[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

Zivo wrote:
In wartime, the engine control unit could be reset to 1,500 horsepower. Keep in mind, the engine also can exceed 1,500hp for heavier variants like Coalition.

true, they could do just that, but i doubt it. the abrams and leo 2 engines are actually rated much higher - about >2000hp as ive read somewhere
and in the hot and hi and dusty afghan climate a power boost would help them a lot slugging all that weight - but they didnt go for one.

but then again, those were mainly coin ops - a repeat of 8.8.8 "blitzkrieg" which be over in a matter of weeks, if not days, would give incentive for the tankers to unleash the full power of their machines. after all the war would be over before their engines give in due to overuse.

AFAIK the different weight vehicles will have different engine ratings so the lightest models like the APC and the cargo transport model might have the engine derated to 1200hp, but the engine is designed for a future rating of something like 2,400hp, with increases over time with new materials... perhaps that heat resistant aluminium they developed might extend the life of the engine and allow higher power ratings...

AFAIK the Tank model Armata will have a 1,500hp rated engine.

From Twitter



source
https://mobile.twitter.com/mod_russia/media

Strange that not already posted here :
without canvas :
Armata :
http://cs624419.vk.me/v624419498/32f62/z40rxdCZONE.jpg
http://cs624419.vk.me/v624419498/32f6b/3lrI_kB3uHA.jpg

Kurganets :
http://cs624419.vk.me/v624419498/32f72/o9sW7xa3eo0.jpg

+ http://xn--80ahclcogc6ci4h.xn--90anlfbebar6i.xn--p1ai/multimedia/photo/gallery.htm?id=21804@cmsPhotoGallery

archangelski wrote:Strange that not already posted here :
without canvas :
Armata :
http://cs624419.vk.me/v624419498/32f62/z40rxdCZONE.jpg
http://cs624419.vk.me/v624419498/32f6b/3lrI_kB3uHA.jpg

Kurganets :
http://cs624419.vk.me/v624419498/32f72/o9sW7xa3eo0.jpg

+ http://xn--80ahclcogc6ci4h.xn--90anlfbebar6i.xn--p1ai/multimedia/photo/gallery.htm?id=21804@cmsPhotoGallery

.
Well it haven't.

That tank turret looks futuristic as hell, something I expected. Beautiful machine.

Neutrality wrote:That tank turret looks futuristic as hell, something I expected. Beautiful machine.

I find it ugly and not really well made in comperision to what has been shown as the scale model. that scale model looks far better armored, this turret basically has nothing else but spaced NERA tiles like Leopard 2 which are barely effective, ERA is a must.

Well the Armata looks thoroughly conventional, albeit futuristic. I'm disappointed they didn't find a way to make the turret smaller.
And it looks like the 30mm cannon or gattling gun wasn't part of the plan.. perhaps we'll see something like that for the BMPT.

I guess there's no real harm in a turret bustle with extra ammo; especially as the turret is unmanned. Still would have prefered a 30 + ammo instead though.

I'm glad they went with the 12.7mm HMG on APC models as there's no need for anything heavier; but there really could have put 2-3 independently-traversing machine guns at different heights to each other; instead of just one. They could have comfortably fitted them onto one turret.
Also, a grenade launcher coaxial to the HMG wouldn't have added much cost, but considerably expanded the APCs firepower options; 40mm grenades fragmenting in mid-air make for an effective anti-ambush weapon.

The Epoha-lite will do the job, but only due to its ATGMs.
I can't help feeling that the 30mm is inadequate for today's realities and the 45mm or 57mm needs to be made ready ASAP.

From side:

flamming_python wrote:Well the Armata looks thoroughly conventional, albeit futuristic. I'm disappointed they didn't find a way to make the turret smaller.
And it looks like the 30mm cannon or gattling gun wasn't part of the plan.. perhaps we'll see something like that for the BMPT.

I guess there's no real harm in a turret bustle with extra ammo; especially as the turret is unmanned. Still would have prefered a 30 + ammo instead though.

I'm glad they went with just the HMG on APC models; but there really could have put 2-3 independent machine guns on different heights; instead of just one.

Nevertheless the NSVT is too weak to be put on any modern vehicle other than an MRAP or jeep. Why the hell would they do that instead of making a RWS with the equally combat proven and far more powerful KPVT?

Why would the russian army shoot itself in the foot that way?

Even better it would've been to put a low velocity 23mm EGT, something completely feasible given the size of both the bumarang and kurganets.

If it's gonna be a new generation of vehicles for their class, improvements in all fields should be made, armament included.

You might tell me that zany gadgets and automations will counteract the NSVT's lack of firepower but that doesn't adress range and armor piercing capability, something only imprved with a bigger gun.

I pray to god the APC configurations of all the new platforms shown on the parade are just minimum possible armament demonstrators that will not become more than inferior export versions.

Video:

Nevertheless I'm truly excited that the entire vehicles already uncovered. But weren't still supposed to be covered in tarp until Vparade? What made the MD declassify them earlier?

But it's still a bittersweet moment knowing that most of the weapons equpped are weaker than they should've been...

Strapping on more guns should not be a problem. This is just series 1 stuff...

That hole in the left side of the Armata MBT does look pretty incriminating.

As in screaming - 'im just dyin for an autocannon here!'

The exciting thing is that it seems to be a modular add-on. So perhaps an autocannon could be attached, or a gatling gun, array of RPO missiles, MANPAD fitting, or whatever else might be called for.

ebobat wrote:

What's that large hole ? Emplacement for autocannon ?

my god, i was gonna go to sleep but i just had to check for updates. oh well. <grabs tissues>

>is the turret solid- as in that faceting isnt sheet metal?
>where did the smoke GL go?

yeah, i think so too that the hole in the left side is for slotting a mount with either a 30mm or 57/40mm GL.

and the faceting- they really went gaga on the stealth measures. maybe the turret superstructure's outer layer is RAM?</wildspeculation>

I'm interested to know what is the hole on the left side of the turret is? Is that some type of the optic that covered with armour?

collegeboy16 wrote:>where did the smoke GL go?

\

Flyboy77 wrote:I'm interested to know what is the hole on the left side of the turret is? Is that some type of the optic that covered with armour?

Probably thermal exhaust port where you have to fire a space torpedo to destruct it.

Flyboy77 wrote:I'm interested to know what is the hole on the left side of the turret is? Is that some type of the optic that covered with armour?

the hole nearest to the gun is prolly the gunner's sight- the one at the side is prolly for aux. weaponry.

ebobat wrote:

Good first post, just remember to introduce yourself in the 'New Member Introduction' forum.

flamming_python wrote:That hole in the left side of the Armata MBT does look pretty incriminating.

As in screaming - 'im just dyin for an autocannon here!'

The exciting thing is that it seems to be a modular add-on. So perhaps an autocannon could be attached, or a gatling gun, array of RPO missiles, MANPAD fitting, or whatever else might be called for.

Agreed, it has "plug & play" written all over it.

Remember when these things first showed up? None of them had side armor (APCs also). And now they all do.
I have a feeling same will be for guns.


EDIT: That might explain early public "premiere". Not all parts are there yet.