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


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3657
    Points : 3655
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Hole on Sat Jan 02, 2021 9:23 pm

    calripson wrote:T-72 and T-90 derivatives are 1970's vintage technology at heart. It's time to shift production to modern designs. Just to replace all the tanks in the 1st Guards Tank Army will take 5 years at 100 per year not to mention T -15 in the armored units which would be another couple of hundred units. I would apply the same rationale to Su 57 production. Time to shift 100% to modern designs. No more re-polished 50 year old designs. It's 2021.

    Leo2 and M1 are designs from the 70´s, too.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 756
    Points : 786
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  mnztr on Sat Jan 02, 2021 9:52 pm

    The T14 has a huge amount of automation on it, including the unmanned turret. The Russians are logically uneasy that there may be a weak spot they missed so going all on one tech is not gonna happen. Even the US operates a very broad range of versions of M1. The M60 was manufactured until 1983 and only retired in 1991 by the USA. It is still quite widely used elsewhere T-55 is stilll used very widely. With remote controlled turrets the upgrade potential of old tanks is even further increased. You can drop that 5T turret on, uparmour the hell out of the tank with the weight savings and end up with a pretty dangrous MBT.
    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 2203
    Points : 2203
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Big_Gazza on Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:05 pm

    mnztr wrote:The T14 has a huge amount of automation on it, including the unmanned turret. The Russians are logically uneasy that there may be a weak spot they missed so going all on one tech is not gonna happen. Even the US operates a very broad range of versions of M1. The M60 was manufactured until 1983 and only retired in 1991 by the USA. It is still quite widely used elsewhere T-55  is stilll used very widely. With remote controlled turrets the upgrade potential of old tanks is even further increased. You can drop that 5T turret on, uparmour the hell out of the tank with the weight savings and end up with a pretty dangrous MBT.

    My view is that the modernised T-72/80/90 fleet is a strategic resource for future conversion into UGVs once the technology finally matures and tactical doctrines are established for effective warfare by unmanned vehicles. Future armoured formations will be characterised by heavily-protected manned Armata-style vehicles supported by a large number of UGVs, both controlled by remote from operators in Armata vehicles, as well as autonomous AI-controlled.

    Until that becomes a reality, the Russian military will maintain its Soviet-era tank designs and continue with progressive evolutionary upgrades.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6898
    Points : 6888
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Isos on Sat Jan 02, 2021 11:32 pm

    Full AI is stupid.

    If it was up to me I would make it one man crew like when you play on video games with a very well protected seat. And use the rest of the crew to pilot drones/loitoring munition from behind or recruit more infantry with ATGMs or for anti UAV tasks which will be more needed in the future because AD won't be able to deal with overwhelming small drones.
    LMFS
    LMFS

    Posts : 2725
    Points : 2727
    Join date : 2018-03-03

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  LMFS on Sun Jan 03, 2021 2:00 am

    The Armata tank may start mass - producing in the Russian army this year

    Moscow. January 2. NEW-generation armored Vehicles based on the Armata heavy tracked platform are expected to start mass - producing in the Russian Armed forces this year.
    The head of rostec state Corporation Sergey Chemezov and the head of the Ministry of industry and trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov earlier announced the start of serial deliveries in 2021.
    "Serial deliveries of the t-14 tank on the Armata platform will begin in 2021. Today it is by far the best tank in the world. In the future, this vehicle will be the new main tank of the Russian army, " Chemezov told reporters on December 7.
    "The Ministry of defense has ordered additional technical solutions in order to reach serial delivery from next year (2021) under the contract that was signed," Manturov said earlier.
    The company "Uralvagonzavod" (UVZ) has developed a heavy tracked platform "Armata". It is based on the T-14 tank, the t-15 infantry fighting vehicle and the t-16 armored recovery vehicle. The equipment on the Armata platform is being tested.
    Earlier Yury Borisov, the Deputy Minister of defense (now Deputy Prime Minister), said that the defense Ministry has a contract to supply military trials of two battalions of tanks T-14 and battalion IFV T-15.

    https://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=544022&lang=RU
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 756
    Points : 786
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  mnztr on Sun Jan 03, 2021 2:56 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:
    My view is that the modernised T-72/80/90 fleet is a strategic resource for future conversion into UGVs once the technology finally matures and tactical doctrines are established for effective warfare by unmanned vehicles.  Future armoured formations will be characterised by heavily-protected manned Armata-style vehicles supported by a large number of UGVs, both controlled by remote from operators in Armata vehicles, as well as autonomous AI-controlled.  

