Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
ult wrote:
That should be the IFV variant. looking at the position of drive sprocket..hmm Front mounted engine.
+59
chicken
mutantsushi
Strizh
Kyo
Big_Gazza
victor1985
OminousSpudd
AbsoluteZero
GarryB
kvs
Notio
higurashihougi
sepheronx
George1
Werewolf
Vann7
Cpt Caz
Vympel
volna
fragmachine
acatomic
Sujoy
Mike E
Asf
Cyberspec
mack8
magnumcromagnon
Stealthflanker
zg18
russianumber1
etaepsilonk
a89
NickM
AlfaT8
Regular
Neoprime
AJ-47
gaurav
Deep Throat
Viktor
Morpheus Eberhardt
Hachimoto
xeno
runaway
collegeboy16
Pugnax
Russian Patriot
flamming_python
Shadåw
Dima
KomissarBojanchev
Mindstorm
medo
marcellogo
AZZKIKR
Austin
TheArmenian
TR1
Zivo
63 posters
[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1
Stealthflanker- Posts : 1459
Points : 1535
Join date : 2009-08-04
Age : 36
Location : Indonesia
That should be the IFV variant. looking at the position of drive sprocket..hmm Front mounted engine.
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
That almost looked like automatic mortar 2B1 and not a cannon.
George1- Posts : 18513
Points : 19016
Join date : 2011-12-22
Location : Greece
Werewolf wrote:That almost looked like automatic mortar 2B1 and not a cannon.
maybe it has a like BMPT Terminator armament, not a cannon, but other sort of weaponry as IFV
magnumcromagnon- Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan
Stealthflanker wrote:ult wrote:
That should be the IFV variant. looking at the position of drive sprocket..hmm Front mounted engine.
Plus the steeply sloped frontal hull resembles this speculative configuration of Armata:
![[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 39 0_1129cc_c4f53e05_orig](https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/15510/5684310.46/0_1129cc_c4f53e05_orig.jpg)
![[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 39 0_1129c9_2356a50e_orig](https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/16122/5684310.46/0_1129c9_2356a50e_orig.jpg)
George1- Posts : 18513
Points : 19016
Join date : 2011-12-22
Location : Greece
can u please post the photo at 800x600 scale?
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
Breathing heavily intensifies.
Zivo- Posts : 1487
Points : 1511
Join date : 2012-04-13
Location : U.S.A.
We're so spoiled. 
magnumcromagnon- Posts : 8138
Points : 8273
Join date : 2013-12-05
Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan
George1 wrote:can u please post the photo at 800x600 scale?
How's this?
Zivo- Posts : 1487
Points : 1511
Join date : 2012-04-13
Location : U.S.A.
Right click the image you want to post, then select "view image" or whatever, it'll open a new window. Then right click the rescaled image in the new window and select "view image info", this will open a new window. Under dimensions, this particular image says: "1,500px × 1,125px (scaled to 849px × 637px)"
Go to the forum window, click the "insert an image" button, paste the url, and under width and height, paste the scaled numbers, 849 x 637. That way the image isn't squished and is reduced to a reasonable size. That's how I do it, I'm sure other posters have their own ways. I use Firefox, your browser may be different.
Go to the forum window, click the "insert an image" button, paste the url, and under width and height, paste the scaled numbers, 849 x 637. That way the image isn't squished and is reduced to a reasonable size. That's how I do it, I'm sure other posters have their own ways. I use Firefox, your browser may be different.
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
Plus the steeply sloped frontal hull resembles this speculative configuration of Armata:
Probably extra armor because of the front mounted engine.
What are your guesses...
Will russia be so open and naive to show its new APS on Armata or Kurganetz or will they remove any APS system along with Radar to keep it secret as long as necessary?
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
Werewolf wrote:Will russia be so open and naive to show its new APS on Armata or Kurganetz or will they remove any APS system along with Radar to keep it secret as long as necessary?
Might be already mounted
![[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 39 EF4vK](https://2img.net/h/se.uploads.ru/EF4vK.jpg)
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
Cyberspec wrote:Werewolf wrote:Will russia be so open and naive to show its new APS on Armata or Kurganetz or will they remove any APS system along with Radar to keep it secret as long as necessary?
Might be already mounted
Touché.
Zivo- Posts : 1487
Points : 1511
Join date : 2012-04-13
Location : U.S.A.
What are your guesses...
The engine and transmission placement means the glacis is going to have to be thinner. The Merk IV has the same problem. To compensate, they added a spaced armor module.
Might be already mounted
Two separate units on the same side?
Cyberspec- Posts : 2904
Points : 3057
Join date : 2011-08-08
Location : Terra Australis
Hard to say for sure....the pic is pretty blurry
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
http://s018.radikal.ru/i502/1503/e8/9ffb4aeadb2b.jpg![[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 39 9ffb4aeadb2b](https://2img.net/h/s018.radikal.ru/i502/1503/e8/9ffb4aeadb2b.jpg)
The predecessor.
The predecessor.
flamming_python- Posts : 9516
Points : 9574
Join date : 2012-01-30
TR1 wrote:http://s018.radikal.ru/i502/1503/e8/9ffb4aeadb2b.jpg
The predecessor.
It's the Chinese nuclear tank from C&C: Generals!
All it needs is a second barrel.
Man this thing is just excessive. Now I can see why they cancelled the project.
The current Armata concept is a lot more sensible and cost-effective.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 28
Location : Roanapur
Holy Shieetttt!!!! i come here after a week of school and find this!!! armatas, kurganets and even T-95. mein gott weinachten came early this year!!! one of the three is enough fap material to last me through the holy week but three, om. 
