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


+45
Atmosphere
marcellogo
PapaDragon
George1
william.boutros
runaway
GarryB
thegopnik
The-thing-next-door
BenVaserlan
lyle6
caveat emptor
Begome
Sprut-B
Walther von Oldenburg
xeno
mnztr
Backman
diabetus
Broski
RTN
lancelot
Swgman_BK
galicije83
AlfaT8
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
limb
Mir
franco
JohninMK
ludovicense
flamming_python
Werewolf
Arrow
Arkanghelsk
Kiko
TMA1
ALAMO
DerWolf
sepheronx
Big_Gazza
Isos
sputnik
PhSt
Hole
49 posters

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40220
    Points : 40720
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  GarryB Tue Aug 15, 2023 4:50 am

    The running gear only gets noticeably warmer than the ground when the vehicle is moving. In a static position you can dig tank trenches, drape overhead camo netting to better hide the tank.

    In a static position you can set up netting even further from your vehicle to catch drones and ATGMs well away from the vehicle.

    "That is, it will have electric propulsion and a diesel engine, with an operating principle similar to that of hybrid cars. They aim to halve fuel consumption, which is a significant advantage," Kornev stresses, explaining that a hybrid engine means lower mass, reduced noise levels and possibly higher acceleration characteristics, which could prove critical on the battlefield.

    Halving the fuel consumption of an Abrams probably means it still uses more fuel than Armata or T-90AM...


    The real difference is that Armata is planned to be a vehicle chassis for a vehicle family that performs all roles within a Russian armoured division, this new Abrams is a tank.

    Broski likes this post

    lyle6
    lyle6


    Posts : 2447
    Points : 2441
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  lyle6 Tue Aug 15, 2023 12:52 pm

    Throwing some numbers around:

    The minimum specific fuel consumption of the AGT1500 engine is 330 g/kWh.

    50% more efficient comes up to 220 g/kWh.

    The 12N360 engine has slightly less than 220 g/kwh so its actually slightly more efficient.

    GarryB, LMFS and Broski like this post

    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 3269
    Points : 3261
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Arrow Tue Aug 15, 2023 1:05 pm

    The question is how quickly the US will be able to develop and implement this Abrams X and what will be its combat value compared to the T-14?We probably won't see a new Abrams soon, during which time the T-14 will undergo modifications.

    GarryB, GunshipDemocracy, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6


    Posts : 2447
    Points : 2441
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  lyle6 Sat Aug 19, 2023 12:10 am

    The AbramsX is a technology demonstrator. It is not an operationally ready platform unlike the T-14 which has passed all factory and state trials and is currently on pre-serial production. It would take the Abrams X at least a decade to go from its current stage to where the T-14 is by now by at which point the T-14 would be in numbers and modernized to a new standard.

    GarryB, Big_Gazza, kvs, Sprut-B, LMFS, Hole, BenVaserlan and like this post

    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 11054
    Points : 11034
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 48
    Location : Scholzistan

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Hole Mon Aug 21, 2023 5:25 pm

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 2609210
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 60249010
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 63166710

    GarryB, franco, George1, Big_Gazza, galicije83, zardof, littlerabbit and like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6


    Posts : 2447
    Points : 2441
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Afghanit hardkill APS live-fire testing

    Post  lyle6 Tue Aug 29, 2023 9:32 am

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 VK32A4P
    Probably against APFSDS arrows based on the entry holes which are quite deep and display the characteristic surface pitting on oblique impacts.

    Also suggests that Afghanit uses a DIME filled warhead since it shred the main gun's thermal sleeve (moved off to the side since then) but didn't cause any detectable damage on the turret or the hull that is no more than 5 meters away from the detonation zone.

    Note that despite this the sub-caliber arrow is still mostly intact - all the APS has done is deflect the arrow so it hits the actual armor at a sub-optimal angle. You still need heavy complex armor arrays to effectively absorb the hit which is why heavy armor is here to stay despite the presence of hardkill APS.

