the new generation T-14 Armata tanks will enter the Russian Armed Forces in late 2019 - early 2020, Rostec head Sergei Chemezov told the TASS on the sidelines of the Dubai Airshow 2019.
"At present, production preparation is being completed, a pilot batch has been manufactured. Its delivery to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will take place in late 2019 - early 2020," Chemezov said.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/7150025
The head of Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, said that the preparation of production is being completed, a pilot batch has been manufactured
DUBAI / UAE /, November 19. / TASS /. The first experimental-industrial batch of the new generation T-14 Armata tanks will enter the Russian Armed Forces in late 2019 - early 2020, Rostec head Sergei Chemezov told the TASS on the sidelines of the Dubai Airshow 2019.
"At present, production preparation is being completed, a pilot batch has been manufactured. Its delivery to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will take place in late 2019 - early 2020," Chemezov said.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/7150025
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1205
Points : 1261
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
dino00 wrote:The first batch of Armata tanks will enter the troops in late 2019 - early 2020
The head of Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, said that the preparation of production is being completed, a pilot batch has been manufactured
DUBAI / UAE /, November 19. / TASS /. The first experimental-industrial batch of the new generation T-14 Armata tanks will enter the Russian Armed Forces in late 2019 - early 2020, Rostec head Sergei Chemezov told the TASS on the sidelines of the Dubai Airshow 2019.
"At present, production preparation is being completed, a pilot batch has been manufactured. Its delivery to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation will take place in late 2019 - early 2020," Chemezov said.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/7150025
Is that a pilot batch of vehicles produced in the new factory to test production or already existing test vehicles being put in service to test the tanks in service conditions?
I also could not help but wonder what happens when the T-14 is obsolete but the Koalitsiya and other armata based vehicles remain effective? After all MBTs age faster than pretty much any other ground unit.
Hole- Posts : 9688
Points : 9670
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 47
Location : Scholzistan
The T-14 is designed to be modernised constantly. You can add different guns, new and more armour, new sensors without changes to the basic vehicle. It is also ready to become a unmanned vehicle = robot.
Even in it´s current form the T-14 will have 20 - 30 years before becoming obsolete.
Even in it´s current form the T-14 will have 20 - 30 years before becoming obsolete.
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1205
Points : 1261
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
Well with enough alteration you could keep almost anything up to date. I remember that one of the Russian tank plants upgraded an old T-55 to level of the T-80U. The big question is will the upgrades be sufficiently extensive or will they just lazily slap on the latest ERA and fire control systems.
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
They already have a replacement 152mm gun available... as they develop new armours and new sensors and new communications and other electronics they can be updated just like with any other tank...
The concept of these new vehicle types is that instead of a division with BTRs and BRDMs and BMPs and MTLBs and tanks and tank based vehicles (like MSTA artillery) and engineer vehicles based on tanks and BMPs and BTRs and MTLBs and command vehicles and air defence vehicles and trucks for Grads and anti tank missile vehicles based on MTLB or BMP-3, plus even tank based TOS artillery units, that they would all be replaced by one platform... one base vehicle with a standard engine and transmission and wheels and/or tracks etc etc.
When the armour is upgraded then you can upgrade the armour across the family from MBT to IFV and APC and engineer vehicle and air defence vehicle and command vehicle and ambulance and ATGM vehicle etc etc.
Armata based units will be more expensive but also much much better armoured than existing forces, even Boomerang units will have better average protection simply because only the MBTs in a current unit would have better protection... all the other vehicles will be based on other platforms and have less protection.
The concept of these new vehicle types is that instead of a division with BTRs and BRDMs and BMPs and MTLBs and tanks and tank based vehicles (like MSTA artillery) and engineer vehicles based on tanks and BMPs and BTRs and MTLBs and command vehicles and air defence vehicles and trucks for Grads and anti tank missile vehicles based on MTLB or BMP-3, plus even tank based TOS artillery units, that they would all be replaced by one platform... one base vehicle with a standard engine and transmission and wheels and/or tracks etc etc.
