Lee_Vincent Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 Russia has a history of breaking the mold in armor tech. They should not be underestimated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee_Vincent Posted February 21, 2015 Author Share Posted February 21, 2015 Note that it also uses metamaterials to bend light around it so it becomes invisible. Hell those things could be anywhere in the May Day parade 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 Russia has a history of breaking the mold in armor tech. They should not be underestimated. Last Russian tank I'd call ground breaking was the T-64. It's been a spell. Sure, we can mock the Russians for their blister but lets remember the US's ability to stay on-time, on-budget and within spec is not exactly sterling either. There's supposedly an *M1A3* out there somewhere that weighs tens tons less than M1A2. Theoretically to be fielded within CMBS timeframe though not so much as a notional drawing of the thing has appeared in public. True, but in no way is the US military claiming it's the be all end all tank that will be in service in less than two years without anyone having actually see it for reals (I believe there was some years ago a "2017" date associated with it, but it's long since slid past that). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freyberg Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015 What was also interesting was that the tank was being designed to be able to operate as a drone, if I read the article correctly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexey K Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 I can guarantee that I'm better than some Russian fanboys, who are living in the dream world like "m829a4 cannot penetrate t90am since t90am have 800mm+ KE defense without ERA" , or "T90am's shells can penetrate M1A2 front armor at any circumstances". "M1A2 are greatly over estimated" . Obviously, some Russian fantasy world lovers believe that their hope can realized beyond the physics. Russian technological inferiority, specially about core science related with chemistry and material science, is the real and main point behind all the Russian weapon vs US weapons discussions. Just simple, Russian technology and science is declining in its quality and quantity, since all smart Russians try to escape their nation, and their economy cannot support such expensive projects. 1960s and 1970s were the good days of Russian science. Let's see, and let's observe how Armata looks like. But if someone expect Armata as an ultimate doomsday weapon which can beat M1A2 SEP v2 and Leo 2A7 like a cake, I will not convinced about that. I don't think that any modern tank can beat any other modern tank like a cake Aslo, I don't think that we will get any reliable source of information about Armata, so everybody is free to imagine anything he likes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Hi, The T14 and T15 the tank and BMP will be in the parade and are real. They are certainly real and too many in the Russian industry have announced they will be there. In fact Russian kit has a very good reputation for doing “what it says on the tin...” as we say in the UK these days . The Russian adds for YouTube clips are just that but the reports in Jane’s and Defence Update are near always flatter. In the sense that the “serous..” claims for their kit prove to correct and honest. I doubt will be anything radical. But if they claim it will stop certain threats, certain models of long-rod penetrator at certain ranges and given tandem HEAT rounds. Plus any new APS will say intercept Javelin.. you will find it does just that. But you need to look for the claims on genuine arms trade sites and sources. Not US think tanks or similar. They as crazed as Russian YouTube adds . It is no big deal. Ignore the exited, fun, YouTube stuff. But as the Israelis have found Russian kit does do what it claims to. If you pop over to Defence Update, an Israelis site to promote their defence industry but does comment on other countries kit, many here would be a bit shocked by how flattering they are about Russian equipment. BTW The Economist Intelligence Unit rates the Russian education system ahead of the the US, Sweden, Israel, Norway and many others. No point arguing with me about it, just Google it and do your own research. Every year they produce a table that tries to take in full range of measures, Pisa is just one, and Russia does OK and is not declining at all. Compared with western countries education wise. I bet we do see it in BS.. ; ). All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Hi, BTW.. I am not being rude, but don’t like political discussion on the net, the pub is for that, too easy to get the tone wrong. So will not respond. The Economist and Financial Times are as hostile to Russia and Putin as Neo-Cons but... they don’t fiddle facts. They are also smart when it comes to collecting and evaluating data. If they rate Russia as number 13 in the world for educational outcomes ahead of most western nations, it likely they are correct. They will have known it would be controversial and double checked. Given they measures they are using. They may be wrong, but the default is that they are not. All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 If it can fight western tanks on equal terms and be javelin proof (new APS)/that will be a success. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 n fact Russian kit has a very good reputation for doing “what it says on the tin...” as we say in the UK these days I'm not really trying to be antagonistic, but I would qualify that with "it does what it says on the tin if you hold it right, and it's not a day ending in "y" or "in the strictest technical sense that labeling a day optic with a decal that says "night sight" does make it technically a night sight, but it doesn't make it a very good one" All the Russian hardware I saw generally did what it was supposed to, just with appalling quality and shoddy worksmanship. Maybe it's better now, but it is the same companies doing it since the stuff I handled was cranked out, so perhaps not. Granted it was mostly infantry gear, but I expected "rugged and simple" not "did something just fall off? I think something just fell off" Also BTW The Economist Intelligence Unit rates the Russian education system ahead of the the US, Sweden, Israel, Norway and many others. No point arguing with me about it, just Google it and do your own research. Every year they produce a table that tries to take in full range of measures, Pisa is just one, and Russia does OK and is not declining at all. Compared with western countries education wise. then BTW.. I am not being rude, but don’t like political discussion on the net, the pub is for that, too easy to get the tone wrong. So will not respond. The Economist and Financial Times are as hostile to Russia and Putin as Neo-Cons but... they don’t fiddle facts. They are also smart when it comes to collecting and evaluating data. If they rate Russia as number 13 in the world for educational outcomes ahead of most western nations, it likely they are correct. They will have known it would be controversial and double checked. Given they measures they are using. They may be wrong, but the default is that they are not. RUSSIA IS SUPERIOR BUT I AM NOT GOING TO BE POLITICAL SO I WILL NOT TALK ABOUT THE FACT THEY ARE SUPERIOR. ALLOW ME TO INSERT SOMETHING ABOUT HOW SMART RUSSIANS ARE INTO A TOPIC ABOUT PUFF THE MAGIC RUSSIAN TANK THAT IS TOTALLY REAL AND MY BEST FRIEND YOU JUST CANT SEE HIM. I like the UN's education index. They're not trying to sell me something Additionally can we just have one Armata thread? It seems to be the pattern that RT publishes how Aramatatata will eat all the American babies from 10 KM while jumping a ditch and someone sees fit to post another thread because we cannot possibly have heard of this tank that is the promised one instead of simply adding to the existing half dozen Armata threads. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pablius Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Given that it will have an active-phased array radar and a crew of two...I conclude Armata is not a tank, it is a plane...we have been fooled all this time! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Hi, Here is another link that I don’t think is a commercial site so should be allowed. http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/ Whatever they come up with will have been filtered through hundreds of mock battle days and runs and compared to the results from the latest T90. So it will be an improvement but we will have to wait and see the details. Two man would be surprise but the basic configuration is very similar to early ’08 concepts. Time will tell. Lots to look forward to for those with our interests. A toy on the block will be fun to gradually ascertain the full specification for . All the best, Kip. PS. panzersaurkrautwerfer “RUSSIA IS SUPERIOR BUT I AM NOT GOING TO BE POLITICAL SO I WILL NOT TALK ABOUT THE FACT THEY ARE SUPERIOR. ALLOW ME TO INSERT SOMETHING ABOUT HOW SMART RUSSIANS ARE INTO A TOPIC ABOUT PUFF THE MAGIC RUSSIAN TANK THAT IS TOTALLY REAL AND MY BEST FRIEND YOU JUST CANT SEE HIM.” What you mean is the US, Germany whatever.. is superior regardless of any evidence in any field from anyone.. .. . Maybe we are just seeing a repeat of the Cold War, to quote the US Army “The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) wrong thread... Edited February 22, 2015 by akd 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 PS. panzersaurkrautwerfer “RUSSIA IS SUPERIOR BUT I AM NOT GOING TO BE POLITICAL SO I WILL NOT TALK ABOUT THE FACT THEY ARE SUPERIOR. ALLOW ME TO INSERT SOMETHING ABOUT HOW SMART RUSSIANS ARE INTO A TOPIC ABOUT PUFF THE MAGIC RUSSIAN TANK THAT IS TOTALLY REAL AND MY BEST FRIEND YOU JUST CANT SEE HIM.” What you mean is the US, Germany whatever.. is superior regardless of any evidence in any field from anyone.. .. . Maybe we are just seeing a repeat of the Cold War, to quote the US Army “The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” No. What I meant is injecting some comment about education systems is functionally irrelevant to the discussion, then claiming to not want to get into a political discussion. Russian life expectancy is lower than American life expectancy