    GarryB, franco, kvs, galicije83, BenVaserlan, Begome, Mir and jon_deluxe like this post

    Begome
    Begome


    Posts : 158
    Points : 160
    Join date : 2020-09-12

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Begome Tue Aug 29, 2023 12:06 pm

    very nice find!

    Also confirms that the sensors many people have referred to as AESA radars are actually optical with those black panels just being the protective covers.

    BenVaserlan and lyle6 like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6


    Posts : 2447
    Points : 2441
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  lyle6 Tue Aug 29, 2023 2:38 pm

    Begome wrote:very nice find!

    Also confirms that the sensors many people have referred to as AESA radars are actually optical with those black panels just being the protective covers.

    Correct. The panels on the 4 corners of the turret are the UV/IR direction finding sensors. These are purely passive and work by detecting the presence of illuminating lasers or burning rocket motors/muzzle flashes.

    The two boxes immediately above the hard kill launcher are high-speed pulse-doppler radars. More importantly these are quite small and only activate on cue by the optoelectronic sensors so the chances of radar detection are minimal.


    Last edited by lyle6 on Tue Aug 29, 2023 3:38 pm; edited 1 time in total

    Begome and Broski like this post

    BenVaserlan
    BenVaserlan


    Posts : 58
    Points : 64
    Join date : 2018-06-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  BenVaserlan Tue Aug 29, 2023 3:24 pm

    lyle6 wrote:
    The two boxes immediately above the hard kill launcher are high-speed doppler radars.

    Which boxes? Please show an image of those.
    Begome
    Begome


    Posts : 158
    Points : 160
    Join date : 2020-09-12

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Begome Tue Aug 29, 2023 3:31 pm

    One of the bigger mysteries for me is still to what degree the APS can act against top-attack threats...by that I don't mean Javelin, as it's angle of attack is actually not that steep (IRL, not in Battlefield lol), so it can almost certainly be dealt with by the hard-kill effectors, but e.g. loitering munitions or EFP-warhead-launching mines or cluster rockets from MLRS etc...the UV/IR sensors seem angled enough to be able to see those threats as long as they're not in a ~30-45° cone above the tank (and the T-14 would shoot its smoke grenades straight up if it thought something was coming from the top, as that "something" would almost certainly be picked up moving into the cone, especially since the T-14 will be sharing data with other vehicles around it), but the hard kill effectors don't have that kind of angle...

    Makes me think that the engineers actually intended AI to constantly surveil the environment via the UV/IR sensors and autonomously engage top-attack threats with the machine gun. The chance of accidental friendly fire or danger for civilians is very low, as civilians won't be riding magic carpets through the air, so you could actually leave it on auto without kill confirmation by the gunner/commander, but is the machine gun accurate enough?

    What the aforementioned threats have in common is that they're pretty slow, unlike the missiles, which would have higher velocity but also a more shallow AoA. Slower means easier to hit and this hypothesis would also explain another puzzling detail about the T-14, namely that it doesn't come with an HMG (e.g. 12,7mm Kord) like the T-90, but has a regular 7.62mm MG instead...the main advantage of it vs the HMG is the much larger amount of ammo that can be carried (it also has a slightly higher rate of fire and muzzle velocity, which suits this purpose as well), so you can better afford shooting some of your ammo at aerial targets, while keeping plenty for ground targets.

