L0ckAndL0ad

Lets talk about APS specifically. So, say, you have to construct new line of vehicles, that are going to be equipped with specific APS by default. And all of them now look like they're made specifically for those setups, especially T-14 and Kurganets. In order to plan how to incorporate such APS into their design, you need to work on APS first. Even the form and size (plus minus) of kill munitions should be decided beforehand. So you need to R&D and test that APS before you're done with vehicles' designs. Compare kill munitions and radars installment & setups, especially on Kurganets, to previous Arena setups. APS equipment form-factor affects vehicle design. When it came to Arena, they've had to change vehicle's design here and there to install the system. With newgen vehicles, they had to think about APS first, so that they won't have to change vehicle's design later. Therefore, even if Afghanit hasn't been fully tested and made 100% complete when installed on the new vehicles, its base sub-systems and the munition should've undergone some preliminary trials on a test stand long, long time ago. Does that sound logical? I agree. Move over, here's what I think. As much as I know how production works, factory will unlikely send equipment for field trials before making preliminary tests on their own. Some components might be missing or even disabled, but those that are there and not disabled should be at least somewhat operational. Otherwise there's no point in mounting and sending them to field trials that should start soon. No, they are not lucky guesses. However, I disagree with quite a few of your statements on what happened/is happening and why, because I think that you're not seeing the full picture, due to being limited in terms of information you've got. But I am not going to discuss these statements here, because this is A/K/B thread, and not a political one. I more or less agree.

The guy in the interview specifically said that there's no AI, and won't be for a while. The only thing he described is the ability to automatically back up 20-50 meters if crew gets KO. But the way he described it could be attributed to future, planned Armata "firmware" that isn't there yet.

I agree with highlighted part. Oh, "faith" again, yeah, right. Did you see that I've said "most of the systems should be more or less operational"? I did not say "everything is fully operational by now". Do you see the difference? Strykers, in your example, were still shipped, for the most part. And even MGS was more or less operational, it just had problems. So again. It is mid 2015 now. From what I've heard in one of the interviews, they might send existing vehicles to field trials this year already. So, I'll ask you again, can we assume that most of the stuff is more or less operational? LOL, yeah, very convenient. Did it? You keep intentionally producing these silly statements on my behalf. And this one right here is aimed to spiral the discussion out of A/K/B topic. So you're intentionally derailing this thread. Is that how it suppose to work? So why is it exactly do you think that re-telling a bunch your predictions changes anything I've said? Looks more like a boasting attempt, trying to turn it into a pissing contest. If you don't have access to a whole bunch of information, your conclusions won't be as accurate as if you had that information, by default. And that accuracy gap depends on the size of that information. And the size of that information is freaking huge. The less pieces of the puzzle you have on your hands, the less finished the picture would be when you've ran out of pieces. Yes, you'd be able to vaguely or even more or less accurately say what is portrayed on that picture, but if you'll try to fill the blank spots with your imagination you'll be prone to failure. And the person with more pieces of puzzle would be able to fill the blanks more accurately. And I've agreed with them. Neither do I.

Not many things go as planned. Doesn't mean everyone should stop making plans. If they want to start full-fledged field trials by 2016 and mass production by 2019 (with 2016-2019 period meant for addressing uncovered issues and teething problems, not just waiting for stuff to get R&D-ed and built), most of the systems should be more or less operational and factory-tested by now. Is that logical to assume? In my opinion, it is. How would you know if I dodge questions then? Paraphrasing can be done differently. I've explained how different, and why your method did not work. Sure, I agree. Except for Ukraine part. Lots of things that you're basing your theories and predictions upon are wrong, in my opinion. Your lack of language and culture understanding alone makes you blind to a whole Mariana Trench of information, that is available to those that do have such understanding. Vague predictions by themself aren't that valuable. Saying that corrupt regimes will collapse eventually is like saying that the sky is blue. If you put it this way, yeah. In Russian, afford means "being able to", "being capable to". Obviously, cutting other budgets, like social spendings means "harm". So in the end, "they are able to do it" is what I wanted to say. No, my positions is that they can do it. While harming other budgets. I think that theoretically they can even avoid harming non-military budgets if they'd substantially optimize military budgets. If they'll stop spending money on an actual war they're doing. You know, theoretically.

