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

    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 10559
    Points : 10633
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  PapaDragon Fri Apr 16, 2021 5:00 am

    Atmosphere wrote:...By the way, as per request of the ministry of defense , the T-14 can infact be optionally manned (gunner) if the Turret is damaged.

    I don't think that's true, there's not enough space in there and the turret interior would be a death trap

    It would be like sitting in a giant meat grinder
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 522
    Points : 524
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 Fri Apr 16, 2021 6:17 am

    Atmosphere wrote:

    So the T-14 may be more or less free from the Su-57's "media mud".

    By the way, as per request of the ministry of defense , the T-14 can infact be optionally manned (gunner) if the Turret  is damaged.

    It isn't. There's no indication that they've made any considerations at all with regards to operating in manual/degraded mode.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 4078
    Points : 4074
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Hole Fri Apr 16, 2021 12:04 pm

    If the turet is so heavily damaged that mechanics/electronics doesn´t work anymore, what should a man do in it? dunno

    GarryB and flamming_python like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Fri Apr 16, 2021 2:22 pm

    Numbers from Germany that could very well be inflated, if not outright hoax

    The land of the tank with 2.5m of turret front armour.... I don't believe they would lie.


    So the T-14 may be more or less free from the Su-57's "media mud".

    It will get respect because funding will be needed to replace what they have.

    I rather suspect Su-57 can be fair game for a while because they can rely on numbers...

    Of course numbers are not so valuable against a good air defence system like the one Russia has.

    By the way, as per request of the ministry of defense , the T-14 can infact be optionally manned (gunner) if the Turret is damaged.

    I would believe manually fired, but I suspect they would do that from on top of the turret because the requirement to put a seat and controls inside the turret would defeat most of the advantages of making it unmanned in the first place.

    Being able to reach in and clear debris or a jam, but sit inside it to push a button...

    There is not a huge amount a man could do if there was something wrong... it would be cramped and manually loading ammo into the gun would be a real trick.

    A roof access hatch for maintenance and repair, but you would not get me in there...
    Atmosphere
    Atmosphere

    Posts : 40
    Points : 42
    Join date : 2021-01-31

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Atmosphere Fri Apr 16, 2021 11:56 pm

    https://thewarmy.com/a/t14_armata_mnenie_ekspertov-2693/

    " ... There’s no guarantee the tank will lose combat efficiency. The diesel engine needs no electricity to work. A high-pressure air tank is just enough. To shoot the cannon the gunner changes seat and shoots from the turret in manual mode. Why is the turret so large? The Ministry of defense demanded that manual operation and shooting should be available. ..."

    LMFS likes this post

    x_54_u43
    x_54_u43

    Posts : 268
    Points : 284
    Join date : 2015-09-19

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  x_54_u43 Sat Apr 17, 2021 5:16 am

    Zero chance of a seat inside and shooting it, much less a way for the gunner to reach the turret from the compartment, it's absurd.

    flamming_python and magnumcromagnon like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 522
    Points : 524
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 Sat Apr 17, 2021 6:42 am

    The Russian MoD also demanded that the T-90M carry 40 rounds. You know what UVZ did? They attached a bustle rack for the extraneous rounds. The crew can't access this ammo from inside the turret at all so for all intents and purposes it is irrelevant when in direct combat. Essentially UVZ just did the bare minimum that can be expected and went on ahead. No use satisfying absurd requirements to the same degree as main priority parameters especially when both contradict each other. The T-14's manual shooting mode could very well be just the gunner eyeballing gun from atop the turret while pulling a lanyard to the solenoid trigger, Napoleonic artillery style.

    lancelot likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:32 am

    Would have to be a very desperate thing because the gunner in the turret would have exceptionally poor protection from enemy fire...

    I can appreciate them wanting the gun to be able to be fired manually in an emergency but having the gunner leave his position in the hull and climb into a turret to fire the gun sounds like the avionics bay of the Mi-28A being used to transport people... it might be possible but it would never happen.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Sat Apr 17, 2021 10:34 am

    The T-14's manual shooting mode could very well be just the gunner eyeballing gun from atop the turret while pulling a lanyard to the solenoid trigger, Napoleonic artillery style.