    BenVaserlan wrote:Which boxes? Please show an image of those.
    He means the front-facing radars:

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 T-14_p10

    Edit: actually, scratch that there may not even be a "blindness" cone, if this image from a patent about the soft-kill aspect of Afganit is correct:
    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 T-14_s10


    Last edited by Begome on Tue Aug 29, 2023 4:07 pm; edited 2 times in total

    kvs, galicije83, GunshipDemocracy, Hole, BenVaserlan and lyle6 like this post

    BenVaserlan
    BenVaserlan


    Posts : 58
    Points : 64
    Join date : 2018-06-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  BenVaserlan Tue Aug 29, 2023 3:46 pm

    Thank you.
    thegopnik
    thegopnik


    Posts : 1795
    Points : 1797
    Join date : 2017-09-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  thegopnik Mon Sep 04, 2023 6:27 pm

    Checked the T-90 and T-14 thread, what source or article did you guys find that the Sprinter is 20kms when i only find 8km or 12km figures thrown around for that missile range?

    BenVaserlan likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40220
    Points : 40720
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  GarryB Tue Sep 05, 2023 8:05 am

    Western sources claim 12km.

    BenVaserlan likes this post

    thegopnik
    thegopnik


    Posts : 1795
    Points : 1797
    Join date : 2017-09-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  thegopnik Wed Sep 06, 2023 3:16 am

    GarryB wrote:Western sources claim 12km.

    I am asking where and what source states its 20kms, I heard it get discussed here some pages back but I cant find sources. 2nd gen FLIR on Abrams is like 8km and 3rd gen FLIR is to increase that range by 2.6 times meaning 20.8kms. I am wondering when Russia will begin to field such optics soon.

    BenVaserlan likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40220
    Points : 40720
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  GarryB Wed Sep 06, 2023 7:32 am


    I am asking where and what source states its 20kms, I heard it get discussed here some pages back but I cant find sources. 2nd gen FLIR on Abrams is like 8km and 3rd gen FLIR is to increase that range by 2.6 times meaning 20.8kms. I am wondering when Russia will begin to field such optics soon..

    The missile is laser beam riding so a target 12km away is probably optimistic to start with, and your turret mounted optics means nothing if the missile you fire can't detect the laser beam you are pointing at the target to guide it.

    If they changed the missile from a laser beam sensor in the rear looking at the launch platform to a laser seeker looking forward for reflections from the target then they range can be anything you want...

    BenVaserlan dislikes this post

    lyle6
    lyle6


    Posts : 2447
    Points : 2441
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  lyle6 Wed Sep 06, 2023 3:14 pm

    thegopnik wrote:Checked the T-90 and T-14 thread, what source or article did you guys find that the Sprinter is 20kms when i only find 8km or 12km figures thrown around for that missile range?
    12 km is the figure given by Western sources because that is the range achieved by the MRM-CE. An unpowered projectile with a conventional dual-mode gimballed seeker hard locked for a 9,000 over-g limit and fired from the anemic XM360 gun. The last bit is what fucked it over because it resulted in a very slow shell that took its sweet, sweet time to reach its target.

    This gives us a feasible baseline of 12 km range. Even better, Krasnopol shells fired in dumb ballistic mode would have a 12 km range as well so it checks out.

    However 3UBK21 Sprinter for the T-14 Armata would definitely be a much heavier missile than the MRM-CE with the capacity to take up substantial solid propellant reserves, if nothing else thanks to its more powerful gun. If Krasnopol only has a measly 12 km in a pure ballistic trajectory, the rocket gives its a boost of 33% to range, and the glide fins take it to the rest of the way to the target out to 20 km, then it stands to reason Sprinter should enjoy a similar performance boost too at the very least while retaining a tactically relevant sustained velocity all throughout.

    Krasnopol is also old Soviet guided shell technology so its g-hardening is woefully out of date. Any slight improvement and the Sprinter can be fired at even higher velocities.



