[Official] Armata Discussion thread #2

Cyberspec wrote:You guys should be grateful they showed them publicly this year thanks to this important anniversary. Otherwise we probably wouldn't see them for another year or two...

Totally agree with this. Man, some of you guys got unbelievably worked up. This beast is a long way off from production. The sheet metal of the outer turret may simply be a placeholder for more durable material. Whatever the case, the final machine will be solid. I believe that. The people designing these things aren't dummies, and much testing and modification is yet to come.

BKP wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:You guys should be grateful they showed them publicly this year thanks to this important anniversary. Otherwise we probably wouldn't see them for another year or two...

Totally agree with this. Man, some of you guys got unbelievably worked up. This beast is a long way off from production. The sheet metal of the outer turret may simply be a placeholder for more durable material. Whatever the case, the final machine will be solid. I believe that. The people designing these things aren't dummies, and much testing and modification is yet to come.

I keep telling people that Armata, Kurganets, Boomerang are still prototypes...but no one is willing to listen. Of all the brand new modular vehicle platforms, Typhoon-K/U are the most mature, easily several years ahead of the formerly mentioned vehicle platforms.

Vann7 wrote:Maybe the core internal turret is invulnerable.. but the thin metal sheet stealthy box in the outside ,is actually very weak ,bases on photos and close shots ,that shows the stealth hat ,is a thin steel sheet cover.so a single hit by any tank shell will completely wipe at very least all the optics and sensors and leave the turret on its bones.
Losing all its APS capabilities. I hope they add more real armor to protect even the outher stealth cover of the turret and its sensors.. ideally make it completely solid and dense the whole stealth cover.
Because doesn't look like the thin outside stealth skin on the turret,
and its sensors/optics will survive either 30mm gun fire or a simple grenade explosive ,tearing away stealth cover ,with the attached optics and sensors .   Hopefully the final tank will have more real armor on the turret and make more solid the turret for protection of the sensors and optics and piece of mind.

No no no no no.... That is the against the whole point Vann...

An incoming round will either hit overwhelming armor (of the actual turret) or nothing at all, and will pass right through. Because the rounds are almost certainly going to be KE or HEAT, the actual penetration will be extremely slim, and will most likely cause no damage to any sensors. Even if it does, it would probably be one at a time. I assume they'd be extremely easy to replace too.

And like any tank... You can't bury the sensors in armor, they need to be external. If say the turret was hit by a HE shell, it would destroy most of the sensors, *but the same is true for almost every other tank*. 

The idea behind this turret is truely innovative and impressing.

BKP wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:You guys should be grateful they showed them publicly this year thanks to this important anniversary. Otherwise we probably wouldn't see them for another year or two...

Totally agree with this. Man, some of you guys got unbelievably worked up. This beast is a long way off from production. The sheet metal of the outer turret may simply be a placeholder for more durable material. Whatever the case, the final machine will be solid. I believe that. The people designing these things aren't dummies, and much testing and modification is yet to come.

^This, very much this.

The utter storm of criticism the Armata is receiving (the T-14 in particular, and I'm not just talking the opposition) is embarrassingly silly.

1.) This is not the final production version. This one sentence takes all your speculation about the turret and takes a giant dump on it. Everything is subject to change.

2.) Tanks have a long history in Russia, essentially shaping the modern MBT of today, they genuinely lead in this field. They won't bungle it, they're not a corrupt Lockheed Martin with the ludicrous funding of the Pentagon.

sumbitch, transformer in my college blew the fck off - missed the parade stream.
anyway, glad there wasnt much fail in it -didnt have to work overtime in ridf on /k/

Mike E wrote:

An incoming round will either hit overwhelming armor (of the actual turret) or nothing at all, and will pass right through. Because the rounds are almost certainly going to be KE or HEAT, the actual penetration will be extremely slim, and will most likely cause no damage to any sensors. Even if it does, it would probably be one at a time. I assume they'd be extremely easy to replace too.

And like any tank... You can't bury the sensors in armor, they need to be external. If say the turret was hit by a HE shell, it would destroy most of the sensors, *but the same is true for almost every other tank*. 