    I would assume the gun would still be aimed by the commander, but for some reason if the controls in the crew compartment couldn't get the gun to fire and that the gunner had to climb out and climb in and manually fire the gun, but in all honesty I would think instead it would drive to a rear area and get the damn thing fixed instead...
    Atmosphere
    Atmosphere

    Posts : 40
    Points : 42
    Join date : 2021-01-31

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Atmosphere Sat Apr 17, 2021 9:34 pm

    I didnt Say an entire manned section inside the tank.
    But the ability to shoot it manually if needed.
    How will that happen is up to UVZ.
    magnumcromagnon
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 7326
    Points : 7475
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  magnumcromagnon Sat Apr 17, 2021 9:42 pm

    Atmosphere wrote:I didnt Say an entire manned section inside the tank.
    But the ability to shoot it manually if needed.
    How will that happen is up to UVZ.
    It won't! Rolling Eyes Doing that would turn the human operator in to tomato paste, and make the T-14 turret in to an overpriced food processor. pwnd
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Sun Apr 18, 2021 3:47 am

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Screen16

    This is supposed to be the T-14 turret with all the extra stuff removed... and their does seem to be a rather large roof hatch, which I used to think was for routine maintenance or repair if something got jammed or stopped working.

    The side chute there to eject empty case stubs is right next to where the hatch is, so that area includes an autoloader to feed rounds into the gun and an ejector to throw the empty stub metal cases out sideways... would they have room for a seat and manual controls?

    I mean if it was part of the design then it should be possible, but I would think massively redundant automatic systems would be better.
    Atmosphere
    Atmosphere

    Posts : 40
    Points : 42
    Join date : 2021-01-31

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Atmosphere Sun Apr 18, 2021 5:47 am

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Atmosphere wrote:I didnt Say an entire manned section inside the tank.
    But the ability to shoot it manually if needed.
    How will that happen is up to UVZ.
    It won't! Rolling Eyes Doing that would turn the human operator in to tomato paste, and make the T-14 turret in to an overpriced food processor. pwnd

    We are not talking about necessarly seating the gunner inside the turret. There can be other solutions for manually firing the gun in cases of need. Tank crews are trained to fight in case their sights are offline.

    The manual control is there Because it is a ministry criteria. But exactly how is unknown. It can be from outside. Or something else
    Atmosphere
    Atmosphere

    Posts : 40
    Points : 42
    Join date : 2021-01-31

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Atmosphere Sun Apr 18, 2021 5:50 am

    GarryB wrote:[Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Screen16

    This is supposed to be the T-14 turret with all the extra stuff removed... and their does seem to be a rather large roof hatch, which I used to think was for routine maintenance or repair if something got jammed or stopped working.

    The side chute there to eject empty case stubs is right next to where the hatch is, so that area includes an autoloader to feed rounds into the gun and an ejector to throw the empty stub metal cases out sideways... would they have room for a seat and manual controls?

    I mean if it was part of the design then it should be possible, but I would think massively redundant automatic systems would be better.

    Indeed redundant electronics should be enough. They have tinkered with The issue of unmanned turrets for a long time so they should be sitting on a hill of data concerning they reliable functionning.
    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 165
    Points : 173
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  limb Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:50 pm

    The main problems with autoloaded guns are 1) Gun must be at a specific elevation to be reloaded, which throws away aim and 2)No ability to remove already loaded round. What if the tank is carrying an HE shell but encounters enemy tanks which it can ambush? it has to shoot the HE shell in order to load an APFSDS, which would spoil the ambush.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 522
    Points : 524
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 Fri Apr 30, 2021 7:02 am

    limb wrote:The main problems with autoloaded guns are 1) Gun must be at a specific elevation to be reloaded, which throws away aim and 2)No ability to remove already loaded round. What if the tank is carrying an HE shell but encounters enemy tanks which it can ambush? it has to  shoot the HE shell in order to load an APFSDS, which would spoil the ambush.
    What do you mean it throws away the aim? The gun is slaved to the sight; the gunner operator's view of the target is never interrupted, unless you count the blink of an eye when the camera is shuttered off to prevent the muzzle flash from burning out the visual and thermal matrices of the sight as well as your retinas. Movement of the gun is not at all reflected in the reticle. What actually adjusts the reticle is the ballistic computer compensating after taking in telemetry from the laser range finding as well as the spatial corrections from the tracking gates. Just look at any videos of late cold war tanks shooting and you'd see my point.