thereby American fighter planes are vastly superior, but I don't want to get into a discussion about how much better life is in America effectively etc. Russian hardware isn't "bad" insofar as much as it's "budget." What I've handled that wasn't third party production generally did again, what it was advertised but there's a wide difference between contemporary western and Russian night optics despite them both saying "night vision" on the box. Further a lot of the fit and finish stuff I handled was lacking, in places that really needed a steel retention cable there was a cheap fabric strap. Screws stripped on fairly new pieces of equipment with manual force only. Corners were clearly cut, and this is something that's consistent with other technical intelligence written on Soviet/Russian hardware. Will the Aramata be good? Sure. Maybe. But right now we're going into this discussion with the following facts known for sure: 1. There is a Russian armored vehicle program called Armata. There's a lot more information of a pretty wide range of assumption, claims, and wild guesses, but we do not even know what the vehicle looks like, is armed with, and so forth. Which is why I'm getting tired of hearing about the Armata, because honestly at this point I could just claim that it is armed with dual 152 MM autocannons that fire literal beehive rounds (As in hives full of bees) because there's equal parts evidence that it has a two man crew and radar guidance. My incredulity isn't that Russia can design a threat tank, it's that they'll be able to build it. The thing that killed the previous generation of new Russian designs was economic troubles. Armata was conceived of and designed during good economic times and high oil prices. It's supposed to be produced during some of the worst times the Russian economy has faced, and it's being done in a way that's apparently more or less totally ready for Private Strelok to drive out of the factory several months from now, despite the world at large not knowing anything except for a name, and that honest guys, it exists. Further looking at the performance of the other elements of the recent Russian rearmament programs in terms of the shortfallings of the T-72B, the limited procurement of new rifles and other equipment, and especially the very troubled Russian Air Force efforts, it's clear someone is making some budgetary choices, or things are running out. Does this mean Armata is just another Black Eagle or T-95? Who knows! Either way we'll all know more in a few months. But here's some things we can easily take from this discussion: 1. The Economist's ranking of Russian schools has absolutely nothing to this topic, and it was pointless to bring it up. 2. Armata does not exist in any reasonable way to be included in CMBS in the near future. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thewood1 Posted February 22, 2015 Share Posted February 22, 2015 Hi, Here is another link that I don’t think is a commercial site so should be allowed. http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/ Whatever they come up with will have been filtered through hundreds of mock battle days and runs and compared to the results from the latest T90. So it will be an improvement but we will have to wait and see the details. Two man would be surprise but the basic configuration is very similar to early ’08 concepts. Time will tell. Lots to look forward to for those with our interests. A toy on the block will be fun to gradually ascertain the full specification for . All the best, Kip. PS. panzersaurkrautwerfer “RUSSIA IS SUPERIOR BUT I AM NOT GOING TO BE POLITICAL SO I WILL NOT TALK ABOUT THE FACT THEY ARE SUPERIOR. ALLOW ME TO INSERT SOMETHING ABOUT HOW SMART RUSSIANS ARE INTO A TOPIC ABOUT PUFF THE MAGIC RUSSIAN TANK THAT IS TOTALLY REAL AND MY BEST FRIEND YOU JUST CANT SEE HIM.” What you mean is the US, Germany whatever.. is superior regardless of any evidence in any field from anyone.. .. . Maybe we are just seeing a repeat of the Cold War, to quote the US Army “The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” Hey, what happened? I thought you declared you were out of the conversation? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danzig5 Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I posted this TASS link about the future of the Russian army in the other Armata thread, so in brief the real plans of the Russian army don't involve a lurid fantasy tank but the same vehicles and systems that are in game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 When the economy is so blatatantly rampantly corrupt I find it pretty funny that anyone has any faith at all that the military contracts are gonna be anywhere even close to public statements. Geez c'mon let's all get back to earth and discuss what the Russian military is going to actually be capable of fielding. Considering as long as Russia continues it's aggression in Ukraine, the likelihood of any access to high tech overseas equipment at any scale is going to be a long shot. Russia is going to home grow everything, nah I don't think so. Heck they had to go to France to build a carrier. The great Russian navy, built in France. Face it