Yeah, looks very professional and time consuming, for a fan-made video. One thing is most likely wrong is a mention of coax MG next to the main gun, in the little gap. In the mean time, Khlopotov published T-14 and T-15 specs. My guess is that this info will soon arise on UVZ's main site and he got it first from his contacts there. T-15 is said to have 2+9 seating config (tho 3+8 should sound more logical). MOUT kit for T-14 is mentioned (53 t vs 48t for base model). Multispectral smoke and "Overhead half-sphere protection" are mentioned too. 32+8=40 rounds for T-14 main gun. Sizes are huge, 3.3 and 3.5 meters in height, 9.5 and 10.8 m in length. Looks legit. http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2015/05/blog-post_45.html http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2015/05/15.html

Yeah, If you want to play Arma, I'd suggest to join some big community. Playing organized MP games is a way to go, singleplayer sucks. There's a lot of different Arma communities out there. I was a part of one, so can recommend some others (English-native ones) that we've played against during TvT sessions - ShackTac, United Operations, Task Force Blackjack. But there's plenty others to choose from: http://forums.bistudio.com/forumdisplay.php?90-ARMA-2-amp-OA-SQUADS-AND-FANPAGES http://forums.bistudio.com/forumdisplay.php?168-ARMA-3-SQUADS-AND-FANPAGES A2 or A3? A3 is much superior, but requires better PC.

Interesting vid that shows the level of modern Russian wheeled light armored vehicles. Typhoon family, both K and U, including K 4x4, that does 120 kph on a road. @ 16:30-17:40 - ceramic plate test vs 14.5mm. Similar or identical is used on Boomerang, as I understand.

Yes yes yes! I've totally forgot about it! I just went and read it again and it makes A LOT of sense now! Compared to when I read it the first time, back in a day. In short, it explains that the kill munition would be able to move at speeds of 2-3km/s, be able to defeat APFSDS rounds, and have a kill sector of 120-160 degrees upon explosion. It does say that it's based upon a controllable (in 2 axis) base. I did not get it before I read further. Later it says that the munition has several ignition/exhaust points, which are used to correct movement direction (basically, steer). So "controllable base" is the munition itself, not a Trophy-like controllable, moving pad. So yeah, there's the patent for a steerable munition that is aimed to deal with tank rounds. I correct my previous statement - that's the evidence to suggest that they went Quick-Kill route. And they want it to work against tank rounds, which explains T-14 design.

So, in theory, Afghanit may turn out to be hard-kill top-attack capable, yes? Well, so far I've seen it being able to drive (sometimes with problems) and turn its turret, so it's definitely more than a mockup box at this point. Moreover, APS munitions that we're seeing are in fact inert mockups, because it's a parade, and they don't bring ammo there. Whether or not specific systems are operational, yeah, that's a big and open question. Like I've said in my previous post, ask "yes or no" question next time. Oh, actually, every time I make sarcastic statements that are intentionally false, I construct them in a way that closely follows the logic (or even exact words) of a person that I am talking to. Therefore, if a person won't be able to understand such sarcasm, and suddenly says "I've never said/meant that", I would be able to show his previous words and draw a logical line between them and my sarcastic statement. So far, this tactic never failed me. Your tactic of making silly statements on someone's behalf that cannot be linked with actual words of that person is a road to nowhere, and therefore it did not work on me so far. So, if you want your tactic to work, use my actual words or something similar to what I've said, that follows the logic of what I've said. If you do not understand what my point is, then say so. Or ask "yes or no" questions. Making silly disconnected statements just won't work. Complaining is one thing. And the extent at which it might work to change govt's behavior ranges from country to country. In Russia, complaining might and work on mundane level problems, but definitely not on this kind of level. This is why I said that you obviously do not live in Russia or Ukraine to know people and how it works. Yeah, and those obligations get cut somewhat. And Russian govt can sustain population's discontent with such decisions (because it's a corrupt authoritarian regime). Therefore it can afford their current plan. Well, that's because you don't think that they can afford their current plan. I do think they can (as stated above), therefore I have a higher level of confidence than you.

