T-90 Main Battle Tank

Thank you very much for the article.

It is the first time I realized that Russians invented the new Shtora.
We have laughed at the Shtora system for almost 20 years, on the battle field any tank with Shtora turned on basically tells the enemy "I am here, shoot me". So any contry bought Shtora can be regarded cheated by Russians.
However now the situation is totally different with invention of the new Shtora, in that article it mentioned "Now turn on the station before moving to the current modulation mode is just three seconds, then the equipment can operate in combat mode."
This is so good.
It means now T-90A with TSHU-1-7M can turn on Shtora only after discovery of radiation since it just takes 3 seconds in mode change, now this system makes sense.

AttilaA wrote:It's not ERA block, but Shtora modulators.

Those modulators are absent on Azerbaijani T-90S that has the newer TSHU-1-7M (photo below).



Here is an article on TSHU-1-7M.

http://survincity.com/2014/06/tank-station-opto-electronic-countermeasures-tshu_2/

Thanks for the information.

Suddenly:

stated by the Main Agency of Automobiles and Tanks of the Ministry of Defense:

all T-90A will be upgraded to T-90MS level. T-72B3 will also get an upgrade with more armour, new engine and new optics

http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments
http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments

k@llashniKoff wrote:Suddenly:

stated by the Main Agency of Automobiles and Tanks of the Ministry of Defense:

all T-90A will be upgraded to T-90MS level. T-72B3 will also get an upgrade with more armour, new engine and new optics

http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments
http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments

Sounds great so a T-90AM finally.

k@llashniKoff wrote:
all T-90A will be upgraded to T-90MS level.

cool, hope they include elements of T-14 too. the new gun for the T-14 is a good start, with modern ammo it should put it on equal footing as T-14 against the best western tanks, that is to say it can actually kill them reliably now, now unlike before the T-14 where both sides could only penetrate each other's armor in their weakspots. and, since T-90MS already has a turret bustle ammo storage, just turn it into a full on straight ram turret autoloader like the K-2's, Leclerc's and the tank can now hold modern ammo to feed the new gun.

k@llashniKoff wrote:
T-72B3 will also get an upgrade with more armour, new engine and new optics[/b]

please also upgrade the damn FCS. everytime i see it stop to fire i cant help but think: "the 70s called, they want their no firing on the move back". i mean its not that big of an issue if you know what you are doing- ie well trained at gunnery. but the problem is the conscript dudes who will get to play with these dont get much time and opportunity to train their gunnery skills as the ones before them so the only way to make up for it is with added sophistication in their equipment. for example, firing on the move and autotracking capabilitie; these two are biggest one of those aids.

k@llashniKoff wrote:Suddenly:

stated by the Main Agency of Automobiles and Tanks of the Ministry of Defense:

all T-90A will be upgraded to T-90MS level. T-72B3 will also get an upgrade with more armour, new engine and new optics

http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments
http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments

The translation of the word "park" usually designates those in storage which are about 200 T-90. Never the less, good news and would be nice if all T-90's got upgraded.

Following the news about MOD apparently confirming the upgrade of legacy T-90 to MS-like standard, here it is, T-90M Proryv-3!


http://gurkhan.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/90-3.html

It might be called T-90M 'Proriv' (Breakthrough) instead of T-90AM...but good news....there were hints about it since the start of the year

Do think new turret ?

K5 to relikt good

Book. wrote:Do think new turret ?

K5 to relikt good

It looks like the standard welded turret, just with the overlayed ERA.

lease also upgrade the damn FCS. everytime i see it stop to fire i cant help but think: "the 70s called, they want their no firing on the move back". i mean its not that big of an issue if you know what you are doing- ie well trained at gunnery. but the problem is the conscript dudes who will get to play with these dont get much time and opportunity to train their gunnery skills as the ones before them so the only way to make up for it is with added sophistication in their equipment. for example, firing on the move and autotracking capabilitie; these two are biggest one of those aids.

Actually it might sound very strange but most modern FCS can hit moving targets, but actually stopping while someone is firing at you is the best way to make them miss...

If you fire at a target from say 2km you will lead a moving target... if it stops the second you fire then your round will hit the ground in front of them...if you wait until they stop and then fire you might get a hit unless they drive away as you fire and then your round will hit the ground when they were...

GarryB wrote:
Actually it might sound very strange but most modern FCS can hit moving targets, but actually stopping while someone is firing at you is the best way to make them miss...

If you fire at a target from say 2km you will lead a moving target... if it stops the second you fire then your round will hit the ground in front of them...if you wait until they stop and then fire you might get a hit unless they drive away as you fire and then your round will hit the ground when they were...

clever, but ill just program my autotracker to tighten the lead on you tank, to compensate for you hitting the brakes or slamming the wheel.

clever, but ill just program my autotracker to tighten the lead on you tank, to compensate for you hitting the brakes or slamming the wheel.

If you reduce your lead that just means when I accelerate harder you will miss...