the economic foundation to do this is sinking fast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wee Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Heck they had to go to France to build a carrier. The great Russian navy, built in France. Nothing new with this one, actually. During 1920s and so, they practically bought their heavy industry and production lines from the west. With gold. Not to forget the optics industry. During the cold war days, Soviet union bought some vessels from Finnish shipyards too. Nothing like carriers, but smaller stuff. And some very specialized stuff too, like the deep sea Mir sub's from the 1980s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_(submersible) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 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. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) One interesting thing I read a short while ago (then lost). Kuwait is not quite as happy as they could be with their BMP-3s and are now giving them a BIG overhaul. A British firm (I believe) is redoing the whole layout, moving the turret to the rear and leaving the middle section for troop transport. The one article I saw included a picture. But a quick Google Search brings up nothing. The reason why I'm mentioning this is there may be a downside to adding everything including the kitchen sink to your armored vehicle.s An IFV with a 100 gun, 30mm autocannon and multiple mmgs sound like a nifty idea until you remember you've still got to squeeze your infantry into it afterward too. One can surmise a battle tank decked out like something out of a Star Wars movie might have a few downsides that aren't so apparent, too. The U,S Britain and France all tried auxiliary autocannons on their tanks at one time or another and soon dropped the idea Edited February 23, 2015 by MikeyD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) panzersaurkrautwerfer, I was in the T-62 they had in the "know the enemy" garden at NTC. Technically, I wasn't supposed to be in it, but what's an excited Threat Analyst presented with real Russian tanks to do? At just over 5'11" I was too tall by a bunch of inches (couldn't close turret hatch while standing), but I'm here to tell you that thing was dangerous. While static. It's full of unradiused square steel bars (as in will cut you) and flanges with sharp corners and ends. I thought about trying to get into the driver's seat but was already dinged up and was also afraid I might get caught by hanging about too long. Clearly, there's a reason for those well padded tanker helmets, but for the tankers' sakes, I hope their coveralls are thick and tough, too. Interestingly, while the Israelis upgunned and reworked their captured T-55s, they did nothing of the kind with the T-62s and happily took as many as they could get. But then, they're Israelis, the Finns of the Middle East! Love your plywoodium! Where does that fall on the Periodic Table? In any event, it should be much cheaper than the Holy Grail of military aerospace--Unobtainium. MikeyD, Fortunately for the Russians, Armata's supposed to be a tank, not an IFV. Theoretically, it could pull off all that weaponry. Using it effectively? Another matter entirely. Might wind up as the high tech version of the T-28 and T-35, though. Lots of weapons and no real way to use them as intended. Regards, John Kettler Edited February 23, 2015 by John Kettler 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stagler Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 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. Yea, we reckoned Burlak turret module upgrade would have been more beneficial and cost effective in the long term. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTR Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 One interesting thing I read a short while ago (then lost). Kuwait is not quite as happy as they could be with their BMP-3s and are now giving them a BIG overhaul. A British firm (I believe) is redoing the whole layout, moving the turret to the rear and leaving the middle section for troop transport. Good idea, let's ship the heaviest part of the vehicle towards the second heaviest part and leave that all in the back . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agusto Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 I love that image. I especially like the gatling gun on the left sidet Looks like the Armarta is going to be in in the CMBS: Total Overkill module, along with the BMPT. I mean, how many barrels has this thing? 1 x 125 to 152 mm main gun, 1 x 30mm chain gun, at least 3 x 7,62 on the gatling gun + an additional 7,62 coaxial MG - this makes 6 barrels in total. History has clearly shown that multi-barrel weapon systems on MBTs are significantly cooler than their single-barrel counterparts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Oh dear, there's that ridiculous artist's-concept image again... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 Oh dear, there's that ridiculous artist's-concept image again... But it looks cool ! Don't tell me you're rejecting a cool pic on the grounds of (ugh !)... facts ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.