No, there's no such evidence. You did not answer the question, tho. Why Israel can make a good APS, and Russia can't? R&D costs only once, you just have to invent it and test it. Moreover, they've already done 2 iterations of Drozd, and 2 iterations of Arena. Afghanit is their 5th APS. How many countries have done so much R&D APS-wise so far? I, on the other hand, can explain why Trophy is worse than Quick-Kill-like APS. Oversaturation danger. Trophy is limited by the amount of exploding elements available at the same time on a given sector, and by reload time. Firing 2-3 salvos of 2 missiles each (4-6 total), from a single direction, at the same instant, will most likely destroy the vehicle equipped with Trophy. Quick-Kill like APS can theoretically deal with that, if there's enough munitions present. It would be helluva loud and violent event, but theoretically it can deal with that. So Trophy is a limited concept, and separate available controllable munitions are a much better answer. Also: Helicopter APS. Reminds you anything? http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150224005136/en/Orbital-ATK-Completes-Key-Test-Helicopter-Active#.VWCQjUaEkdU http://defense-update.com/20120427_rafael_develops_rpg_hard_kill_for_helicopters.html#.VWCQpUaEkdU I've never completely dismissed a possibility that their attempts will fail like these did. I was expecting something like Battlestar Galactica footage, where they're jumping right before the missiles hit. Or, CMBS footage with vehicle disappearing from player's view due to FOW, and dodging a strike. I wanted to laugh, but I get the impression that you were not joking. I've stated quite a few times that I did not said or meant anything like what you've attributed to me. Nothing like that, not even close. I did not refuse to show you which part was wrong. ALL of it was wrong. And why the hell should I challenge something I've never actually said? It is your statement that you're unable to back up. At this point, I'm not even sure if you're not doing this intentionally (making silly statements on my behalf that is). If so, you're simply wasting time. Simple "yes or no" questions would've been much more constructive and less time consuming. This is why I've said that there's no direct link, but things might change dramatically if (when) Putin will go away. Or due to more global political reasons. From what I've read in Russian, he was against decreasing social budgets to support military one. This is what he meant by "could not afford". And no, I don't dance around. First thing I did was, I went and read the original statements. Didn't see anything that says "they can't do it. fullstop." and moved on, because what I was already saying about budget cuts in other areas is the way it's happening and that's what the guy was against of. My previous answer still stands. No, I'm saying that they're doing everything to make it go as smooth as possible, and, therefore, have very good chances to succeed. My previous answer still stands.

UVZ posted Armata on their site in "Products" section. http://uvz.ru/product/70/88 http://uvz.ru/product/70/89

Sure, anything is possible. Doesn't mean that some things are more likely to happen than others. Arguments for such possibilities can be subjective and objective. I try to use objective ones. Well, because out of few possibilities, only one will turn out to be true, there's always a room for a debate, in attempt to figure out which one is correct beforehand.

So why Israel can do APS against top attacks, and Russia can't? Bringing up ridiculous claims is always good for a discussion! If you can show us a proof of concept video of teleporting APS (contrary to Quick Kill video), then I'd discuss such possibility. Our previous debate ended by you not wanting to quote my words to compare them with your paraphrasing of my supposed position. One can tie anything with anything in the world, if one wishes. I do not think that there's a direct connection between A/K/B and possible collapse of Russian govt. You do realize that I've specifically said "I did not say "they'll find a way"", right? My impression so far is that increase in absolute values is a correction due to currency exchange rate changes. Yes, I do. The fact that I gave Russia a chance to show me that they can do a fair referendum doesn't mean I don't know our people. LOL, if Russian propaganda says something, doesn't mean it's false. And again, this isn't the place for such discussions. Answering to the half of my argument won't be enough either. Dramatic changes before 2018? May be. Due to politics. Not A/K/B related, but those that can influence them, yes. But it's not a direct link.