The idea behind this turret is truely innovative and impressing.

yeah, ironically those would have the best chance for inflicting a f-kill on t-14s. good thing the hardkill afghanit interceptors are there to blow them out of the way.

collegeboy16 wrote:sumbitch, transformer in my college blew the fck off - missed the parade stream.
anyway, glad there wasnt much fail in it -didnt have to work overtime in ridf on /k/

Are your sure it wasn't sabotaged by Hotel Moscow?

First attempt.



Armata T-14 & T-15 http://defense-update.com/20150509_t14- … lysis.html

Alex,

I just posted that a few hours ago...

Cyberspec wrote:Alex,

I just posted that a few hours ago...

Ups. My bad. The thread is rolling so fast, I thought I'm still on page 33.

alexZam wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:Alex,

I just posted that a few hours ago...

Ups. My bad. The thread is rolling so fast, I thought I'm still on page 33.

The amount of pics lets the thread grow fast.

Werewolf wrote:

alexZam wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:Alex,
I just posted that a few hours ago...

Ups. My bad. The thread is rolling so fast, I thought I'm still on page 33.

The amount of pics lets the thread grow fast.

Yeah. We been waiting for so long. They most likely roll out one of those Poligon or Voenaya Priemka in a month, so we will have more stuff to learn. Certainly, they will leave all classified stuff out and give a few hint here and there just another to spark more intrigue and cause some serious flood of opinions. Until it that it will be predictably slowing down. My background is in telecommunication, would love to hear those networking smart feature of those machines, BUT they should never reveal it. Just a main principe idea would be enough. If new gen IFV, tanks and APC would be in sync in realtime with each other and combat hq, I would be approving. But there is still a long way to go of furious testing and trials. However, I'm glad they are on a right path.

Possible (IMO likely) arrangement of dynamic armour under the outer panels....as you can see, both the top and sides are covered.



The author of the CGI had posted this before the shape of the T-14 was publicly shown

apparently the developers claim the capsule inside the tank ,cannot be penetrated
by any know Tank Gun in the world..in existence today.which is a really ambitious statement. If thats was true ,then it will mean how much? 1300mm protection in all sides? Or maybe is more like 600mm protection but after a hit on the external Body near the crew.. . that is 800mm +600mm protection. or so?

This could be interesting if true.. because one thing that was not rare in Ukraine to happen..
is that a tank is hit by any anti tank weapon.. and the crew listen the explosion.. they panic
and just leave the tank ,even if it was not penetrated.. no body wants to risk being caught
inside of the tank while being fired anti tank weapons and pressure too much their luck .

But if the capsule is a strong as developers claim ,this could essentially allow the crew to fight
until the last bullet or sabot round was fired first. and the tank no longer could be used to
fight. And even if without bullets or munition they could prefer to use the tank as a bunker and call for help.. really can't wait to see T-14 and T-15 too in action .. how is its defense. and intercepting sabot rounds in the case of the tank.

Vann7 wrote:
apparently the developers claim the capsule inside the tank ,cannot be penetrated
by any know Tank Gun in the world..in existence today.which is a really ambitious statement.  If thats was true ,then it will mean how much? 1300mm protection in all sides?  Or maybe is more like 600mm protection but after a hit on the external Body near the crew.. . that is 800mm +600mm protection. or so?

from the front, that is. the hull sides prolly are only a tiny fraction of the thickness and effectiveness of the frontal hull armor, the hard kill countermeasure is there anyway to pick up the slack.

Vann7 wrote:
This could be interesting if true.. because one thing that was not rare in Ukraine to happen..
is that a tank is hit by any anti tank weapon.. and the crew listen the explosion.. they panic
and just leave the tank ,even if it was not penetrated.. no body wants to risk being caught
inside of the tank while being fired anti tank weapons and pressure too much their luck .

ive read lots of stories about the dismal performance of the ukrainians but this is the first ive heard of such. considering they are hearing explosions inside the tank every time the gun fires i doubt they would be dissuaded by the sound of explosions outside the tank enough to abandon common sense and hightail it on foot, where suddenly explosions come not just with exponentially higher volumes but with free supersonic shrapnel.

now aircraft OTOH...

