Armata soon to be in service.

[Stagler]

Damn, out trolled big time

Edited May 10, 2015 by Stagler

[sburke]

No more gulags in Russia guys.

Well the museum just got an overhaul so don't be surprised when the system of camps gets restored.  If Comrade Stalin is being rehabilitated it seems the Russian people are in for a new dark age.

 

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/gulag-museum-to-reopen-but-proof-of-stalin-crimes-removed-director-says/517046.html

 

Really sad statement on what the Russian people are learning of their own history and the whitewash of the atrocities committed by the Communist regime.  Guess folks don't want to tarnish the image on the 70th anniversary.

[Battlefront.com]

A little late, yet I still imagine Steve's when he heared about it...

 

It's easy to poke fun at technical issues along the path of development. However, I think the half dozen or so times I've said nobody should read too much into the breakdown shows that I don't view it as important. Certainly not as embarrassing as this the M247 Sgt York:

In February 1982 the prototype was demonstrated for a group of US and British officers at Fort Bliss, along with members of Congress and other VIPs. When the computer was activated, it immediately started aiming the guns at the review stands, causing several minor injuries as members of the group jumped for cover. Technicians worked on the problem, and the system was restarted. This time it started shooting towards the target, but fired into the ground 300 m in front of the tank. In spite of several attempts to get it working properly, the vehicle never successfully engaged the sample targets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M247_Sergeant_York

Of course that program was cancelled after 50 vehicles were produced Seriously though, look at the Osprey program's long history of horrible accidents and deaths during testing. Yet it wound up being a very useful addition to the US military capability. In fact, a few days ago I heard on the radio that two were sent to Nepal to move supplies out to remote regions that aren't accessible by road in any meaningful way.

Lesson is... nothing is perfect during testing, so expect imperfection. If you guys saw some of the early CM Alphas and Betas from 2007 you'd wonder how it was we ever got it to this stage

 

Really sad statement on what the Russian people are learning of their own history and the whitewash of the atrocities committed by the Communist regime.  Guess folks don't want to tarnish the image on the 70th anniversary.

Or they need new housing for the driver of the Armata

Cheap shot, but someone had to take it!

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

In other news, VP of the concern that manufactures Kurganets claims (in his interview with TASS) that their vehicle uses ceramic plates for passive armoring and is protected from top attacks.

I know of nothing that has proven effective in defeating a Javelin. As for ceramics, can you armor nerds tell me if it has much to do with defeating a DU Sabot? I though ceramic was mostly to defeat against HESH.

 

Well, in the case of the BMP-1 and Kontakt-1, the mounting surface could not be sacrificial as it was directly protecting crew. Detonation of ERA could injure the crew in that case. There is no technical problem with mounting ERA without heavy armor immediately behind, as can be seen on many side hull ERA installations.

Good point. Though I was kinda using the BMP-1 analogy to the turret in terms of having the sensors survive. Meaning, the ERA might save the gun but not the sensors that make it functional.

However, the chance of this shell on Armata being a base for ERA is very slim, because:

-it appears too lightweight to support heavy ERA, held together with cotter pins and clearly meant to be pulled off with ease to access equipment

-it partially covers external sensors, so mounting ERA over it would either obscure sensors or leave big gaps

-the angles serve no purpose for armor protection effectiveness of efficiency

I'm fairly certain the actual armor array is probably slab-sided and concealed beneath the shell, protecting only the gun and upper autoloader.

Yes, that does seem to be the case. Certainly the metal shielding is, as I speculated many pages ago, there mostly for protection against elements, tree branches, etc. and still offer access to the stuff underneath. Still looks pretty thin for that.

OK, what that said then it appears that the Armata's turret will not be protected by ERA. Not unless they plan on some sort of kit that swaps out the panels for something ridged to hold the ERA in place. And even if that's the case, it appears that several components of the Armata's turret won't be very well protected from a hit. Smoke dischargers for sure, APS of course, and... well... I don't know what else

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

It's hard to say about the other two infantry carriers, but the Boomarang appears to offer the passengers a LOT more room than the BTR series. Obviously the tradeoff is height. I think someone guessed at the height of the Boomarang?? If so, I'm curious how it compares to other wheeled armor (LAV-3, Stryker, Boxer, etc.)