    Until that becomes a reality, the Russian military will maintain its Soviet-era tank designs and continue with progressive evolutionary upgrades.

    Lots of options, they can also get rid of the turrets, add armour and a VLS version of Koronet and turn it into an incredibly powerful tank destoryer
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 386
    Points : 392
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  marcellogo on Sun Jan 03, 2021 11:40 pm

    I would limit myself to the immediate without over-extending ourself into what use eventually found to the actual tank chassis once their own service would end.

    That's because seems me that even in their actual state they are still perfectly useful and have so a long period of service ahead of them.
    I have get the idea that the originaal plan to have just a single family of vehicles in each regiment have been partially scaled down, in the sense that motor rifles ones would still kept them after having transitioned to Boomerang/Kurganets.
    In this, we should search for info about the future OoB of such equipped regiments.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27334
    Points : 27866
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:23 pm

    Initial production numbers are generally to get it into service in a number of units for testing and evaluation in proper service.

    The Armata is not a tank.

    The T-14 will be a tank in a heavy armoured division or brigade but the T-15 will be the BMP in that division or brigade and the T-16 will be the armoured recovery vehicle in that division or brigade.

    The point is that in medium and light armoured division the tank will be a Kurganets or Boomerang based vehicle.
    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 386
    Points : 392
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  marcellogo on Tue Jan 05, 2021 2:20 am

    A.t.m. they are talking about full scale production to be started this year, almost for Armata.
    And yes, Armata is a complete series of different vehicles, the T-72/80/90 are instead just tanks (plus derived support vehicles).
    All such discussion was started by someone complaining that a full scale production of just 100 T-14/year is too low.
    In my previous reply I disagreed saying that:
    T-14 is not the whole of Armata.

    Armata family would go just to fully Armored Regiment (or Brigade) i.e. one for each Motor Rifle division, three for Armored ones only.

    Once actual tanks and other fighting vehicles modernization process would be over, the production facilities in which it took place would be all converted into that of new generations of fighting vehicles.

    Last one but this is a strictly personal opinion is that IFV should be given priority, above all for what it come to Boomerang and Kurganets families.


    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27334
    Points : 27866
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 05, 2021 8:24 am

    The thing is that there are going to be the same two different types of forces as before... motor rifle, and tank... that is not going to change... but what is going to change is the vehicles each unit operates... right now every motor rifle and tank force has a mix of all sorts of vehicle types though there are already families being used... for instance T series tank based vehicles include of course MBTs like T-72 and T-80 and T-90, but is also includes other vehicles like MSTA artillery vehicles which use T-80 chassis, various armoured engineer vehicles like the BMO-T, and of course mine clearing vehicles and the new BMP-T and of course there was going to be the BTR-T troop transport based on a T-55 tank chassis, the BREM-80U which is an armoured recovery vehicle based on the T-80, the BREM-1 based on the T-72 (along with similar vehicles based on BMPs and BTRs and MTLBs too)... there is chemical and radiation vehicles and various other vehicles used in every force...

    The point is that right now it is a mish mash of different types... there are different types of armoured recovery vehicle based on all the different tank and BMP and BTR version and a unit might have a mix of different models.

    On the surface that sounds like a good idea as it reduces the number of types of vehicle but when your BMP is BMP-3 but your BMP based recovery vehicle is a BMP-2 with different engine and wheels and tracks etc then the logistics of the unit is made worse rather than better had it had all BMP-3 based vehicles for jobs they have BMP based vehicles for.

    The idea of the new vehicles is that eventually a force will have just one vehicle type, so the Armata division will have T-14s and T-15s and T-16s which are tanks, BMPs and BREM recovery vehicles respectively but also T-24s and T-22s and T-18s that might be command and recon and artillery or something else vehicles.

    With the Armata there are two basic models... engine at the front for T-16s and some other vehicles and engine at the rear for Tank and other models... but eventually all the vehicles in an Armata unit will be replaced with Armata based vehicles so one engine type, one wheel type, one track type, the same transmission. Note the heavier vehicles might have a higher engine rating to improve mobility while lighter vehicles might have derated engines to extend their operational lives and reduce costs...