If I am constantly changing speed and direction then the autotracker is no better than just a good guess.

It can estimate where I should be if I continue at the same speed in the same direction but it can't account for any changes in either... it wont even allow for a small hill in front of my tank until I start climbing it so if you fire before I get to it your shot will go low and hit the ground...

GarryB wrote:

clever, but ill just program my autotracker to tighten the lead on you tank, to compensate for you hitting the brakes or slamming the wheel.

If you reduce your lead that just means when I accelerate harder you will miss...

If I am constantly changing speed and direction then the autotracker is no better than just a good guess.

It can estimate where I should be if I continue at the same speed in the same direction but it can't account for any changes in either... it wont even allow for a small hill in front of my tank until I start climbing it so if you fire before I get to it your shot will go low and hit the ground...

Aggree, sooner or later the driver or automized driver gets input whenever the TIS of commander detects an enemy tank firing at you to give instructions to stop, slow down, speed up or change directions to avoid getting hit, that would increase the survivability by a big chunk.

GarryB wrote:
If you reduce your lead that just means when I accelerate harder you will miss...

If I am constantly changing speed and direction then the autotracker is no better than just a good guess.

It can estimate where I should be if I continue at the same speed in the same direction but it can't account for any changes in either... it wont even allow for a small hill in front of my tank until I start climbing it so if you fire before I get to it your shot will go low and hit the ground...

but how will your system know i am shooting short? APS radars can only prosecute projectiles and missiles at most 100m and they are the best tool to measure the target's speed and direction. so prolly an optics based sensor that can only recognize the massive flash and know if its directed at the tank but not see the projectile itself until much later when its closer(since its a very small target and theres lot of visual clutter around it).

not to mention a tank's kinematics is a known quantity. i know it wont jump, sidestep or do a cobra in front of me and that it can only follow a preprogrammed logic for its dodging routine. logic that tends to favor certain actions more than others like lets say if the system detects incoming at 12 o clock it wont slam the brakes or if its incoming at 3 or 9 o clock it would do just the opposite. and that decision making is influenced by couple factors like the projectile's speed and direction(only a rough guess tho.), the tank's kinematics and the terrain. now if i know all 3(terrain is the only tricky bit but newer thermals show contours pretty well) i could pretty much make shots of high probability taking into account attempts to dodge but yes even so they still only are guesses.

then there is the lag- electronic systems dont take much time at all do their job but the mechanical systems would take quite a lot more than hundreds of microseconds. behold quite possibly the most agile tank of current times:

collegeboy16 wrote:

GarryB wrote:
If you reduce your lead that just means when I accelerate harder you will miss...

If I am constantly changing speed and direction then the autotracker is no better than just a good guess.

It can estimate where I should be if I continue at the same speed in the same direction but it can't account for any changes in either... it wont even allow for a small hill in front of my tank until I start climbing it so if you fire before I get to it your shot will go low and hit the ground...

but how will your system know i am shooting short? APS radars can only prosecute projectiles and missiles at most 100m and they are the best tool to measure the target's speed and direction. so prolly an optics based sensor that can only recognize the massive flash and know if its directed at the tank but not see the projectile itself until much later when its closer(since its a very small target and theres lot of visual clutter around it).

not to mention a tank's kinematics is a known quantity. i know it wont jump, sidestep or do a cobra in front of me and that it can only follow a preprogrammed logic for its dodging routine. logic that tends to favor certain actions more than others like lets say if the system detects incoming at 12 o clock it wont slam the brakes or if its incoming at 3 or 9 o clock it would do just the opposite. and that decision making is influenced by couple factors like the projectile's speed and direction(only a rough guess tho.), the tank's kinematics and the terrain. now if i know all 3(terrain is the only tricky bit but newer thermals show contours pretty well) i could pretty much make shots of high probability taking into account attempts to dodge but yes even so they still only are guesses.

then there is the lag- electronic systems dont take much time at all do their job but the mechanical systems would take quite a lot more than hundreds of microseconds. behold quite possibly the most agile tank of current times:

That is obvious i thought, the enemy will always try to hit you, if you drive forward he will of course aim ahead and that is handled by FCS, he will not purposely try to aim short, that makes no sense, even with dispersions ammunition and guns have or a non perfect FCS you still boost your chances of not being hit by responding with a break when you see your opponents tank firing a shell.

