Jump to content
Lee_Vincent

Armata soon to be in service.

Recommended Posts

I would totally and entirely discard the Armatas as the next Black Eagle given what's going on now except for the Russians have been so damned insistent that the Armata is coming.  

 

I'm by no means certain that it's going to exist, but I'm inclined to think there's going to be a "Something" vs just cricket noises when all the various AFVs roll by May 6th or whatever, and there's no Armatas.  This might be anything from the Armata being a much less ambitious upgrade that's been touted, to it's similar to many of the other Russian ultratech designs that never get past a few prototypes, to Dear Virginia, there is a Santa Claus and he is Russian.   

 

Right now there's nothing that out and out rules out the Russian "truth" that there's Armatas, and they're going to be in service.  But there's no proof they exist as promised either. If the promised day comes and goes with no Armata, or it's just a T-72 hull with a new engine, then got it.  If ultratech looking tanks roll down the road, and plywoodium is not in evidence, then we've got more to talk about.

 

Think T-90 and T-72 upgrades until infinity are more likely though.  

 

They do exist. There is at least one. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

They do exist. There is at least one :)

At least one of "something" 

 

It could be a T-90 hull with a new engine, and a mockup turret.  That's really the trick of Armata watching is just what it is now, what it will be in production, and the ability of the Russians to accomplish getting it into service are all variables we don't have much visibility on except for "these are all things that need to be thought about."

 

Re: BMP3

 

South Korea remained pretty ambivalent about them too.  They certainly had the money to get more , and when received they were the only modern IFVs they had (the K200 being their chief APC at the time, which is more or less just an AIFV/ULTRA M113), but outside of receiving them never sought to acquire more.  The T80Us also have...I'm not sure.  When my unit did a combined gunnery before I arrived, we had to build in a lot more "easy" targets (like upscaled or close range targets, and the T80 equipped unit had to cease fire fairly often because they couldn't acquire targets given range conditions.  

 

I am not sure how much of this was the platform, simply because unlike most gunneries, this gunnery was the ROK giving us what they needed to shoot vs a ROK tank company showing up to our range.  The K1 and K1A1 equipped units were however able to complete our range with the normal sized targets at normal range. They also did not need to cease fire because there was too much smoke or dust in the air.

 

I really wanted to visit the Russian equipped ROK units but they're not stationed near the DMZ, and my attempts to go all never made it beyond the "maybe."  The mech infantry officers I talked to who used the BMP3 all said they liked the K21 better, but again I'm not sure if that was "better because it's Korean" or "K21 was a newer vehicle" or "The BMP3 is a deathtrap and I am so happy I never have to sit in one again"

 

Either way they're continuing domestic production, and their stuff looks more western than Russian influenced.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least one of "something" 

 

It could be a T-90 hull with a new engine, and a mockup turret.  That's really the trick of Armata watching is just what it is now, what it will be in production, and the ability of the Russians to accomplish getting it into service are all variables we don't have much visibility on except for "these are all things that need to be thought about."

 

The pictures on militaryphotos and tank net clearly shows the 7 road wheel univeral chassis (for armata and koalitsiya) on the supposed prototype of the "armata".

 

The turret module, mostly covered in canvas in said, shows a design closest resembling the picture below. Complete with the same APS mounts arround the lower turret ring. The chassis on the picture below however looks like that of the supposed universal chassis less 1 road wheel. Also on the most recent photos, it shows what looks like a 152mm gun instead of the 125mm gun.

 

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/armata_images.htm

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a mighty fine model they've got there.  You said there's a photo of the armata itself or is it someone confirming a certain rendition is closer to reality?

 

 

https://pp.vk.me/c614926/v614926171/127c9/7KJBumTmkec.jpg

 

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=229709&d=1422956282

 

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=229710&d=1422956282

 

 

Note the seven road wheels of the universal chassis for tank and artillery piece.The turret has APS dispensers on the bottom ring of the turret on the top picture as you can see clearly - very similar to concept 3d model, which was also used as the image for the news story on TVZvezda the other day. The overall shape of the turret looks close to the concept model also.

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It's an homage of sorts inspired by some existing stuff. 

 

Nothing wrong with that, again we're all grasping at straws, but it feeds back into when the Parade starts, we're all going to be surprised to some degree.

 

 

 

Gee, that takes me right back to the fourth grade and the pictures we used to draw surreptitiously in class when terminal boredom set in, which it did more often than not.

The additional weapons, or even worse, dual main gun turrets, are always the halmark of bored student or doesn't know much about tanks design.

 

Addendum to photos:

 

Those are interesting.  I wonder why the first one has mistmatched roadwheels? Front also just looks weird in relation to the building.

 

Still.  Haven't seen them before at least.

Edited by panzersaurkrautwerfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Addendum to photos:

 

Those are interesting.  I wonder why the first one has mistmatched roadwheels? Front also just looks weird in relation to the building.

 

Still.  Haven't seen them before at least.

 

Probably because its a POS prototype still :)

 

LockandLoad - Regardless - I think that this is what we will see come may time. Painted in Dark Green. Its their only card in their sleeve at this time. I am almost certain that the fighting module will be the same anyway.

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The additional weapons, or even worse, dual main gun turrets, are always the halmark of bored student or doesn't know much about tanks design.

