Jump to content
Lee_Vincent

Armata soon to be in service.

Recommended Posts

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.

 

AK-12 is pretty conservative.  Just an update to the basic design to address several issues that held the AK-74M back as a modern rifle, including a proper (not improvised) rail system. Also, they still haven't made a decision on replacement.

 

More of the imagineering seen above:

 

29I1j.jpg

SFU4l.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boomerang from the top 2366x4088px:

 

https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/6833/8955119.a/0_9c669_1be5a46b_orig.jpg

 

Left side 19461x9944px:

 

https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/9492/8955119.a/0_9c66a_c1570254_orig

 

Even more attachment points than on the right side.

 

Also, as a part of the contract I've talked about previously (for "few hundred" BMP-3s), MoD buys BMD-4Ms and BTR-MDMs, 250+ vehicles, during the next 3 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly OT, but been following this thread and found it fleshed out some previous informative discussion about Bradley IFV development in the Shock Force forum. So thank you to all posters for contributing to another excellent discussion that makes these forums stand out so highly.

 

Also, the insights about the difficulties of design leaps and their practical implementation with engineering leaps really prompts me to look at USA developments in a different light.

 

 

Yes war brings leaps because of the mobilisation of effort, monetary, labour, mental etc. But in some ways some of the leaps the US has made is quite remarkable in a way. So, while easy to criticise, that systems like Osprey, F22, Stealth Bomber, made light of day is some testimony that the system is functional. 

 

 

Cost wise, how long can the US maintain trying to keep a generational edge over most rivals in pretty much most areas is the BIG question.

 

 

Regarding Russian new vehicles being like a vanity project. I've for some time now started to suspect that Putin gets 'something' from militarism.

Imagine being the Big boss of a whole country where you have mafia style power over the system and enough money most of anything. Many of the day-to-day stuff bores Putin, you can see it sometimes in the press. But then every now and then there's the buzz of a moderately sized military operation that really all hinges on his orders. From his portrayed characteristics, I really suspect that his personal psychology plays some role in his decision making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody got any solid information on the APS mounted on Armata? Ever since the invention of ERA I've been very interested in the safety side effects. Especially since we need to know this sort of thing for future CM needs. Remember that CM was one of the first simulators ever to have infantry near a brewing vehicle become casualties.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody got any solid information on the APS mounted on Armata? Ever since the invention of ERA I've been very interested in the safety side effects. Especially since we need to know this sort of thing for future CM needs. Remember that CM was one of the first simulators ever to have infantry near a brewing vehicle become casualties.Steve

I sense a new project coming up..... :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If true, and the vehicle can be remotely controlled, then Russia better have some top notch network security. Otherwise a bunch of dOoDz playing World Of Tanks might start WW3 for a laugh :D "Dude! I so TOTALLY invaded Poland! Wait a sec... my mom's trying to get me to take out the trash."

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AK-12 is pretty conservative.  Just an update to the basic design to address several issues that held the AK-74M back as a modern rifle, including a proper (not improvised) rail system. Also, they still haven't made a decision on replacement.

 

More of the imagineering seen above:

 

29I1j.jpg

SFU4l.jpg

Cool. Shrouds are off. You armor nuts learning anything from this view? I know the angle/distance doesn't help us with turret roof arrangement, though the 3D renders Stagler posted seem to be correct there. Bolted on plates (ceramic?) on the front portion at the very least.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything but anything gets through, it's going to take out the turret.  Either the optics or the gun, there's just no room between anything, and compared to the thickness of the frontal slope of western tanks, unless the new APS/ERA does a number on the new "heavy" sabots it's going to be a firepower kill.  

 

Also the reliance on automation means what might be a manual override, or even just bypassing broken stuff isn't going to be practical.  The Russians are not stupid, but it is a design assuming a lot of risk from KE projectiles.  Additionally the whole "Sheet metal allowing rounds to pass through!" thing appears to be ripe for hat consumption.  Unless the outer layer really deals with late model sabots (or earlier model sabots fired by higher velocity platforms), there's a lot thats very important and very breakable behind that shell.  