Oh no, we'll be really stuck when I'll ask you to quote my exact words where I express such position. Then you'd refuse (you won't be able to, because there's nothing in my words that says anything like that), and you'd switch to another topic. Then we'll be stuck again with you ignoring my direct questions. Anything may or may not happen, that's pretty obvious IMO. Why ridiculous statements again?

I disagree in some parts. First of all, A/K/B are chassis. Platforms for many vehicles. Not all of them should have APS. But, generally, Kurganets, as a chassis, is more suited for one particular APS installment setup. The way T-14 and T-15 APS are installed is quite different and less "generic" than Kurganets setup.

Quite a few pages ago, it was you who said that you don't think there's anything they can't do technology-wise, given enough resources. Do you remember saying that? Now you're changing your statement, yes? I think that the possibility that top-attack may only be countered by soft-kill APS, and not hard-kill, is very high (and to remind you, latest Arena does up to 20 degrees). However, I think that they went for hard-kill top-attack-wise because inertial guidance, when visual is lost, will still most likely guide ATGM to its target, and there may not be time (or means) to move the vehicle away in those split seconds. That's a logical explanation why hard-kill solution is much viable than a soft-kill one. It has nothing to do with my "faith" in Russian engineers. So you say, after not answering my direct questions few times in a row during our previous "discussion". Maybe you did not express, but I thought you did. And what exactly did you expect to hear in return to this answer? "Yes"? I do think it will collapse eventually, but for completely different reasons, that have nothing to do with A/K/B topic. I did not dodge the question. I agreed with the first statement and therefore gave an answer to the next question that came after it. I didn't say "they'll find a way". I said that they're cutting other budgets and optimize/correct existing ones (like changing the priority for Ground Forces and VDV during the latest meeting). That's what currently happening. What impact will it have on the country as a whole is irrelevant to this topic. You do not live in Russia or Ukraine, do you? I did/do, in both. I do know what to expect from my own people better. I say there will be no more coups in Ukraine for now, because nobody in the West will support it. The statement was that they can't sustain that without cutting other budgets. That's what they do, so that military budget won't be affected much, and priority projects specifically. So if there's no change in military budget, and, actually, a shift in focus, in favor of Ground Forces and VDV, at expense of other branches, it's actually for better for A/K/B future, isn't it? I meant that things may change dramatically as Putin goes (if ), in terms of govt's priorities.

Ouch. Them Russians! There's also Shturm (AT-6), Ataka (AT-9) and Vikhr (AT-16). I do accept solid arguments and logic. Please refer back to my previous message addressed to Steve where (at the end) I point out two latest official statements re newgen vehicles and ask whether anything is going to change in that regard. I see no evidence to support the idea that they won't be able to pull off what they've officially stated (more or less, obviously). If you think they can't, please say why they can't. Specifically. As I've said, I agree with their analysis, it was good. And I provided my personal translation of their statement. Word "practically" outlines it all. Let me give you an example. "I wanted Crimea to become a part of Russia again. Putin practically listened to my recommendations and annexed it".

