[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

TR1 wrote:lol @ you guys talking about these Armata radars.

You are all going to be very disappointed indeed when you see what he actual radar sight looks like, if it is even adopted.

What's wrong with you? The only guy who believe's that the radar has a 100 km range is 'Vann7' (who's known for his beliefs) virtually everyone else was highly skeptical, I far one still maintain it's '10 km' range but definitely not '100 km' range. How do you come to the conclusion of 'guys' when only 'one' person is advertising it (outside the German idiot who wrote the article, who I already denounced as a imbecile)?

BTW who needs radars on T-14 Armata's to be that powerful anyway? With a BMS as well as powerful Armata command posts they could easily get more powerful radars at their disposal (such as the ones in a S-400 battery for airspace surveillance or Zoopark for ground surveillance) without the cost of fitting one for every Armata vehicle.

Why don’t we see IFVs with 57 mm gun?
I understand the telescopic rounds and the guided rounds are still under development, but until they will be ready, and it might take 10 years, why not to use the AU-220 turret with the 57mm gun?

We can change the turret when the telescopic rounds will be ready, but till than we can use one of the new turrets for the 57mm.

I would take the IFV, take out the dismount soldiers, and fill it with all the weapons and ammunition that we need. The soldiers will ride only on APCs.

In this way we can use this vehicle that I would call it FSV-Fire Support Vehicle, with tanks and with the APC.  This combination called High/Low Mixed Forces.

AJ-47 wrote:Why don’t we see IFVs with 57 mm gun?

Because NATO doesn't have heavy IFV's in service. 30mm can still do the job, at least for a few more years. The new generation of Russian vehicles have drop-in turret upgrades anyways. Give it a few years.

I for one still maintain it's '10 km' range but definitely not '100 km' range.

Assuming they are even being used to detect and track targets, and that the arrays will be similar in size and power to portable ground surveillance radars. I'm guessing 10km against aerial targets, 8km against ground vehicles, and 1km against infantry.

Zivo wrote:

Assuming they are even being used to detect and track targets, and that the arrays will be similar in size and power to portable ground surveillance radars. I'm guessing 10km against aerial targets, 8km against ground vehicles, and 1km against infantry.

There's already Kornet-M systems with their massive 152mm diameter HEAT warheads with a range of 8.5 km which could fire 8 missiles within seconds of each other, in their downgraded export variants (which are being sold to the Gulf Monarchies). You would need at least a 10 km range radar to stand a fighting chance, combined with powerful command posts sharing information between ground surveillance radars like Zoopark-1.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Zivo wrote:

Assuming they are even being used to detect and track targets, and that the arrays will be similar in size and power to portable ground surveillance radars. I'm guessing 10km against aerial targets, 8km against ground vehicles, and 1km against infantry.

There's already Kornet-M systems with their massive 152mm diameter HEAT warheads with a range of 8.5 km which could fire 8 missiles within seconds of each other, in their downgraded export variants (which are being sold to the Gulf Monarchies). You would need at least a 10 km range radar to stand a fighting chance, combined with powerful command posts sharing information between ground surveillance radars like Zoopark-1.

The radar would detect the missile in flight regardless of the range it was launched from.

At 8km of range, all the APS would have to do is pop smoke anyways. I don't see much chance for a gunner to track a tank that far away with a cloud of smoke in the way.

Zivo wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Zivo wrote:

Assuming they are even being used to detect and track targets, and that the arrays will be similar in size and power to portable ground surveillance radars. I'm guessing 10km against aerial targets, 8km against ground vehicles, and 1km against infantry.

There's already Kornet-M systems with their massive 152mm diameter HEAT warheads with a range of 8.5 km which could fire 8 missiles within seconds of each other, in their downgraded export variants (which are being sold to the Gulf Monarchies). You would need at least a 10 km range radar to stand a fighting chance, combined with powerful command posts sharing information between ground surveillance radars like Zoopark-1.

The radar would detect the missile in flight regardless of the range it was launched from.

At 8km of range, all the APS would have to do is pop smoke anyways. I don't see much chance for a gunner to track a tank that far away with a cloud of smoke in the way.