    The point is that every T-90 MBT and T-72 upgraded tank and T-80 tank wont need a T-14 replacement because in Boomerang forces and Kurganets forces there will be a B-xx and a K-xx tank version with a T-14 turret for that job... and the K-xx which is a Boomerang based T-14 should be much cheaper to produce in large numbers and also much cheaper to operate than any track layer, so tank numbers will likely increase massively...

    It is just as well the CFE treaty is not enforced because Kurganets and Boomerang tanks as well as Sprut based tanks should be quite capable vehicles... but in a third world country the T-15 and K-17, and B-11 BMPs with 57mm guns will be rather potent vehicles, not to mention the models that get the 2S38 anti aircraft gun mount with air burst 57mm shells. I would expect even the grenade launcher 57mm shells will have laser command detonation fuses for airbursts over targets with front cover but no top cover...

    Going to be very dangerous times for enemy drones...

    The units that get T-15 will obviously also get T-14 and T-16 vehicles, while units that get K-17 and B-11 BMPs will likely get K-xx tanks and B-xx tanks respectively so the type of BMP they get will indicate what other vehicles they should be getting...
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 204
    Points : 206
    Join date : 2020-09-14

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 on Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:52 am

    As we've seen even designs that weren't really meant for long term exploitation like the T-64/72 pattern could serve for at least half a century with upgrades keeping them just barely ahead of obsoletion. The T-14 designed with modularity in mind should serve for at least that long while keeping more or less abreast with the bleeding edge provided they keep the factories working for that much long just as the US does with its Abrams. A few battalion sets per year is not much compared to cold levels of production, but that was then when equipment was so much cheaper and the military budget was several times larger.

    Another issue is the T-14 is the pinnacle of tank technology - higher technology means much higher levels of competencies necessary to operate the equipment effectively. One of the selling points of the Soviet tank design school was of the huge commonality in operation between the later and early models which meant that transitioning from say a T-55 to a T-72 is not going to be that much of an issue. This was made possible through deliberate streamlining and simplification of technologies which made it so that operating and maintaining these vehicles would not require much more out of a mostly conscript operator pool.

    The T-14 is the exact opposite. It will require much more heavily trained and skilled operators with far broader skillsets, which only means more time and resources spent for any single Armata crew member's education. Draftees aren't going to cut it as we've seen one park his tank in the middle of red square for everyone to see. The next generation of tankers could very well be closer to attack helo pilots than they are to today's tankers with how involved they are going to be. You could even see it in their crew stations:
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 ErSC_SZWMAEfF20?format=jpg&name=large
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 G5szbxw7cup21

    Hole likes this post

    marcellogo
    marcellogo

    Posts : 386
    Points : 392
    Join date : 2012-08-02

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  marcellogo on Sun Jan 10, 2021 11:56 am

    lyle6 wrote:As we've seen even designs that weren't really meant for long term exploitation like the T-64/72 pattern could serve for at least half a century with upgrades keeping them just barely ahead of obsoletion. The T-14 designed with modularity in mind should serve for at least that long while keeping more or less abreast with the bleeding edge provided they keep the factories working for that much long just as the US does with its Abrams. A few battalion sets per year is not much compared to cold levels of production, but that was then when equipment was so much cheaper and the military budget was several times larger.

    Another issue is the T-14 is the pinnacle of tank technology - higher technology means much higher levels of competencies necessary to operate the equipment effectively. One of the selling points of the Soviet tank design school was of the huge commonality in operation between the later and early models which meant that transitioning from say a T-55 to a T-72 is not going to be that much of an issue. This was made possible through deliberate streamlining and simplification of technologies which made it so that operating and maintaining these vehicles would not require much more out of a mostly conscript operator pool.

    The T-14 is the exact opposite. It will require much more heavily trained and skilled operators with far broader skillsets, which only means more time and resources spent for any single Armata crew member's education. Draftees aren't going to cut it as we've seen one park his tank in the middle of red square for everyone to see. The next generation of tankers could very well be closer to attack helo pilots than they are to today's tankers with how involved they are going to be. You could even see it in their crew stations:
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 ErSC_SZWMAEfF20?format=jpg&name=large
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 G5szbxw7cup21

    A platoon of Tanks is 9 men, a company 30, just take the section and squad platoon commanders and vicecommanders of an actual conscript based infantry btg and you are served.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 204
    Points : 206
    Join date : 2020-09-14

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 on Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:30 pm

    marcellogo wrote:
    A platoon of Tanks is 9 men, a company 30, just take the section and squad platoon commanders and vicecommanders of an actual conscript based infantry btg and you are served.