Yeah. Here's my statement. Russians are spending billions on the new vehicles. They've created a new APS for them (or even a combo of various soft and hard kill APS). There's no point to do that unless the new APS is better than previous versions (20 degrees vertical, 1000m/s for latest Arena setup), and unless new vehicles can do their job better than their predecessors. I also think that there's no point in creating a tank that can't "tank", and a whole new APS that can't deal with all modern anti-tank threats. Therefore the only logical explanation I can find is that the new APS is aimed to deal with top-down attacks and probably even tank rounds (at least heavy version). Because radars and some smokescreen launchers look upwards. Because it's possible to create steerable APS munitions. Because APS is all there is that can save T-14's turret from being trashed by a KE strike, or so it seems for many people. How successful are these new vehicles? How faulty their systems? I don't know. I don't even like some of them. But that's the logic that I see behind them. That's what I think they are aiming for, not how good they are. If you can provide better logical explanations for these designs, I'm all ears. If you agree with my statement, then why do we still wasting time on this? I see a lot of concern about poor Russian working class people. How touching. Don't buy it, tho. Russian government is a giant ass, but "the collapse" because of the tanks and "almost identical reasons as Soviet Union"? A-ha-ha-ha-ha. Decrease in other budget areas. Fine-tuning, unification, size decrease of existing nomenclature. Collapse of the whole country because of that? Budget cuts don't create coups. Will budget cuts in Ukraine create another coup? They're practically trashing social spending and salaries now, and are facing default. But this is not really the place to discuss this. There were two official statements so far. One is that there would be ~100 vehicles per type for testing and mass production only after 2019-2020. Second is that they're increasing Ground Forces budget at expense of other Armed Forces branches budgets, and that Putin asks them to start mass production as soon as possible. Is there anything that can change this situation dramatically in the nearest few years? At least not before 2018 (next presidential elections).

Yeah, and if only there was some sort of official statement about procurement numbers in the near future. Like, they came out and said, "we won't start mass production till 2019-2020". Obviously, never happened, right? And for those who want to actually dig the numbers, the old ГПВ-2020 used 14% of the whole military budget on Ground Forces alone (and they are separate from VDV, btw). That number has been increased recently, after Sochi meeting with Putin, regarding procurement.

Don't you dare be reasonable! Can't you see, Russian economy is crumbling to the 90s levels?

You continue to amuse me, Steve. /me says "vid shows that it's possible" Then says Should I even say anything here? So is it already happening, possible or impossible? And what are these repercussions? Never said I see it as vendetta. I do see a certain psychological pattern in some posts around the internet, this forum included, however. And it gets boring. /me yawns

LOL. The video is a proof of concept that shows that it's possible. Afghanit's APS munitions give (me, personally) an impressions that they're following the same route. It's an answer to those who do not understand how it may work. How it actually works, and how good it works, is a completely different question. But NOTHING can nullify the fact that such method of interception is possible. Saying that "if US can't field it, then nobody can" is not an argument. Russians and Israelis are the ones with the most experience on APS so far, and not the US.

Oh, that's actually a very valid point. Because both you and the guy in the article were "just repeating what you thought the guy was saying" and "it's not like it's your own mf thought in the matter". "2300 Armata tanks" is a legendary statement by now, and it's wrong from the beginning, because it's a giant misunderstanding. The actual plan for ГПВ-2020 was to get 2300 new armored vehicles. That includes BTR-82A, upgraded T-72B3s, and even upgraded BTR-80->BTR-82AM. From what I've seen so far, people who scream "OMG Russian economy is crumbling!", just want to "see the bad guys fail" (a widespread psychological desire), and don't really want to look at the actual facts and numbers, which is imperative for doing an actual economical analysis. You don't know Russian, do you? I've read both the original report and CAST's statement about Putin's acceptance. It's nothing more than a PR attempt. The outcome of the Sochi meeting about procurement did fall in line with their report's suggestion and they did not want to miss such PR opportunity to come out and say, and I quote, "Therefore, we can state that Russian higher authorities have practically listened to our recommendations". Practically. They are commercial organization. Saying that Putin himself agrees with their suggestions/reports is a PR move. Doesn't mean their report is wrong, no, I do agree with it very much. Especially the part about plane and heli procurement. Arrogance is so arrogant this time of year.

For those who forgot or missed the video that shows how Quick Kill works, and those who does not understand why AKD's question was rhetorical:

/me opens up article /me sees "2300 Armata tanks by 2020" /me closes article "Daddy, you're not even trying!" LOL. So CAST says, to make themselves look cool. Reality? Not sure if he even knows about their existence. Tho their latest report seemed good, I'm not sure how much people "at the top" actually notice them. They did create a lot of fuzz by bashing Navy procurement, that's for sure.