    And no, every tank has that same problem. The standard SOP even for manually loaded tanks is to fire off the round instead of trying to replace it; much faster that way and less dangerous too. If you spot the enemy its not a big leap to assume he has spotted you as well, so your better off capitalizing on your opportunity and hope its enough of a distraction that you can load the next killing shot before he can respond. Furthermore, the round type to be loaded by default is dependent on the mission and what threats there are, but its always the commander's prerogative, and most would rather err on the side of caution than be caught flat-footed hence more often than not you'd see the APFSDS loaded in the chamber anyhow.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Fri Apr 30, 2021 9:56 am

    The main problems with autoloaded guns are 1) Gun must be at a specific elevation to be reloaded, which throws away aim and 2)No ability to remove already loaded round. What if the tank is carrying an HE shell but encounters enemy tanks which it can ambush? it has to shoot the HE shell in order to load an APFSDS, which would spoil the ambush.

    Tank guns only operate in an elevation range of maybe 35-40 degrees if you are lucky... minus 5-10 degrees to plus 25 to 30 degrees... normally less.

    Most tank guns return to a specific elevation to make loading possible... if they don't then at some angles they would make manual loading very very hard.

    The gun aim is all electric drive so positioning the gun precisely is all done automatically on every modern tank anyway... and so is aiming off to hit the target and auto target tracking... if the tanks gun elevation and traverse systems are inaccurate then that is a totally different problem from having or not having an autoloader.

    The precision of laying the gun on target or moving to reload and then accuracy of moving back has nothing to do with the autoloader.

    The 125mm gun the Russians use is a two piece round... it would not matter what sort of auto or manual feed system they used, you can't remove rounds manually except for in base sticking the big rod they use to clean the barrel down the barrel to push the projectile out.

    If you can't reload rounds why would you drive around with ammo in the gun?

    If the tank is part of an ambush it would select the suitable ammo just before opening fire... if the tank is driving along it would leave its main gun empty because normal operation in a tank is not for the commander to say... hey gunner put any old shit shell in the gun you like... knock yourself out and then I will pick a target we can use it against when we find some bad guys...

    Normally the commander would be spotting for threats and targets... having a shell loaded means the next shell could already be selected so firing the gun and reloading the next round can actually be rather fast because the autoloader does not need to rotate to the next available round before loading it...

    If the tank is engaging an ATGM team it has spotted 7km away and is lining up a HE Frag shell to ruin their day and an Abrams appears... the tank commander would probably cancel firing the HE round and reverse behind cover... the round could be fired in the barrel and a new round loaded and then move from behind cover to a new firing position and try to locate the Abrams again... call out both targets for other vehicles in the unit to engage too... someone else might get both targets.

    Of course as the new rounds are developed and they get bigger and heavier... the propellent and projectile components of the 125mm round are 30-35kgs in the confines of a turret... larger calibre guns are going to be much heavier rounds... manual loading is not going to be possible pretty soon anyway.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Fri Apr 30, 2021 10:56 am

    I would point out that the big roof mounted access hatch is in line with the gun, so if there is an autoloader in there I would not think there was much room for a seat and manual controls let alone room to manually load the gun, elevate and traverse it and fire it...

    You have to question what sort of emergency or problem they could possibly have where they might need to manually operate the gun... I would think most of the time if the gun is not working and backup systems are not helping then your focus would be to get the tank and the gun to somewhere where it can be fixed and working properly.

    I would think backup systems would be a good thing, but if you think of it like an automatic rifle are we talking about manually being able to recock and fire the gun without racking the mechanism back and reloading a fresh round (in case of a dud round), or are we talking total redundancy where you remove the top cover of the AK and the bolt carrier and manually pull rounds one at a time from a magazine, poke them into the chamber and then place the bolt and rotated and lock it by hand and then pull the trigger and then reach in and rotate the bolt to unlock it, extract the fired case, push a fresh live round into the chamber and push the bolt in and rotate it to lock it again while thumbing back the hammer ready to fire?

    Awkward for a rifle, but nigh on impossible in a tank with an autoloader because the design is for the autoloader arm to manouver the components of the ammo from autoloader to gun breach... unless you can manually remove that to free up space to do it manually... you are creating space cavities that have no other purpose than an emergency option that on 99% of tanks may never be needed... and it is not like an ejection seat... staying and continuing to shoot at the enemy in such a condition is not getting the best out of that tank.

    But the Army clearly want some manual back up options...