Werewolf wrote:
That is obvious i thought, the enemy will always try to hit you, if you drive forward he will of course aim ahead and that is handled by FCS, he will not purposely try to aim short, that makes no sense, even with dispersions ammunition and guns have or a non perfect FCS you still boost your chances of not being hit by responding with a break when you see your opponents tank firing a shell.

the FCS will only aim short if its dealing with a target capable of dodging, and if it deems its most likely that said target will hit the brakes. otherwise its back to normal aiming. and, its important to note that whatever reaction the target makes, its effectively committed to it. even if your detection system can track the incoming projectile all the way from the muzzle (likely not) the relatively high lag systems like the transmission and brakes wont be able to catch up, see the type 10 vid.

k@llashniKoff wrote:Suddenly:

stated by the Main Agency of Automobiles and Tanks of the Ministry of Defense:

all T-90A will be upgraded to T-90MS level. T-72B3 will also get an upgrade with more armour, new engine and new optics

http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments
http://twower.livejournal.com/1697192.html#comments

this upgrade should compliment the T-14s quite nicely plus extending their lifespan

You are talking about tank duels. It could happen in Eastern Ukraine. But in war You will drive in formation or either be in defensive position. And tank on tank battles would be damn hard to find, thanks to standoff weapons Russia posses.

So...all of the T-90A's in Russian service will be upgraded to this standard? I figured it would be a few hundred of them. 

It is possible the T-72 upgrade will include FCS-improvements, especially when the details aren't all out yet.

 - To prove my point, the turret of the "T-90C" (aka T-72B3 upgraded to T-90 standards) looks different than that of the standard one, in terms of sights. 


It could just be me, but this looks less B3 and more T-90AM.

Regular wrote:You are talking about tank duels. It could happen in Eastern Ukraine. But in war You will drive in formation or either be in defensive position. And tank on tank battles would be damn hard to find, thanks to standoff weapons Russia posses.

those standoff weapons(airpower delivered, rocket arty, rocket assisted gun arty) are only efficient if used against concentrations of enemy forces. and what better way is there to herd the sheep to the slaughter but with your own tanks, and that means tank duels.

but how will your system know i am shooting short?

It doesn't need to... when firing at a moving target you allow a lead to compensate for the distance the target will travel between the time you fire and the time your projectile impacts the target area.

If you continue to move in the same direction and at the same speed then odds are a decent FCS will get a good hit.

If you detect the threat firing... ie detect the muzzle flash on FLIR then a near instant application of the brakes or accelerator and a small turn could reduce the chances of a hit dramatically... if you have modified your FCS to fire short then if I slam on the brakes you still might hit me, but if I accelerate even harder you might miss me completely.

All I might have time for is to turn towards the muzzle flash so you have to penetrate my frontal armour instead of getting to try to penetrate my side armour...

APS radars can only prosecute projectiles and missiles at most 100m and they are the best tool to measure the target's speed and direction. so prolly an optics based sensor that can only recognize the massive flash and know if its directed at the tank but not see the projectile itself until much later when its closer(since its a very small target and theres lot of visual clutter around it).

the radar on the armata could have a range of something like 10km and will likely be used for all sorts of data collection purposes... the IR sensors will detect the muzzle flash when the round is fired... you don't need to precisely track the projectile to turn the heaviest armour on the tank towards the muzzle flash...

i could pretty much make shots of high probability taking into account attempts to dodge but yes even so they still only are guesses.

If you are tracking your target accurately then there will only be one predicted aim point... if you want to start allowing for potential evasive manouvers then your aiming box will become enormous and the probability of a hit will greatly reduce... not increase... unless you can guide the round you are firing after firing.

It could just be me, but this looks less B3 and more T-90AM.

Looks like a manually controlled roof MG.

A lot more than just a MG, Garry...

This is a B3...the differences seem to pop out for me IMHO. I'll edit the T-90C "picture" to show what I mean.


I am kind of clueless to the name and purposes of each individual system, so forgive me in advance. 

1: Completely new addition, maybe some kind of commanders sight? 
2: New copula with presumably new sights. 
3: Updated sight of some kind...B3 had a similar one, but they are different in appearance 
4: Really small sight, not found on the B3. Probably related to the copula. 
5: Sosna-U, just in a different "mount".

Mike E wrote:
This is a B3...the differences seem to pop out for me IMHO. I'll edit the T-90C "picture" to show what I mean.


I am kind of clueless to the name and purposes of each individual system, so forgive me in advance. 

1: Completely new addition, maybe some kind of commanders sight? 
2: New copula with presumably new sights. 
3: Updated sight of some kind...B3 had a similar one, but they are different in appearance 
4: Really small sight, not found on the B3. Probably related to the copula. 
5: Sosna-U, just in a different "mount".

There's no "sight" on that cupola.

1. Is "Hawkeye" TIS/TCS.
2. Is actually a lighter cupola lifted from the heavier one used on the SM/MS. It's not really groundbreaking and personally would have liked for them to retain the old HMG-sight instead of the cupola, but whatevs. On the T90SM/MS it has an armored bulkhead. Here it looks lighter.
3. Is Sosna-U.
4. Is a simple persicope for the gunner.
5. Is the Gunner's secondary sight.

The Proriv-2 turret is here stripped of it's T05BV-1 and instead the machine-gunner(the PKM-B is mounted on the TC cupola) is either given a chance to go IDF and expose itself, or there's a rail on the cupola a la WW2 Panzers and it is remotely controlled. I personally doubt it as the articulated PKM-B style mount means the TC will have to go Gush Katif on the ennemy.