 

I got into a really frustrating argument with an adult (or at least someone of the age supposedly of an adult) who was certain that WW II tanks should have been fitted with twin gun turrets. After all, if multi-gun turrets had worked well with warships, why not on tanks? Trying to explain to him the differences between ship and ground vehicle design and the physical constraints that led to them was just too big a job. So I gave up on the boob and left him to dwell in his ignorance.

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

LockandLoad - Regardless - I think that this is what we will see come may time. Painted in Dark Green. Its their only card in their sleeve at this time. I am almost certain that the fighting module will be the same anyway.

 

Maybe.  But it's just as likely as any other number "Armata" models and prototypes we've seen revealed.

 

 

 

I got into a really frustrating argument with an adult (or at least someone of the age supposedly of an adult) who was certain that WW II tanks should have been fitted with twin gun turrets. After all, if multi-gun turrets had worked well with warships, why not on tanks? Trying to explain to him the differences between ship and ground vehicle design and the physical constraints that led to them was just too big a job. So I gave up on the boob and left him to dwell in his ignorance.

 

Same experience.  Did not understand why the Landkruezer Ratte or whatever was a terrible idea, simply kept stating that they could add more armor to make it invincible to air attacks, and have a flak nest on the roof.  Abrams would be better with two cannons, etc etc.  I tried hard to educate him. Thought I made headway, then proclaimed that an S300 launcher on top of a super tank would make it immune to all airstrikes, so the time is NOW for megatankshipthing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe.  But it's just as likely as any other number "Armata" models and prototypes we've seen revealed.

 

 

 

Unlike any others this is closest to earliest concepts and has actually been built. All other variations we have seen up till now are speculative - not counting early T-95 or Burlak projects as they were separate but both conducted at the same location.

The chassis is what we have been told to expect. The fighting module is not like some concepts but distinctly shares the shape of some CGI models. Call it what you will, Obr 195, T-14, but I think we will see these in May :) - even if they are not exactly "Armata" as we have thought expect it (field kitchen, 152mm artillery piece, radar guided anti-ship helicopter equipped, thermal imaging proof, hover laser tank). They simply don't have the capability to prove concept, build, and put out anything else in that time frame.

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I studied on this tank by myself, and found that the T-14 (Armata)'s new shell will be likely to far deadlier than T90am.

According to some sources, (include Viktor "vim", a Russian expert that I really trust) it will use 2A82 new 125mm smoothbore, and it will use one-pieced shell 'Grifel' (I thought Grifel is for 152mm of Obj 195. Is this the another version? Please someone let me know. Also, wasn't Svinets-2 was planned for T-14? Too much various infos are all over the web about this tank :( ), "very rough" estimation will be 800-900mm, or a bit more than 900mm RHA.

 

Based on my studies, this will far more powerful then previous 3BM46 shells or any previous Russian penetrators. Ok, I must admit that my narrow prejudice towards Russian weapons and tech was biased. Anyway, at least this tank can be really a deadly threat to all current western MBTs, if the estimation about Grifel is true. (Don't get me wrong. Still, I will not be convinced if someone says T14 is the ultimate doomsday weapon which can kill any western MBTs with just one shot. But now I know that this is really good weapon system with deadly punch) Yet, we all must keep in mind that this weapon is still behind the curtain, since it is just a prototype. Lets see it on the May. 

 

ps) O. Sienko (Uralvagonzavod) mentioned about new APS of T14 in some interview. Anyone have some idea about that system?

Edited by exsonic01

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years and years ago I wrote a little article tracking Soviet weapons advances with coincident *abandoned* western technology projects. The American T95 MBT of the 1950s with its smooth bore gun and dart ammo, being followed by introduction of Russian T62 with it smooth bore gun and dart ammo, Initial hull design of the M60 with composite armor bow (not accepted for production) followed by introduction of T64 with its composite armor bow, etc. The designs are never quite close enough to be called 'copies' but the Russian were obviously paying close attention and taking notes. The Pentagon has conducted any number of technology demonstration projects over the years on overhead guns, remote sensors, in-hull crew placement, etc etc. We never seem to get much use out of these tests but it appears the Russians have found them useful  ;)

Edited by MikeyD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designs are never quite close enough to be called 'copies' but the Russian were obviously paying close attention and taking notes.

 

I've noticed over the years how often Soviet and now Russian aircraft designs resembled similar types previously unveiled in the West. As you say, not copies, but "inspired"? Possibly a case that certain configurations are so optimal that their appearance in more than one national service is all but inevitable. And it doesn't mean that the Russians were ever not capable of producing original designs. It's just that the timing was sometimes suspicious.

 

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how far you run or how well you hide, Armata (reportage and speculation) will find you!  I was looking for info on modern Russian tank gunnery, and this popped up. The Armata part is interesting, but the news of a Russian robotic tank is far more so. Start learning the acronym MRK. Pretty sure we'll be seeing lots more of it in the years ahead.

 

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/01/russia-should-begin-next-generation.html

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-14 is already in Alabino btw, but all spotters attempting to take a picture of it have been shot. 

 

Red Guards Bear Cavalry is vigilant and protecting secrets of Motherland Russia!  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...