    Will be interesting to see what this is... we have seen in the avionics compartment of the Mi-28, so perhaps the manual gunner position might be revealed eventually too.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 522
    Points : 524
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 Fri Apr 30, 2021 11:36 am

    GarryB wrote:
    The 125mm gun the Russians use is a two piece round... it would not matter what sort of auto or manual feed system they used, you can't remove rounds manually except for in base sticking the big rod they use to clean the barrel down the barrel to push the projectile out.
    That's a good point. For one part rounds its possible if one has very strong fingers to pull the round by the protruding flange lip of the case stub. With two part rounds however, you would only be getting the propellant charges out, but not the projectile which would be stuck firmly in the chamber. The fit is so snug, it won't slide out by elevating the gun and letting gravity do the work. So not only is it impractical its impossible to replace an already loaded round in a two part ammunition system while in battle.

    GarryB wrote:
    If you can't reload rounds why would you drive around with ammo in the gun?

    If the tank is part of an ambush it would select the suitable ammo just before opening fire... if the tank is driving along it would leave its main gun empty because normal operation in a tank is not for the commander to say... hey gunner put any old shit shell in the gun you like... knock yourself out and then I will pick a target we can use it against when we find some bad guys...

    Normally the commander would be spotting for threats and targets... having a shell loaded means the next shell could already be selected so firing the gun and reloading the next round can actually be rather fast because the autoloader does not need to rotate to the next available round before loading it...

    Historically the tank that comes out on top in duels is the tank that spots and shoots his opponent first. Forget about tank sims, if you get hit by a large calibre projectile of whatever type or a missile its going to ring everyone's heads like a bell. You're not shooting back unless you already have your gun trained at the enemy, but you would be trying to back into cover while popping smoke. The tank is also not going to escape unscathed either: unarmored and exposed external equipment might get smashed, the gun, laying drives, and the optics might get damaged, or the tracks might be cut etc. In general, its far more advantageous to shoot first with whatever than to delay while you change to a more appropriate ammo type.

    GarryB wrote:
    If the tank is engaging an ATGM team it has spotted 7km away and is lining up a HE Frag shell to ruin their day and an Abrams appears... the tank commander would probably cancel firing the HE round and reverse behind cover... the round could be fired in the barrel and a new round loaded and then move from behind cover to a new firing position and try to locate the Abrams again... call out both targets for other vehicles in the unit to engage too... someone else might get both targets.
    I'd say take the shot anyways. Most Abrams crews are trained to fight with the commander up top his hatch - a HE-frag shell detonating point blank at the armor might not penetrate it, but might kill the commander and definitely injure everyone inside with the blast.

    GarryB wrote:I would point out that the big roof mounted access hatch is in line with the gun, so if there is an autoloader in there I would not think there was much room for a seat and manual controls let alone room to manually load the gun, elevate and traverse it and fire it...

    You have to question what sort of emergency or problem they could possibly have where they might need to manually operate the gun... I would think most of the time if the gun is not working and backup systems are not helping then your focus would be to get the tank and the gun to somewhere where it can be fixed and working properly.
    In line and behind the breech. The access hatch is for maintenance or possibly reloading the ammo, though there appears to be a circular hatch behind the turret that is much more convenient to load rounds into, as you don't have to go up and down the turret. It could also serve as the pressure release mechanism if ever the propellant charges deflagrate due to battle damage.

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 6d9YVER
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1090
    Points : 1124
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  mnztr Thu May 06, 2021 6:38 am

    lyle6 wrote:
    The APFSDS projectiles are longer. The chamber throat has to be redesigned to accommodate the two projectile lengths.

    Will they be using the microwave charge ignition on the 125mm? Seems to make sense since it gives more power via homogenous charge detonation.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 522
    Points : 524
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 Thu May 06, 2021 8:55 am

    mnztr wrote:
    Will they be using the microwave charge ignition on the 125mm? Seems to make sense since it gives more power via homogenous charge detonation.

    That's precisely what you don't want to occur in a gun.

    For safe, and energy efficient operation of the high velocity gun the propellant has to deflagrate without building up a max pressure that matches the pressure limits, and sustain as high a pressure as it could as the projectile travels through the bore. To control the rate of deflagration you compress the solid propellant into grains where the larger they are the lower the max pressure but the longer the burn can be sustained. An additional control is provided by drilling holes into the ends of the mostly cylindrical grains to provide a progressively increasing surface area of burn and thus sustaining the pressure even while the projectile travels through the bore. With traditional base primers, the propellant charge also burns from end to end which further retards the burn rate and pressure.