But you have to assume/prepare for the worst, in very windy conditions popping smoke may not be nearly as effective. At 8 km out the aerosol smoke may have already been deployed, but at 2 km out in very windy conditions much of the aerosol may have been dispersed.

Like GarryB says, there's no '1' invincible counter-measure, you need a layered defense in case one or more fail.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Zivo wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Zivo wrote:

Assuming they are even being used to detect and track targets, and that the arrays will be similar in size and power to portable ground surveillance radars. I'm guessing 10km against aerial targets, 8km against ground vehicles, and 1km against infantry.

There's already Kornet-M systems with their massive 152mm diameter HEAT warheads with a range of 8.5 km which could fire 8 missiles within seconds of each other, in their downgraded export variants (which are being sold to the Gulf Monarchies). You would need at least a 10 km range radar to stand a fighting chance, combined with powerful command posts sharing information between ground surveillance radars like Zoopark-1.

The radar would detect the missile in flight regardless of the range it was launched from.

At 8km of range, all the APS would have to do is pop smoke anyways. I don't see much chance for a gunner to track a tank that far away with a cloud of smoke in the way.

But you have to assume/prepare for the worst, in very windy conditions popping smoke may not be nearly as effective. At 8 km out the aerosol smoke may have already been deployed, but at 2 km out in very windy conditions much of the aerosol may have been dispersed.

That's why there's also the hard-kill element.

Zivo wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Zivo wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Zivo wrote:

Assuming they are even being used to detect and track targets, and that the arrays will be similar in size and power to portable ground surveillance radars. I'm guessing 10km against aerial targets, 8km against ground vehicles, and 1km against infantry.

There's already Kornet-M systems with their massive 152mm diameter HEAT warheads with a range of 8.5 km which could fire 8 missiles within seconds of each other, in their downgraded export variants (which are being sold to the Gulf Monarchies). You would need at least a 10 km range radar to stand a fighting chance, combined with powerful command posts sharing information between ground surveillance radars like Zoopark-1.

The radar would detect the missile in flight regardless of the range it was launched from.

At 8km of range, all the APS would have to do is pop smoke anyways. I don't see much chance for a gunner to track a tank that far away with a cloud of smoke in the way.

But you have to assume/prepare for the worst, in very windy conditions popping smoke may not be nearly as effective. At 8 km out the aerosol smoke may have already been deployed, but at 2 km out in very windy conditions much of the aerosol may have been dispersed.

That's why there's also the hard-kill element.

8 rapidly fired missiles will be a problem for any MBT, even the T-14 Armata...

Zivo wrote:

AJ-47 wrote:Why don’t we see IFVs with 57 mm gun?

"Because NATO doesn't have heavy IFV's in service. 30mm can still do the job, at least for a few more years. The new generation of Russian vehicles have drop-in turret upgrades anyways. Give it a few years."

1. The West as several types of IFV/APC in the 30 tons plus, so 30mm round will not penetrate the front armor unless you get very close, and that's not a good idea.

2. The West has 35mm and 40mm guns on some of there APC/IFV, and even the T-15 will have a problem to stand against it.

So better to start now and bring the 57mm to the IFV, learn who it’s work, check who good they are,
and when the time come, and there will be a real need for telescopic round, then we have the units ready to do the change.[/quote]

8 rapidly fired missiles will be a problem for any MBT, even the T-14 Armata...

I thought the Tigr mounted Kornet-EM system had only two channel guidance anyways? Although you could fire multiple missiles, at that distance the missiles might start obstructing each others view back towards the laser.

1. The West as several types of IFV/APC in the 30 tons plus, so 30mm round will not penetrate the front armor unless you get very close, and that's not a good idea.

Which ones are armored to withstand 30mm fire at ranges were their own guns could penetrate Kurganets and the T-15? CV-90 with the 40mm?

2. The West has 35mm and 40mm guns on some of there APC/IFV, and even the T-15 will have a problem to stand against it.

Across the frontal arc it wont.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

But you have to assume/prepare for the worst, in very windy conditions popping smoke may not be nearly as effective. At 8 km out the aerosol smoke may have already been deployed, but at 2 km out in very windy conditions much of the aerosol may have been dispersed.

