[Official] Armata Discussion thread #1

Zivo wrote:

That thing, it looks like it could be a independently elevated autocannon. If the barrel was on the far side of it, it would be just about vertically aligned with the main gun. It kind of looks like the crew accidentally depressed the autocannon while the tarp was still on, pulling it up a bit from its original position.

195 looks less like a prototype and more like a production war machine, I guess it really was ready for service a few years back.

Anyone recall what 195's APS was designated? It couldn't be Afghanistan could it?

  30mm autocannon poking out.

Those are two different Obj 195 prototypes btw- you can see the APS installation differences.

Did not notice the 2A42 earlier.

TR1 wrote:Those are two different Obj 195 prototypes btw- you can see the APS installation differences.

Did not notice the 2A42 earlier.

I think there was two or three Obj 195 prototypes.

Something interesting from Khlopotov's blog...Soviet 1980's project by KB Spetzmash.

They were planning a promising tank on this platform, heavy BMP, a BMPT and missile tank with vertical launchers.

And to quote Gur Khan: you can thank 'Misha' Gorbachev for this not entering service in 1989-1991  



Source: http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2015/03/blog-post_27.html

Well, according to Gur Khan, who is a very biased, often dis-informative source.

See his current rants about Obj 195.

T-95

Cough repost cough .

Hilarious thing is:
https://vk.com/id130255473?z=albums130255473

This retard posted that photo in 2011! No one noticed it till now, and the other secretive 152mm test bed he photographed.

TR1 wrote:Cough repost cough .

Hilarious thing is:
https://vk.com/id130255473?z=albums130255473

This retard posted that photo in 2011! No one noticed it till now, and the other secretive 152mm test bed he photographed.

Well just like the post of the Project 941 WZ-10 Helicopter designed by kamov, no one believed the guy either, but he was an insider.

Stealthflanker wrote: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

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.

two or more rows of vertical carousel AL is what i think it would use. outer row is for projectiles, while the inner row/s is for propellant charges.
if ever they decide to use oversized charges for APFSDS maybe they could also stack two standard charges on top of another, but this would be only for row immediately after outermost.

for fire rate, maybe there is temp. storage in bustle area a la revolver.

Its RT but still its official from Moscow so ...

Not just tanks: Video with Armata-platform heavy APC emerges

The crew of both Armata MBT and APC consists of only two operators and is located in the middle of the vehicles, whereas the powerplant is believed to be positioned in front of them. The crew cell ensures that operators remain safe even if the vehicle’s major armor is pierced.

RT being stupid like always.

Well known that Armata has 3 crew members.
They talked about possible cutting that down to two, in the future.

TR1 wrote:RT being stupid like always.

Well known that Armata has 3 crew members.
They talked about possible cutting that down to two, in the future.

yeah.
Two man tank is possible but.. computer hasn't advanced that far to take role of gunner. Without computer.. workload would be too much for commander.

i commented on that page too :3

Stealthflanker wrote:

TR1 wrote:RT being stupid like always.

Well known that Armata has 3 crew members.
They talked about possible cutting that down to two, in the future.

yeah.
Two man tank is possible but.. computer hasn't advanced that far to take role of gunner. Without computer.. workload would be too much for commander.

i commented on that page too :3

Although it's not a 100% accurate comparison, many video games have MBT's operated by a two man crew, one driving, and one gunning/commanding. In Arma, many players control MBT's from the gunner position vs the commander position as the rolls become redundant.

All the control is digital. If you could drive armata with a mouse and keyboard, you could theoretically operate it as is done in videogames.

Well, the T-90MS and Armata have Okhotnik an image processor system that can scan the battlefield for targets in IR spectrum aswell as form and shape and autotarget and autolockon. This system could take over the commanders role as Hunter Killer based system. So in theory it is possible today but not recommended.

Werewolf wrote:Well, the T-90MS and Armata have Okhotnik an image processor system that can scan the battlefield for targets in IR spectrum aswell as form and shape and autotarget and autolockon. This system could take over the commanders role as Hunter Killer based system. So in theory it is possible today but not recommended.

With the automation, the gunner's importance is rapidly fading.

In the near future, I imagine the commander will wear a helmet mounted 3D video system, and will simply queue up targets. The FCS will deal with the precision details and the commander just has to press the button to fire. Each Armata will have it's own micro UAV to follow it around that will hover a few hundred feet above each vehicle and help mark targets.

Zivo wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Well, the T-90MS and Armata have Okhotnik an image processor system that can scan the battlefield for targets in IR spectrum aswell as form and shape and autotarget and autolockon. This system could take over the commanders role as Hunter Killer based system. So in theory it is possible today but not recommended.

With the automation, the gunner's importance is rapidly fading.

In the near future, I imagine the commander will wear a helmet mounted 3D video system, and will simply queue up targets. The FCS will deal with the precision details and the commander just has to press the button to fire. Each Armata will have it's own micro UAV to follow it around that will hover a few hundred feet above each vehicle and help mark targets.

The T-14 MBT Armata could have a micro helicopter UAV and a all-weather casing/mount with a built in charger located on top of the turret, that opens up when needed to launch the micro helicopter UAV, and the encasement could close to protect the UAV from the elements.

So back on to the topic of Armata's self-defense capabilities: As far as APS goes, Armata will have Afghanistan, and will have a X-band AESA derived from the PAK-FA program (that will likely have 10km range), everyone knows this...however we should also realize that the standardized defense suite for Armata should blur the lines of what a APS should be. For example the standardized Afghanistan APS suite should be most useful in defeating top-attack weapons (EFP's, PGM's), APFSDS's, extreme close-range ATGM ambush attacks, however we can't rule out the possibility that with the help of a BMS assisted X-band AESA radar, a T-14 MBT's 30mm autocannon turret mount, or a T-15 BMPT's Gsh-6-23 autocannon turret mount could potentially defeat long-range man-portable ATGM missiles at a safe distance of 1.5km, 2.5km, or (even with 30mm autocannon) at 3 km range on a open battlefield. Even speaking on the X-band AESA, we can't rule out the possibility that it may retain enough power to be capable enough to jam radio-command guided PGM's or man-portable ground radar...but of course this is all just speculation, and we'll have to just wait for a official confirmation to make sure of these potential capabilities.

if the armata MBT ever gets a 30mm coaxial it will be 2a42, and its not exactly CIWS material with its relatively low fire rate...

i dont worry much about protection- probably the most dangerous would be attack helos but now that even MBTs could have AESA radar and already have top of the line thermals plus multispectral cammo i dare say the hunter just became the hunted.



-------

https://www.russiadefence.net/viewtopic.forum?t=7343