    What a microwave ignition would bring to the table is the more homogenous burn: instead of burning end to end like with traditional cartridges the charge would instead burn from the sides to get to the center. More of the propellant is ignited at once and this gets more important since the more you stack on charges the worse the variability of the burn will be. With the  Koalitsiya and its 6 charges for max range shots its pretty critical, but for something like say the T-14 with 2 charges at best for its APFSDS its probably not an issue.

    In any case its highly unlikely they will introduce a new type of ignition system for the 2A82-1M gun. The gun is designed to have backwards compatibility with most of the previous 2A46M series of guns' ammunition so it only makes sense to continue the same traditional base priming of the older guns.

    GarryB and LMFS like this post

    avatar
    limb

    Posts : 165
    Points : 173
    Join date : 2020-09-17

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  limb Thu May 06, 2021 10:56 am

    lyle6 wrote:The Russian MoD also demanded that the T-90M carry 40 rounds. You know what UVZ did? They attached a bustle rack for the extraneous rounds. The crew can't access this ammo from inside the turret at all so for all intents and purposes it is irrelevant when in direct combat.

    And thats a shame because the T-90Ms bustle couldve housed an autoloader like the Leclercs or type 10's(with the extra ammo stored in a heavily armored box where the carousel originally was, and the crew can load the autloader with it) which can achieve an RoF of 12-15rpm compared to  the pathetic 7-9rpm of  the T-90 carousel autoloader. Carousel autoloaders should be relegated to the garbage bin of  history, because they inherently have a much lower APFSDS penetrator length limit than a bustle autlloader as well as an inherently lower RoF because the shell has to travel a longer distance to the breach.

    Even if the T-14 can achieve 12rpm, thats pushing carousel autoloader design to the limit, while a horizontal bustle autoloader could most likely achieve 20-30rpm.
    lyle6
    lyle6

    Posts : 522
    Points : 524
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  lyle6 Thu May 06, 2021 11:11 am

    limb wrote:
    And thats a shame because the T-90Ms bustle couldve housed an autoloader like the Leclercs or type 10's(with the extra ammo stored in a heavily armored box where the carousel originally was, and the crew can load the autloader with it) which can achieve an RoF of 12-15rpm compared to  the pathetic 7-9rpm of  the T-90 carousel autoloader. Carousel autoloaders should be relegated to the garbage bin of  history, because they inherently have a much lower APFSDS penetrator length limit than a bustle autlloader as well as an inherently lower RoF because the shell has to travel a longer distance to the breach.

    Even if the T-14 can achieve 12rpm, thats pushing carousel autoloader design to the limit, while a horizontal bustle autoloader could most likely achieve 20-30rpm.
    Nonsense. The Leclerc only manages 10-12 rpm and that's with unitary cartridges with a strengthened propellant case to handle the faster ramming action.

    The T-14 is designed with the 152 mm gun in mind so its internal dimensions allow for 1 m long projectiles, maybe slightly longer, plenty enough for anything the West can develop in the next few decades.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1090
    Points : 1124
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  mnztr Thu May 06, 2021 5:06 pm

    I don't see why the microwave ignition precludes making the gun backward compatible. The microwave ignition results in higher BMEP, adding a base prime ignition mode is not a big deal, the muzzle velocity would just be a bit lower with the old ammo.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28938
    Points : 29466
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  GarryB Yesterday at 12:14 pm

    The fit is so snug, it won't slide out by elevating the gun and letting gravity do the work. So not only is it impractical its impossible to replace an already loaded round in a two part ammunition system while in battle.

    I know the larger calibre naval guns have a degreasing propellent charge that is fired to clear the barrel and warm it up a bit for the standard rounds to be fired...

    Certainly the tank that gets the first shot off has an advantage, but with APS and ERA able to deal with APFSDS then is it a huge advantage.... or should I say will it be decisive every time?

    And rate of fire is not really a huge concern most of the time... after firing most tanks will move to a new position anyway, or will be monitoring the fall of shot to see if a follow up shot is needed.

    Not sure what you mean by side hatch but I would think that top hatch is used for reloading and general maintenance...

    I would expect loading would take place with the vehicle commander sitting in his seat in the hull selecting the round type on his console, while the driver gets the round out of its box and hands it up to the gunner standing on the hull of the tank with the roof hatch open placing the projectile and then the propellent stub into the autoloader to feed into the autoloader cell for the round with the commander identifying what type of round is going into each cell,

    Sponsored content

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5 - Page 24 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat May 08, 2021 3:58 am