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
I saw most of tanks have their weight concentrated to middle or back. Especially to armata i saw is concentrate to back. How that affect the adherence to road? Most important when reaching a hill. Or close to vertical pieces of road.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 28
Location : Roanapur
Werewolf wrote:
I do believe that this is an entirely different turret and not the MBT turret at all. We know that the chassis are unified, but all people jumped immidiatley to the conclusion that this is T-14 MBT due the 7 road wheels. To me it does not represent the concept. The turret seems rather small for autloader with after turret bustle feeding system. The concept on T-64/80 and T-72/90 was two seperated ammunitions which are made of paper like material that are highly flammable, due this kind of ammunition the entire internal volume had to be reduced, meaning no fuel inside the vehicle, no pipes inside that could catch fire and end fatal for tank and crew. This turret seems tall, but rather shorter than expected and i don't think it houses a horizontal autoloader but a vertical one from the hull of it with seperated ammunition and propellant, from the looks of it, the chassis is larger than T-72/90 which means the fuel is back inside of the chassis which means non seperated ammunition, which probably means hard case ammunition will be used.
That is the reason i doubt that this is T-14 turret.
use of hard cased (and i assume unitary as well) ammo is pathetic step backwards. the current trend is liquid propellant/ ETC guns and i believe next iteration of the 2a82-1m is going to be just that. a brass case would be unnecessary and would even impede performance. besides, there is plenty of room for 32 shells and their propellant especially to have their own fully covered cassette in the AL compartment.
Werewolf- Posts : 5927
Points : 6116
Join date : 2012-10-24
collegeboy16 wrote:Werewolf wrote:
I do believe that this is an entirely different turret and not the MBT turret at all. We know that the chassis are unified, but all people jumped immidiatley to the conclusion that this is T-14 MBT due the 7 road wheels. To me it does not represent the concept. The turret seems rather small for autloader with after turret bustle feeding system. The concept on T-64/80 and T-72/90 was two seperated ammunitions which are made of paper like material that are highly flammable, due this kind of ammunition the entire internal volume had to be reduced, meaning no fuel inside the vehicle, no pipes inside that could catch fire and end fatal for tank and crew. This turret seems tall, but rather shorter than expected and i don't think it houses a horizontal autoloader but a vertical one from the hull of it with seperated ammunition and propellant, from the looks of it, the chassis is larger than T-72/90 which means the fuel is back inside of the chassis which means non seperated ammunition, which probably means hard case ammunition will be used.
That is the reason i doubt that this is T-14 turret.
use of hard cased (and i assume unitary as well) ammo is pathetic step backwards. the current trend is liquid propellant/ ETC guns and i believe next iteration of the 2a82-1m is going to be just that. a brass case would be unnecessary and would even impede performance. besides, there is plenty of room for 32 shells and their propellant especially to have their own fully covered cassette in the AL compartment.
What trend? There is not a single gun on tanks that uses liquid propellants.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 28
Location : Roanapur
i think its opposite- the MBT at least looks to me to be a bit front heavy, what with the the big support devices on the the two front rollers. most MBTs are front heavy anyway- the massive turret and now frontal hull armor would always outweigh the engine at the back. and afaik Merkava 4 which defo takes the cake for front heaviness performs well when going uphill- the extra weight seems to add more traction at the front, making the climb easier.victor1985 wrote:I saw most of tanks have their weight concentrated to middle or back. Especially to armata i saw is concentrate to back. How that affect the adherence to road? Most important when reaching a hill. Or close to vertical pieces of road.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 28
Location : Roanapur
well its definitely on the christmas list for next gen tanks- esp. now this mother just exploded in the net.Werewolf wrote:
What trend? There is not a single gun on tanks that uses liquid propellants.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
In the images i saw the turret of armata is bigger in back and is sloped in front. That gives a extra weight to back. Also notice that the armour of tank is very sloped in front thus less thicker. Normally the ammunition must be placed in front of armata cause the high angled armour gives enough protection. To compensate the weight of engine that is also necesary. Now i do t know how much the autoloader will weight. Also the fuel weights a lot....
Stealthflanker- Posts : 1459
Points : 1535
Join date : 2009-08-04
Age : 36
Location : Indonesia
I'm curious about autoloader layout. Given the longer penetrator length envisaged for Armata or T-95..the T-72 or T-80 carousel may no longer be used so other layout must be used. One option is to use bustle OR carousel autoloader similar as old US M1TTB unmanned turret prototype.
This is M1TTB autoloader layout
![[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1 - Page 39 C3653d6b4f4a3ee94054599f6ad0aee1](https://2img.net/h/i47.fastpic.ru/big/2013/0816/e1/c3653d6b4f4a3ee94054599f6ad0aee1.jpg)
Such layout is efficient as it stores more rounds than T-72 layout and allow around 1.1 meter vertical space for rounds BUT.. the loading sequence somewhat more complex than T-72 or T-80. Might affect fire rate in my view.
This is M1TTB autoloader layout
Such layout is efficient as it stores more rounds than T-72 layout and allow around 1.1 meter vertical space for rounds BUT.. the loading sequence somewhat more complex than T-72 or T-80. Might affect fire rate in my view.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
But what whit a magnetic autoloader? Or like in the pistol whit a spring that push all row of missiles. Also one problem is time of fill the tank whit projectiles. In war time is efficient to have less time between empty munition and fill and go back to fight.