T-90 Main Battle Tank

So, production of Armata will start in 2015. Which tanks will Russian army buy in the mean time or they will wait to 2015?

But like I've said Garry, I don't care if that's what they aimed for I only care for what they have now, that I can measure and gauge it's performance. Because otherwise why don't we use the M829A4 or DM77 for all of our little OpFor chats?

GarryB wrote:

But like I've said Garry, I don't care if that's what they aimed for I only care for what they have now, that I can measure and gauge it's performance. Because otherwise why don't we use the M829A4 or DM77 for all of our little OpFor chats?

First of all I am interested in Russian equipment development and I am not hugely interested in what NATO is actually using in their guns right now.

Second I am interested in what they have in development too because right now there is no threat to Russia that cannot be dealt with using existing resources... including tactical nukes.

The T-90AM will not be being worked on in the hopes that they can match M60 tanks. They will be aiming at a tank that has a reasonable chance of defeating a modern tank like the current and near future projected models of the Abrams.

I am not interested in it so I can say the T-90AM is better than this or that tank, I am interesting in knowing they have a tank that will do its job.

Unfortunately, because of the lack of info on all these "technologies", and not including the unproven nature of them, you can't truthfully say that. Like I've said, solid details only, speculation is irrelevant and even though this is a Russian Defense Forum, it is useless without something to compare it too.

Insight from ovtaga on heavy and support platform -
Its not 100%, however chances are Armata'(heavy platform) is not going to be hybrid-electric driven or using electric transmission. They decided not to risk and use this unproven technology for a frontline machine, instead they opt for a advanced next gen diesel and hydrostatic drive transmission(that is new for Rus.tech)
HOWEVER the intemediate platform is gonna be all-electric for extra power as many radio-electronic, radar, SAM, artllery, C4 variants are planned... It is developed by Uraltransmash

vim
"Uraltransmash makes a unified platform for air defense, artillery, electronic warfare, etc. Choosing an electric power explain the need for generation of a electric power, without any additional power plants. These machines most of the time work to feed the systems, rather than movement. **** said that the SAM people are very satisfied"


Armata according to GUR KHAN(guy from UVZ):

"...controlled suspension with blade dampers, the differential rotation mechanism with the hydrostatic drive, front like a ob.187/195 capsule for the crew of 3 people, external weapon like the 195 but the caliber is 125mm, FCS - symbiosis between developments on the 195 and 90m. H-APCs and H-BMP with front engine and rear hatch. In the variant of APCs armed with 12,7 mm machine gun. BREM - crane as BREM-1M, but with the "right" side, a pile of all sorts of useful tools and adjusted (do something resembling to BREM and logistics all in 1,

Engine - not know yet either 2V12-3 or T series or V-99"

T-90AM, SM, - Gur Khan story -
In the picture a machine that was offered for export to one country. T-90M and T-90AM, it's the same thing.
She has an index 188M - but it applies only to the turret, for now this is not a turret but a UBM (unified fighting module). There is a demonstrator of the tank with this turret, which has no official name yet. Conventionally, personally I coined the name "T-90M." Anyway ... somewhere in the 2004-05 year a proactive R&D "Breakthrough"was conducted, which has two sub-themes: "Advance 1" and "Advance 2. 1 - is an upgrade of the T-90A, 2 - modernization of T-90S. Accordingly here are the roots of "T-90AM" and "T-90SM" (II). Those pictures, which have been seen where the machine with a panoramic view and the open MG turret - it's sketches from 2006. These machines, among other things were offered to Algerians. Then they were issued a passport as a T-90SM. Over time, the design was changing. In particular - APU appeared and much more. I have already said here that since the first show show in the machine has recieved some upgrades. Now it is being issued a new ad passport. But its not ready yet. How it will be called according to it - only God and the MoD knows. Morevor ... now practically guarantee that our MOD won't take the T-90M. No claims to the bad desing of MG turret - there are options to choose from - what customer wishes and what he is willing to pay. If the customer is willing to pay for remote controlled turret - he will get a machine with one, no - will be clasic ZU or even do without it. Just one of the wishes of our MOD was exactly the installation of this MG turret. And this requirement was not yesterday, it was born when they issued RFP for "Burlak" and, accordingly, Tagil, while working on "breakthrough" as an option used it too. Mentioned in an interview a period of 5 months - this is nonsense! Oleg(SIenko - CEO of UVZ) consciously or unconsciously confused some things. In fact, over these 5 months was made a a new chassis for the demo machine, but it is new only by birth, structurally it is a selial T90A chassis.