Steve

[John Kettler]

Kieme(ITA),

 

That is, perhaps, the most public and highly supervised tank recovery in history.

 

Steve,

 

My favorite example of a weapon demonstration oops was a Phalanx test from an unmanned barge at sea vs an inbound Walleye glide bomb. The Phalanx found the target and automatically engaged it. Indeed, there were holes in the Walleye front to back through which daylight was clearly visible in the on-mount footage. That didn't stop the Walleye from still coming in and detonating, sinking the test barge!  Got the story from a Hughes colleague who got to see all the live fire test films. As for the Osprey, not only was it problem plagued, but there was a scandal over "gun decking the logs," deliberately falsifying the test data in order to get the tilt rotor approved. I'm still very much of the opinion the F-35 program should be canceled before we embarrass ourselves further and waste billions. 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[L0ckAndL0ad]

Albert Bakov (Kurganets manuf concern VP) also claims (as I expected) that Kurganets IFV's commander can fully control weapons if needed (so does Boomerang and T-15, I guess).

[Kieme(ITA)]

, it appears that several components of the Armata's turret won't be very well protected from a hit. Smoke dischargers for sure, APS of course, and... well... I don't know what else

Steve

 

I smell a game developer's brain already at work on the subject.

[antaress73]

From what i'm seeing in the game, Russia needs the Kurganets IFV more than the Armata T-14.

[Douglas Ruddd]

Wonder if the M1 TTB (Turret Testbed) had much influence on the Russians... Cannot find much on this prototype.

 

[Stagler]

Unlikely, the Russians had been tinkering with unmanned turrets a while before.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/main_battle_tank/object_195/Object_195_main_battle_tank_Russia_Russian_defence_industry_military_technology_640_001.jpg

[BTR]

Unlikely, the Russians had been tinkering with unmanned turrets a while before.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/main_battle_tank/object_195/Object_195_main_battle_tank_Russia_Russian_defence_industry_military_technology_640_001.jpg

 

This actually is just a motorized gun testbed used to observe gun and chassis dynamics. Nothing to do with unmanned turrets here   . 

[L0ckAndL0ad]

Just as I said, MoD signed a contract to buy "few hundred" BMP-3s. Bakov comments that his concern can keep manufacturing them until Kurganets-25 will be ready for mass production (they are the same manufacturer).

 

May 9th photos from Vitaly Kuzmin. Note how T-14's panoramic sight can rotate independently from MG.

 

http://vitalykuzmin.net/?q=node/604

 

[Nerdwing]

Finally, tank commanders can be accused of Wall Hax!

[MikeyD]

Just looking at the vehicles they look grotesquely expensive. In a "money is no object" kind'a way. No hint of design rationalization to accommodate mass production. Its almost like driving Lamborghinis into combat.

[Stagler]

Here are some photos of what is believed to be under that mystery plating after all.
http://sh.uploads.ru/9icHm.jpg

 

@BTR: I disagree, I do believe that turntable test bed was used as an early base development of what was to be the same turn table arrangement on Obj-195.

[L0ckAndL0ad]

Just looking at the vehicles they look grotesquely expensive. In a "money is no object" kind'a way. No hint of design rationalization to accommodate mass production. Its almost like driving Lamborghinis into combat.

 

Do they look bluish-black too?

[Battlefront.com]

Here are some photos of what is believed to be under that mystery plating after all.

http://sh.uploads.ru/9icHm.jpg

I know it's only a guess, but going with this it looks like some extra plates (ceramic?) over the breach area and a removable roof panel to the rear for accessing the gun.

 

@BTR: I disagree, I do believe that turntable test bed was used as an early base development of what was to be the same turn table arrangement on Obj-195.