    If you do that the Russian tank force is bound to lose the majority of its lower level leadership to Armata crews - not ideal. Its also a question if they have the necessary skills needed to operate the T-14 still - the difference is just that much stark in contrast. The only real option is to slowly but steadily build up a dedicated cadre of professional 19Ks over the years, which is fine since that gives the T-14 the much needed breathing room to further mature its technology and more importantly could allow for batch by batch upgrades necessary to keep it right there at the top.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27334
    Points : 27866
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:06 am

    Actually I would say in the newer vehicles and aircraft the operators are becoming more like managers than direct users.

    The information at their fingertips and their options to do different things and call support are greatly magnified with the new gear and equipment.

    The commander of a T-55 could not see the live video feed of a drone operating above his unit, and certainly could not see the EO view of a nearby Mi-24 Hind and mark on the display the enemy position he wants the helicopter to engage for him.

    There will be AI systems scanning all available video feeds from cameras all over these vehicles so if something is moving it can attract the attention of the commander for instance. Pressing a button might allow the system to jump from potential target or threat to the next allowing the user to prioritise and engage in a suitable order...

    Flying a Flanker would be much easier than flying a MiG-23, with the Su-35 having most of the manual procedures like measuring the time an SARH target needs to be illuminated during an engagement fully automated or made obsolete...

    In comparison the T-14 will be easy to operate once you know what everything does... and the Su-57 will probably fly itself most of the time.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 204
    Points : 206
    Join date : 2020-09-14

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 on Mon Jan 11, 2021 7:42 pm

    GarryB wrote:Actually I would say in the newer vehicles and aircraft the operators are becoming more like managers than direct users.

    The information at their fingertips and their options to do different things and call support are greatly magnified with the new gear and equipment.

    The commander of a T-55 could not see the live video feed of a drone operating above his unit, and certainly could not see the EO view of a nearby Mi-24 Hind and mark on the display the enemy position he wants the helicopter to engage for him.

    There will be AI systems scanning all available video feeds from cameras all over these vehicles so if something is moving it can attract the attention of the commander for instance. Pressing a button might allow the system to jump from potential target or threat to the next allowing the user to prioritise and engage in a suitable order...

    Flying a Flanker would be much easier than flying a MiG-23, with the Su-35 having most of the manual procedures like measuring the time an SARH target needs to be illuminated during an engagement fully automated or made obsolete...

    In comparison the T-14 will be easy to operate once you know what everything does... and the Su-57 will probably fly itself most of the time.

    While its true that streamlined and automated processes have made it so that running the tank required but a fraction of cognitive load as it was before, in practice this would only mean that it is now possible to shift from a top-down view on tactics to units that are far more autonomous when pursuing objectives without a corresponding loss in efficiency. This would require much, much better trained soldiers not less.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 MTXhgVI
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 27334
    Points : 27866
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB on Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:30 am

    The command and control capability would be orders of magnitude better, but in a sense you can think of it like being like the old west compared with today for crowd control.

    In the old west or olden times anywhere you had a sheriff or constable who had authority, but if more than one criminal was a problem so one person on their own could not handle the situation then that sheriff could deputise men to help him and form a posse.

    Modern police need to cover much larger areas with much larger populations so they have mobility (motor vehicles) and they have centralised command and control in the form of fellow officers all connected by radio networks.

    They now also have access to databases so they can look up car number plates and check names for finding stolen vehicles and people with arrest warrants etc etc.

    The point is that the modern cop can use those resources to get the help they need, and vests and helmets and firearms and tasers and pepper sprays means they have more options too.

    With the military a commander might send a drone ahead to look for threats... in build up areas a very high flying drone orbiting a city block can see over tall buildings and spot enemy forces from altitudes most people on the ground wont even notice.

    Training would be needed for using these extra resources of course but simulators means you could train 24/7... any convenient time of the day you could put your troops in a simulator and drive vehicles anywhere and anywhen in any weather conditions, and it would be entire units together with air and artillery all working together in ways that could be very realistic...

    In other words it would be easier to train them and to train them to much higher levels because training does not use fuel or ammo and is not dangerous.

    Sponsored content

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 19 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Jan 18, 2021 9:38 am