    GarryB and thegopnik like this post

    BenVaserlan dislikes this post

    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 7336
    Points : 7428
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  ALAMO Wed Sep 06, 2023 3:31 pm

    Sprinter can be substantially longer than the previous generation of GLATMS. Considering that Invar already pierced about 1000mm, I guess most of the size can be used for extra fuel. It means at least doubling the load. Add new a generation fuel, a longer impulse that will make the missile go faster, and what you have at the end is ... well beyond 12 km.
    As lyle6 said, th "12" number is there only to pretend that the western solution is on pair. Well, it is not Laughing Laughing


    Last edited by ALAMO on Thu Sep 07, 2023 9:02 am; edited 1 time in total

    GarryB, kvs, Hole, BenVaserlan, lyle6 and Broski like this post

    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11534
    Points : 11502
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Isos Wed Sep 06, 2023 3:39 pm

    New "atgm" for tanks could be those tube launched drones (new lancet). Either mount them around the turret somewhere in mortar position or directly launch them from the gun.

    It allows to attack way further for a margin of the price of a kornet.

    Let's not forget they will use dedicated vehicles with tens of such drones providing protection to their tanks so the tanks won't need atgm. Apfsds and HE will be enough to deal with the remaining targets.

    Hole, BenVaserlan, lyle6, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40220
    Points : 40720
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  GarryB Thu Sep 07, 2023 2:45 am

    Actually I think they will have their tanks using drones to scout ahead for targets and being able to launch anti tank missiles at targets they find is part of that system they are creating.

    They wont become missile tanks but missiles will become part of their standard armament so if they spot a target ahead they can engage it right away without having to call up other platforms.

    Keep in mind that the Armata equivalent of Shturm will be likely carrying something like LMUR with its two way datalink and 15km range from a ground launch.

    BenVaserlan, lyle6, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post

    thegopnik
    thegopnik


    Posts : 1795
    Points : 1797
    Join date : 2017-09-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  thegopnik Thu Sep 07, 2023 3:58 am

    I am wondering if a 152mm cannon would be enough to make a scramjet or ramjet engine design for an ATGM since a 1st stage engine wont be needed thanks to the muzzle velocity and such missiles will also be too fast for tank projectile APS systems. klevok-D2 and hermes missile have 1st and 2nd staged with warheads. 1st stage looks like its half the length so we can cut that in half and get 1.75 meters and missiles like refleks has a 690mm length but I am assuming maybe a bigger diameter ATGM for a 152mm cannon will make up for the length difference.

    GarryB likes this post

    Isos
    Isos


    Posts : 11534
    Points : 11502
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Isos Thu Sep 07, 2023 9:06 am

    They already designed a ramjet apfsds back in soviet times. No real advantages.

    BenVaserlan likes this post

    caveat emptor
    caveat emptor


    Posts : 1980
    Points : 1982
    Join date : 2022-02-02
    Location : Murrica

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  caveat emptor Sun Sep 10, 2023 2:22 am

    Murakhovskiy:
    https://t.me/Viktor_Murakhovskiy/510
    ...

    This is a people's war.  In addition to the mobilization of the 300,000 people, there was widespread support for various initiatives carried out by volunteers using funds raised from public money.

    I will note those that are carried out for tank troops:
    - equipping tanks with closed communication means that allow communication with infantry and artillery, with all interacting bodies;
    - equipping tanks with dynamic protection “boxes”;
    - equipping tanks with programs for firing from a closed firing position (IOP);
    - equipping tanks with electronic warfare equipment;
    - equipping tanks with camouflage means.

    Now the troops are receiving tanks T-72B3 (upgraded in 2023), T-90M, T-80BVM, T-62MV-1.  Plus, the troops have tanks from previous years of production.  Where is Armata?

    Unfortunately, the company of Armata tanks in the army has been disbanded; their further path follows from the desire to improve it.  When will he appear in the troops?  Not until next year.

    The T-14 "Armata" will fully play a leading role on the battlefield when it is in a single armored battle formation along with the heavy infantry fighting vehicle T-15 "Barbaris".
    Advancing after the firing line of the mobile firing zone supplied by 2S35 "Coalition-SV".

    This offensive ....