I agree with you disagreeing I am sure that Russian engineers did not totally forget about whatever was learned from the older trials. Even if it was "what not to do". Until some who worked on Armata produce definitive information abut their thinking we'll not be able to tell one way or another. It could be MBT-70 -> Abrams sort of comparison, or Sturmgewehr 44 -> AK-47 comparison.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Just looking at the vehicles they look grotesquely expensive. In a "money is no object" kind'a way. No hint of design rationalization to accommodate mass production. Its almost like driving Lamborghinis into combat.

Funny, I had the same thinking when I reminded myself about the MBT-70:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBT-70

Lots and lots and lots of very good ideas, some of which were revolutionary. Some aren't too far off from A/K/B's specs or the reasons behind them. The MBT-70 was a failure because it overreached, had flawed politics behind it, and didn't constrain design by budget concerns. It's no wonder the Leopard-2 and Abrams, both of which derived from this program, turned out to be more conventional end products.

Steve

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

Funny, I had the same thinking when I reminded myself about the MBT-70:

 

It's why I keep bringing it up.  It's a really close parallel in terms of complexity vs resources available.  

[Battlefront.com]

It's why I keep bringing it up.  It's a really close parallel in terms of complexity vs resources available.

Yes, and there are other examples of this as well. It gets back to a point I made a few hundred posts ago that sometimes you get nearly to a production model and that last 1% proves to be insurmountable for some combo of reasons. M247 Sgt York being the example I keep bringing up. 50 production vehicles were made, none entered service. Was it because there was NO possibility of fixing the guidance system? Not really. It was killed off because it was grossly over budget and by the time it got to the final stage there were doubts it was even necessary any more thanks to various AAGM systems.

Another example is one of my favorites... the G-11 caseless ammo small arm concept that was supposed to replace the Bundeswehr's G3. After 20 years of arduous, and expensive, development efforts 1000 were produced for testing. Ooops... the wall came down and Germany had to fund Reunification. So the weapon, which most likely needed more development effort and would have created a lot of side effect costs, was shelved. With the flawed and convenient German mindset that war was no longer a threat to German interests, it deliberately decided it didn't need an expensive replacement to the G3. Instead it went ahead with the much cheaper, and pretty conventional, G-36 was adopted in its place.

Notice that "need" and "want" were fairly similar in each of these cases as is with A/K/B. In that the country in question recognized a definite need to replace what they had with something much better, they tried to jump ahead big time, but in the end had to settle for smaller steps due to the "want" being out of line with "need".

As I've argued before, Russia could certainly use a G-11, but in the end it is probably better off with a G-36.

Steve

[Offshoot]

Here are some photos

I guess you could be using the word 'photos' loosely, but so there is no confusion note that I am pretty sure from the look of them that these are not actually photos but computer graphics 3D renders. If that's the case you'd need to know the source of them to determine their accurateness.

[MikeyD]

Talk about rifles, the Russians are also replacing their primary infantry rifle with the AK-12, another wholly new weapon with every conceivable bell & whistle attached. It seems the Russian military is to Putin as the Palace of Versailles was to king Louis XIV. What we seem to be looking at is a 'vanity project' on a huge scale with little thought to practicality or economy. Hardly the first country to be guilty of that particular sin. Remember the Beijing Olympics? 44 billion and that's probably a low-ball number.

[L0ckAndL0ad]

Talk about rifles, the Russians are also replacing their primary infantry rifle with the AK-12, another wholly new weapon with every conceivable bell & whistle attached.

 

Please, let me try! AK-12 looks like it has no commonality with the rifle they've been using for the past 45 years, has no rail attachment systems and all copies are supposed to be equipped with smart iThermal sights, silencers, lasers, and 100 round mags, all bolted to the rifle itself, right? Would anyone even care to support their claims with anything resembling arguments, facts and/or logic? Such baseless bashing is not even funny anymore.

[BTR]

@BTR: I disagree, I do believe that turntable test bed was used as an early base development of what was to be the same turn table arrangement on Obj-195.

 

Don't know, it is known that the particular picture you presented is a tesbed for the gun on movable chassis. From that rear angle we can see there is nothing inside that turret and the loading is entirely manual.