Like GarryB says, there's no '1' invincible counter-measure, you need a layered defense in case one or more fail.

then pop some more smoke- armatas are designed for maximum combat persistence and would carry a lot more smoke poppers.
right now smoke mortars are mounted outside the turret- with nobody in the turret you could extend the smoke mortars further inside, and mount a lot more smoke grenades inside since they are deeper.
they could also mix the obscurants into the diesel fuel vaporized to make smoke.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

What's wrong with you? The only guy who believe's that the radar has a 100 km range is 'Vann7' (who's known for his beliefs) virtually everyone else was highly skeptical, I far one still maintain it's '10 km' range but definitely not '100 km' range. How do you come to the conclusion of 'guys' when only 'one' person is advertising it (outside the German idiot who wrote the article, who I already denounced as a imbecile)?

BTW who needs radars on T-14 Armata's to be that powerful anyway? With a BMS as well as powerful Armata command posts they could easily get more powerful radars at their disposal (such as the ones in a S-400 battery for airspace surveillance or Zoopark for ground surveillance) without the cost of fitting one for every Armata vehicle.

And whats wrong with you?

Did i ever said armata have 100km range radar?
Go and show me where i said that?

I only said the German magazine said it .. and TR1 told that is   IMPOSSIBLE.
for a tank to have a 100km radar..  

and i told him.. that it COULD be possibly done  (if they really want it) ..doing this and this.. But I never told ,or claimed to know what are Armata specifications are.. how
can anyone do that unless they work in Russia defense Industry building the tanks?

here is a copy paste or what i said.. so you can see you have a misunderstanding problem.

Here is an article about the article that was catched by RT media in spanish.... Smile

http://actualidad.rt.com/actualidad/170784-video-nuevo-tanque-ruso-armata-rival

Basically the article.. apparently the Stern report says..   Armata have nothing that could match it on the world. from its features.. it mention..

- 125mm gun in an unmanned turret and with a crew that is on a armored capsule . (old news this)

-high resolution cameras on the turret and digital operation the whole tank.

- The tank will a radar with 100km range that will be able to track automatically up to 40 projectiles or aerodynamic targets.. (artillery shells ,antitank missiles or low flying planes ?)

-The active defenses of armata can intercept any incoming missile or projectile at up to
1,700 m/s.. that is match 5.0.  Shocked

So basically if the last one is correct..and as good as they claim.. it should be able to intercept
any Rocket artillery ,anti-tank missiles like Javeline or Spikek or Kornet. and or perhaps Sabot tank rounds too.. if it can change the alignment ,even by few inches of any projectile it will make to completely enter in the wrong angle ,failing to either penetrate the tank and or even hit the tank after all. that will be indeed interesting to see.. if they pulled such thing .. It seems as if armata MBT will be a hybrid between a tank and a mini-pantisir air defense.

Did anything there ,looks to you ,that i claimed to know Armata Specs? i only translated the article for ungrateful  people like you understand what they saying. and gave an opinion later how COULD it be possible for a tank to have 100km radars.. if they had the need for it.. using drones or other mobile vehicles supplying the radar information to the tank.  

I agree that 10km or 20km should be enough.. 100km is what the translation of the translation of the german article says.  So i did my job translating it. IF you need a drawing ,with colorful crayons to understand let me know..

Will it be revealed what is the successful  interception chance of the APS?

I'm also far more interested in the ATGM it will carry. Unfortunately with today's proliferation of APSes gun launched ATGMs might become useless due to the necessity for dual launching a missile in order to have any chance of a successful hit.

The radar would detect the missile in flight regardless of the range it was launched from.

At 8km of range, all the APS would have to do is pop smoke anyways. I don't see much chance for a gunner to track a tank that far away with a cloud of smoke in the way.

Well that isn't that easy. Kornet ATGM's are Laser Beam Riders and not Semi-Active Laser Homing missiles. Poping smoke would not break guidance and if the situation is like the vast majority of engagements with ATGM's against tanks, where tanks are just idling like i have seen in every single ATGM engagement video, than the operator has absolutley nothing to do and will still hit the Tank through the smoke since the guidance is facing the Launching Plattform and not the tank (smoke). Tests even in helicopter use have shown Laser Beam Riding missiles have nearly 4 out of 5 Missiles hit tanks that camoflauge themselfs with Smoke screens.