    Last edited by caveat emptor on Sun Sep 10, 2023 4:50 am; edited 1 time in total
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 40220
    Points : 40720
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  GarryB Sun Sep 10, 2023 4:32 am

    I am wondering if a 152mm cannon would be enough to make a scramjet or ramjet engine design for an ATGM

    They did do some work in the past but it didn't go anywhere AFAIK.

    Better propellants solved the problems better than a ramjet design... remember ramjets are limited to mach 5 or 6 or so and probably less so close to sea level.

    They already designed a ramjet apfsds back in soviet times. No real advantages.

    They did, but the two obvious differences was that they were not interested in targets more than 2km away which is just over one seconds flight time for a 125mm APFSDS round leaving the muzzle at 1.8km/s, and also a ramjet would struggle to accelerate something to much more than mach 3 or 4 at such low altitudes, but now they have scramjets which don't need to have a subsonic airflow through the combustion chamber of the jet engine.


    The T-14 "Armata" will fully play a leading role on the battlefield when it is in a single armored battle formation along with the heavy infantry fighting vehicle T-15 "Barbaris". Advancing after the firing line of the mobile firing zone supplied by 2S35 "Coalition-SV".

    In other words it is part of a set that works vastly better when operating as a set rather than on its own.

    This offensive can be supported with:
    - ATGM based on MT-LB;
    - Tunguska-M1 air defense systems and Tor-M2 air defense systems;
    - UR-77 mine clearing installation, BMR-3M combat clearing vehicles, MTU-90 tank bridge layer;
    - PRP-5 artillery reconnaissance vehicles;
    - combat vehicles of the aircraft controller BOMAN;
    - a group of electronic warfare equipment.

    In 10 years time imagine the performance of a Russian force where each of the supporting vehicles is Armata based...

    But of course an entire force of Armatas would not be affordable and would also require a lot of fuel support, so many units will be Boomerang or Kurganets based.

    BenVaserlan and jon_deluxe like this post

    lyle6
    lyle6


    Posts : 2447
    Points : 2441
    Join date : 2020-09-14
    Location : Philippines

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  lyle6 Sun Sep 10, 2023 8:34 pm

    caveat emptor wrote:
    Unfortunately, the company of Armata tanks in the army has been disbanded; their further path follows from the desire to improve it. When will he appear in the troops? Not until next year.
    What's more unfortunate is that a lot of people lack the comprehension to read between the lines:
    They are disbanding the test company to make way for actual combat formations - the tests are finally done.
    All that's left to do is wait for their crews to graduate tank school which, surprise, surprise, is next year.

    GarryB wrote:Better propellants solved the problems better than a ramjet design... remember ramjets are limited to mach 5 or 6 or so and probably less so close to sea level.
    Ramjets also make for expensive ammo. Russia doesn't want scarce silver bullets, they want mass producible wooden stakes that will **** any number of opponents.

    Also, the Russians have yet to use carbon-fiber composite sabots for their subcaliber shells. Composite sabots save like half the weight compared to Aluminium sabots and that is parasitic mass that can go into the arrow itself with no change in ballistics. They have a well-developed manufacturing capability for high strength low weight carbon fiber applications (things like rocket bodies, helicopter blades) but they are not using them. Cost is a factor, but I think they are deliberately leaving this ace in the hole for when they really need a massive almost overnight surge in anti-armor capability.

    GarryB, Hole, BenVaserlan, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post

    BenVaserlan
    BenVaserlan


    Posts : 58
    Points : 64
    Join date : 2018-06-20

    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  BenVaserlan Sun Sep 10, 2023 10:35 pm

    caveat emptor wrote:
    [b]Unfortunately, the company of Armata tanks in the army has been disbanded; their further path follows from the desire to improve it.  When will he appear in the troops?  Not until next year.


    The T-14 needs an APS that can INTERCEPT top attacks from ATGMs, loitering munitions, and artillery. Artillery fire has disabled a lot of tanks in this war.

    Sponsored content


    [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6 - Page 10 Empty Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Oct 06, 2024 12:28 pm