When the armour is upgraded then you can upgrade the armour across the family from MBT to IFV and APC and engineer vehicle and air defence vehicle and command vehicle and ambulance and ATGM vehicle etc etc.
Armata based units will be more expensive but also much much better armoured than existing forces, even Boomerang units will have better average protection simply because only the MBTs in a current unit would have better protection... all the other vehicles will be based on other platforms and have less protection.
Hole- Posts : 9688
Points : 9670
Join date : 2018-03-24
Age : 47
Location : Scholzistan
Main difference between the T-14 and older tanks like the T-72 is that you don´t have to find a way to somehow modernise it, it was designed from the beginning to be modernised. Weapon, sensors, armour, APS - anything can be easily replaced by new stuff.
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
When you need to use one vehicle design for 15-20 different roles then it needs to be modular and easy to both change and to upgrade and adapt.
The T-14 and T-15 are obvious examples... the former is the tank and has a rear mounted engine, while the latter is an IFV and has a front mounted engine so the troops can get in and out of the rear of the vehicle...
The T-14 and T-15 are obvious examples... the former is the tank and has a rear mounted engine, while the latter is an IFV and has a front mounted engine so the troops can get in and out of the rear of the vehicle...
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Russia is the only major economy that has a government debt to GDP ratio of circa 15%: most major economies are over 100%. Business and personal debt levels are also at least 1/3 of other major economies. Additionally, at current oil prices Russia runs a surplus of over $2 billion per month - adding to what should be a reserve fund balance approaching $150 billion (if it is not stolen or mismanaged).
Major economies including Germany and Japan now borrow at negative interest rates - they get paid to borrow money!
Basket case economies like Greece and Italy borrow at effectively zero.
Unfortunately for Russia, they got kicked out of the party - that was one of the major goals of the whole Ukrainian set up - to cut Russia off from the funny money printing press via sanctions.
Putin knowing this listens to his economic team. He wants a buffer in case oil prices tank.
It is a self-defeating and growth limiting approach. Much like many of their half-measures in demographics, it is too timid and will not fundamentally change the underlying reality.
Sorry for off topic, but I don't know much about economics, but even I know banks don't make money on people putting their money in the bank... they make money on loans to earn them lots more money, so if western banks have negative interests rates... how are they making money?
Their profits are as high as ever before and the bonuses and salaries they pay their managers and CEOs never go down, they only go up... perhaps someone with more knowledge on the subject can explain to me in simple terms on an economics thread...
But the point is that yes, the Russians can afford it if they want it, they are just deciding if they need it... which separates them from the west who just borrow more and just buy things they don't really even need and probably cannot use.
calripson- Posts : 733
Points : 788
Join date : 2013-10-26
GarryB wrote:Russia is the only major economy that has a government debt to GDP ratio of circa 15%: most major economies are over 100%. Business and personal debt levels are also at least 1/3 of other major economies. Additionally, at current oil prices Russia runs a surplus of over $2 billion per month - adding to what should be a reserve fund balance approaching $150 billion (if it is not stolen or mismanaged).
Major economies including Germany and Japan now borrow at negative interest rates - they get paid to borrow money!
Basket case economies like Greece and Italy borrow at effectively zero.
Unfortunately for Russia, they got kicked out of the party - that was one of the major goals of the whole Ukrainian set up - to cut Russia off from the funny money printing press via sanctions.
Putin knowing this listens to his economic team. He wants a buffer in case oil prices tank.
It is a self-defeating and growth limiting approach. Much like many of their half-measures in demographics, it is too timid and will not fundamentally change the underlying reality.
Sorry for off topic, but I don't know much about economics, but even I know banks don't make money on people putting their money in the bank... they make money on loans to earn them lots more money, so if western banks have negative interests rates... how are they making money?