ammo as per the project was supposed to be on the outside. It remained only a stash on a motor partition as the most secure. In fact, the demonstrator chassis has everything in its place. Regarding the niche - there isn any! There on the butt of a turret hanging out is the armored box with the ammo. designer - Cherepanov NV, right now he is deputy Director. The demo has standard V-92S2 with 1000hp. On the stand is driven V-93. It has previously reported power of 1100 hp. Actually achieved - 1130 -1150hp. (Sienko cautiously called the lower figure). This engine is designed to further modernize the T-90 and can be installed without replacement and changes in the other systems for the T-90S andT-90A to replace 92. When V-93 is ready - turn comes up for the V-99. UBM provides a embedding of 2A46M-5 or2A82. 2A82 - this gun is a high ballistics and muzzle energy higher than the German L-55.

Just a little more and you can stick X-type chelyabisk, there like in 1350 hp?
They 1350 hp draw type for the civilian version, or more precisely as misinformation - really a 2V12-3 has 1500hp.

http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=335&p=27#p84376

Info from GUR KHAN on advanced heavy vehicles engines -

In Russia, there are at least three (3) promising motors of a heavy class with a capacity of 1500-2000 hp. In Ukraine there is no such thing. There is a 6TD-2 in 1200hp. - thats it. We have 2V12-3 - 1500hp (passed state test, less powerful engines in this family are long time in the series), we got XXX-XXX 1800hp. - it is now worked on in Barnaul. There are new T-Series - xxxxxxx with the stated 1500 - 2000hp. - it has recieved all papers and is ready for initial production and is now perfected . Besides we continue series V-2 - V-93 (1100 1150hp) and V-99 (1200 1300hp.)


More- http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=335&p=29#p85761
So the perspective engine situation is better than was known.

Gur Khan wrote (a):

"Strengthening the firepower provided by the introduction of new ammunition, the so-called" long »(L = 740 mm) of BPS. Instead of a shot from the BPS 3VBM17 3BM42 Mango introduces high-power shots 3VBM22 with BPS 3BM59

Lead-1 and 3VBM23 with BPS 3BM60" Lead-2. The use of these weapons gives the increase in armor penetration while increasing the distance of the actual shooting. "(CFV number 10 of 2009) be amended: in GABTUshnyh papers from 2004 for these shots was registered 4ZH63 charge, but in the" open "then the T-90A - already 4ZH96.

Wouldnt L=740mm shorted then similar american rounds ?

UBM provides a embedding of 2A46M-5 or2A82. 2A82 - this gun is a high ballistics and muzzle energy higher than the German L-55.

What is the advantage of hydrostatic drive transmission and what could constitute advanced diesel engine ?

Would a Hybrid Tank be more ambitious thing to do then a proven diesel system ?

Austin wrote:Wouldnt L=740mm shorted then similar american rounds ?

GarryB wrote:

Wouldnt L=740mm shorted then similar american rounds ?

Yes, but the American rounds are not being fired from the German L/55 gun.

The new American rounds are to get similar performance from the L/44 that standard ammo gets from the newer L/55 gun.

Austin wrote:How does the T-90 gun stand up viz a viz German L/55 gun ?

AFAIK, the T-90's gun is 125 mm L/48 while the Leopard 2's gun is 120 mm L/55, which means that respectively their barrel lengths are 6 m and 6.6 m long respectively.

Nope. Modern studies show that DU rounds have more penetrative capability at ranges under 2 km compared to Tungsten rounds.

Clearly, if you paid attention, Austin never mentioned what variant of the T-90 so I assumed baseline.

GarryB wrote:

Nope. Modern studies show that DU rounds have more penetrative capability at ranges under 2 km compared to Tungsten rounds.

It needs to be significantly more effective to warrant the cost of having to spend enormous amounts of money cleaning up the practice ranges.
And in their tests it wasn't.

Clearly, if you paid attention, Austin never mentioned what variant of the T-90 so I assumed baseline.

And did you include the title of the thread in your thought process or his previous question about a comparison of the new gun in the T-90AM with the L55 120mm gun when you made that assumption?