1. The West as several types of IFV/APC in the 30 tons plus, so 30mm round will not penetrate the front armor unless you get very close, and that's not a good idea.

Russia is currently introducing ZUBR-11 30x165mm APFSDS rounds, the prior ZUBR-8 which is still in service has performance of up to 35mm RHAe penetration capability at 500m which is quite astonishing for an APDS round. I don't know how armored the best armored foreign IFV is but i doubt it will have much more than that. I've seen pictures of ScoutSV vehicle actually not thick armor and it also weights up to 42 tones, despite this mass it is less protected than T-55 tank. They are also equipped with ATGM's they will use ATGM's long before they close in with 30mm cannons.

2. The West has 35mm and 40mm guns on some of there APC/IFV, and even the T-15 will have a problem to stand against it.

Non of those rounds would be capable to even damage Armata, not from front and unlikely from side, not with the thick applique armor.

So better to start now and bring the 57mm to the IFV, learn who it’s work, check who good they are,
and when the time come, and there will be a real need for telescopic round, then we have the units ready to do the change.

The 57mm isn't finished yet and they are not in the rush, why waste money now for one kind of turret and rush an unfinished gun on the plattform when there is no hurry but will result only in unnecessary expenses with tight budgets.

I thought the Tigr mounted Kornet-EM system had only two channel guidance anyways? Although you could fire multiple missiles, at that distance the missiles might start obstructing each others view back towards the laser.

You thought right, LBR's have only two guidance channel mode, called Prichal or similiar systems that are used on Shkval targeting systems.

Well that isn't that easy. Kornet ATGM's are Laser Beam Riders and not Semi-Active Laser Homing missiles. Poping smoke would not break guidance and if the situation is like the vast majority of engagements with ATGM's against tanks, where tanks are just idling like i have seen in every single ATGM engagement video, than the operator has absolutley nothing to do and will still hit the Tank through the smoke since the guidance is facing the Launching Plattform and not the tank (smoke). Tests even in helicopter use have shown Laser Beam Riding missiles have nearly 4 out of 5 Missiles hit tanks that camoflauge themselfs with Smoke screens.

The best way to deal with threats is to have a multilayer defense. The first layer is locating targets before they fire, sensors capable of detecting optics, laser warning systems, radar, and other situational awareness aids fit into this layer. Next is reacting to the threat shortly after they fire. This layer includes automatically rotating the turret towards the threat, popping smoke, and using optical countermeasures. The third layer involves the physical interception of the threat. The fourth, ERA, and raw armor.

Grifel round (125mm variant) went into production in 2014 btw.

It matters how you dispose smoke in area. Throwing devices in such calculated area that wind bring in the area were missile will come. Otherwise you could drop all smoke to one side and a part of tank will be exposed. Also would be better to have a smoke machine on tank that pop smoke whit power even against wind.

TR1 wrote:Grifel round (125mm variant) went into production in 2014 btw.

Can you list all tanks that can shoot this round?

VladimirSahin wrote:

TR1 wrote:Grifel round (125mm variant) went into production in 2014 btw.

Can you list all tanks that can shoot this round?

T-14. No others.

^^^^

Thanks, Just read about it in more detail pretty good round from what is speculated about it.

VladimirSahin wrote:Thanks, Just read about it in more detail pretty good round from what is speculated about it.

What Grifel round?

Can you post source for information on that round?

Nothing solid, Read about it on a old article about Armata capabilities from Topwar.ru... Searching in more depth if I do find something will post.

Zivo wrote

1. The West as several types of IFV/APC in the 30 tons plus, so 30mm round will not penetrate the front armor unless you get very close, and that's not a good idea.

Which ones are armored to withstand 30mm fire at ranges were their own guns could penetrate Kurganets and the T-15? CV-90 with the 40mm?

I think the Ascod SV weight 42 ton and it has 40 mm gun with telscopic round, that can penetrate 150mm from 1,500 meter.
But fighting between APC/IFV is less real, there is enough ATGM to do the job. The important roll might be fighting in urban area and there the 57mm will be much better than the 30mm gun.[/quote]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_riding
But here say its inacurate at big distance. Doesnt say anything about countermeasures. I suppose chaff would be a usefull countermeasure. Like chaff used for radar foul. Or any material that reflect radar or laser.