Actually, banks absolutely do make money by people putting their money in the bank...and not just banks -that is pretty much the business model of big brokers like Schwab who have gone to zero commission trading. Very simple concept: subtract the spread you earn on your deposits less the interest you earn on your securities portfolio divided by your capital ratio and subtract your costs of running your bank. Let's say you earn 2% on U.S. treasuries and you pay depositors .5%. That's a 150 basis point spread. Assume a capital ration of 10.0% - that gives 15%. Subtract the costs of running the bank, assume 5%, and you are left with a 10% return on capital.
Their profits are as high as ever before and the bonuses and salaries they pay their managers and CEOs never go down, they only go up... perhaps someone with more knowledge on the subject can explain to me in simple terms on an economics thread...
But the point is that yes, the Russians can afford it if they want it, they are just deciding if they need it... which separates them from the west who just borrow more and just buy things they don't really even need and probably cannot use.
The-thing-next-door- Posts : 1205
Points : 1261
Join date : 2017-09-18
Location : Uranus
I was just wondering does anyone else think that the Armata may have not been put into production yet because its current armament is considered inadequate? We saw that with the T-15 they were constantly changing the turret perhaps with the armata the dalay is due to the development of a new turret with a larger gun and maybe a more extensive APS.
Or they could be waiting for other countries to fully commit to replacing thier current tanks so that they can adapt thier new tank accordingly.
Or they could be waiting for other countries to fully commit to replacing thier current tanks so that they can adapt thier new tank accordingly.
GarryB- Posts : 37295
Points : 37809
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Armata wont be available for export for some time and even when it is I doubt most countries could afford it... the country it would suit best would be Israel because they like max protection at all costs, but their bottomless pockets are only bottomless for US gear... it is basically a gift to US weapons makers via charity to israel.
They needed to wait for the 57mm high velocity gun to be developed for the BMP model so it can take on other BMPs in enemy use... the 30mm cannon on the BMP-2 was mainly for use against enemy BMPs and BTRs, and the 57mm high velocity gun in the T-15 is the same because NATO BMPs are 30 plus ton vehicles that 30mm cannons wont penetrate any more.
The 125mm gun with long penetrator rounds are perfectly adequate for the job today and the next few years... it will be a while before they have to upgrade and when they do the 152mm gun is already ready to go.
The delay is that having all Armata vehicle based forces is going to be quite expensive and would currently be overkill in most situations really.
A lot of the technology is probably largely untested too so taking more time to get it right and working properly makes sense when it is not urgently needed in service... it is a bit like the Su-57... it is going in to service slowly getting things right but they don't need thousands of them... over time they can produce them and build up a useful force but the Armata vehicle family is heavy tracked which is not needed or even useful everywhere.
In open country like a desert a lighter vehicle might be more useful with better mobility and lower operating costs but with the same gun and sensors to detect and destroy targets at max range...
They needed to wait for the 57mm high velocity gun to be developed for the BMP model so it can take on other BMPs in enemy use... the 30mm cannon on the BMP-2 was mainly for use against enemy BMPs and BTRs, and the 57mm high velocity gun in the T-15 is the same because NATO BMPs are 30 plus ton vehicles that 30mm cannons wont penetrate any more.
The 125mm gun with long penetrator rounds are perfectly adequate for the job today and the next few years... it will be a while before they have to upgrade and when they do the 152mm gun is already ready to go.
The delay is that having all Armata vehicle based forces is going to be quite expensive and would currently be overkill in most situations really.
A lot of the technology is probably largely untested too so taking more time to get it right and working properly makes sense when it is not urgently needed in service... it is a bit like the Su-57... it is going in to service slowly getting things right but they don't need thousands of them... over time they can produce them and build up a useful force but the Armata vehicle family is heavy tracked which is not needed or even useful everywhere.
In open country like a desert a lighter vehicle might be more useful with better mobility and lower operating costs but with the same gun and sensors to detect and destroy targets at max range...
|
|
|