 

Which opens the question in my mind if the turret is either unfinished, and the plates we saw in place are just to make it look like a turret, or if it's just the protective layer that isn't finished, as it's looking pretty skimpy right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nope. They said that it "looks similar", but it's not like "it's based" on DualShock. The resemblance may very well be actually small (Challenger 2?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the deal with the military forces not allowing any other types of Camo to be used, apart from the one that is on all these vehicles? Anyone know why that was decided? I really really do not like this Green...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Logistics and aesthetics. Having one color simplifies maintenance and ensures all vehicles look the same. That's what the military likes, and I think most can agree it looks better. Camuflage was introduced in the Soviet army as the norm post 1984 reform, but since then has not been a terribly sucessful implementation. I like this new look alot - makes military look more maintained. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Logistics and aesthetics. Having one color simplifies maintenance and ensures all vehicles look the same. That's what the military likes, and I think most can agree it looks better. Camuflage was introduced in the Soviet army as the norm post 1984 reform, but since then has not been a terribly sucessful implementation. I like this new look alot - makes military look more maintained. 

 

Agreed.

 

Now if you guys can only do something about that terrible-looking new star :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

Maybe the mindset of 'Pimp my ride' has reached Russia.  That said, for me, what is important isn't how they look, it is how they perform - both in combat and in the maintenance cycle.  They could prove to be very expensive to maintain. Or not.  They may perform admirably in battle. Or not.  All factors we can't know right now.

 

My feel is the T-12 just may have issues with the improved and more powerful gun in a smaller density (and if the discussion about the turret 'shell' are correct) turret due to differential shear forces when the gun fires.  Remember the M551 Sheridans?   A nice light air droppable tank with a 152mm gun on it.  Too much gun for such a light turret and tank and the tank needed heavy maintenance as a result.  It was even reported that sustained firing of the gun would nearly shake the turret apart (catches on hatches would break and the hatches would slam open and closed on firing, damage to the turret motors, etc).  When they tried putting a 105mm gun that was higher velocity than the 152mm on the vehicle, the result was the gun nearly shook the  vehicle apart).

 

Despite advances in metallurgy and new mounting/recoil systems, you can't cheat physics and if the mass to shear force ratio is such that the shear forces induce exceptional strain on the turret components due to insufficient mass, maintenance will be necessary, frequent and expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's quite fair to compare the Armata to the Sheridan.  The Sheridan was a series of compromises to make a vehicle that was airborne/amphibious/able to fight MBTs in a time where large HEAT rounds were the only really reliable way to kill tanks. This led to a very light vehicle, paired with a very large gun.  The Armata isn't fighting weight to that degree, or dealing with the infinite weirdness that was the 152 mm gun.  Similar gun-on-a-turntable type designs have been successful, and the Armata's main gun isn't dramatically bigger/more powerful than the current generation of 125 mm (it can fire more powerful rounds at higher velocity, just saying it's not like it's now a 140 MM or something with a much larger recoil).

 

 

 

Now if you guys can only do something about that terrible-looking new star  :P

 

Concur.

 

In terms of vehicle camo, uniformity is more important than really blending in these days.  To make a tank legit hard to spot against a peer threat you need to actually throw up some camo nets and use the terrain.  A base color that broadly matches the terrain around it (so green, tan, etc) is enough.  Going the extra mile for something like NATO 3 color looks cool, and certainly doesn't hurt, but it's not like the tank is hiding much more effectively.  On the other hand even if you don't know what an M9 ACE looks like, the fact it's painted the same way as the M2 Bradley you're sitting on helps narrow down who's hardware you're looking at.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if you guys can only do something about that terrible-looking new star :P

 

Honestly, I like the new design. I wasn't a fan of that three color scheme, but they've since corrected it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BlackMoria and panzersaukrautwerfer,

 

The M551 did indeed have a terrible recoil problem, but its primary tank killer wasn't a honking HEAT round but the Shillelagh IR beam rider ATGM, which was launched from the cannon. Here's a M551 Conduct of Fire training vid I found. I have never seen anything like it in terms of the ins and outs of an AFV's armament and demonstration of proper use for each and every system. Clearly on display is the immense recoil force on the vehicle from firing a HEAT shell from the Gun/Launcher. I read in ARMOR magazine many years ago a letter from a former crewman of an M551. According to him, the recoil forces were so great they decollimated the Shillelagh guidance system, killing the missile capability in the process!

 

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler

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...