Vann7 wrote:
But if the capsule is a strong as developers claim ,this could essentially allow the crew to fight
until the last bullet or sabot round was fired first. and the tank no longer could be used to
fight. And even if without bullets or munition they could prefer to use the tank as a bunker and call for help.. really can't wait to see T-14 and T-15 too in action .. how is its defense. and intercepting sabot rounds in the case of the tank.

thats the idea, yes. plus since it can drive backwards no prob. the thick frontal armor is always facing the enemy - historically everything from mounted knights to tanks had problems retreating under enemy fire since they would be shot to sh!t when their backs are turned. something like 3/4 to 90% of casualties in ancient battles were suffered under routs.

collegeboy16 wrote:

Vann7 wrote:
apparently the developers claim the capsule inside the tank ,cannot be penetrated
by any know Tank Gun in the world..in existence today.which is a really ambitious statement.  If thats was true ,then it will mean how much? 1300mm protection in all sides?  Or maybe is more like 600mm protection but after a hit on the external Body near the crew.. . that is 800mm +600mm protection. or so?

from the front, that is.  the hull sides prolly are only a tiny fraction of the thickness and effectiveness of the frontal hull armor, the hard kill countermeasure is there anyway to pick up the slack.

Vann7 wrote:
This could be interesting if true.. because one thing that was not rare in Ukraine to happen..
is that a tank is hit by any anti tank weapon.. and the crew listen the explosion.. they panic
and just leave the tank ,even if it was not penetrated.. no body wants to risk being caught
inside of the tank while being fired anti tank weapons and pressure too much their luck .

ive read lots of stories about the dismal performance of the ukrainians but this is the first ive heard of such. considering they are hearing explosions inside the tank every time the gun fires i doubt they would be dissuaded by the sound of explosions outside the tank enough to abandon common sense and hightail it on foot, where suddenly explosions come not just with exponentially higher volumes but with free supersonic shrapnel.

now aircraft OTOH...

Vann7 wrote:
But if the capsule is a strong as developers claim ,this could essentially allow the crew to fight
until the last bullet or sabot round was fired first. and the tank no longer could be used to
fight. And even if without bullets or munition they could prefer to use the tank as a bunker and call for help.. really can't wait to see T-14 and T-15 too in action .. how is its defense. and intercepting sabot rounds in the case of the tank.

thats the idea, yes. plus since it can drive backwards no prob. the thick frontal armor is always facing the enemy - historically everything from mounted knights to tanks had problems retreating under enemy fire since they would be shot to sh!t when their backs are turned. something like 3/4 to 90% of casualties in ancient battles were suffered under routs.

What would although happen in Ukraine was that the crew would bolt as soon as there would be no more power with the tank. IE when the tank wouldn't be able to move despite the combat compartment being unscathed.

Also knowing that Skiff ATGM's were used, the task of finding and killing the ATGM crews would be drastically altered.

Some variation of how Armata looks without the light hull (not mine)

So I think there is no need for a massive hull like on T-90MS or Leopard-2. The gun and the loader mechanism are well protected with armour and active armour from the top and all the optik and sensors are protected with the light hull from bullets and shrapnel.

k@llashniKoff wrote:Some variation of how Armata looks without the light hull (not mine)

So I think there is no need for a massive hull like on T-90MS or Leopard-2. The gun and the loader mechanism are well protected with armour and active armour from the top and all the optik and sensors are protected with the light hull from bullets and shrapnel.

We already know the lines aren't that clean, but I'm fine with that.

Another attempt for Armata turret

Da_Vinci wrote:Another attempt for Armata turret

Remember to introduce yourself in the member introduction forum...

Something we haven't mentioned so far I believe...the anti-mine system of the Armata

The Armata platform is configured with an active mine countermeasure system, designed to detect or trigger mines ahead of the tank.
The system is mounted on the lower front edge of the vehicle. Photo: vitaly-Kuzmin

I am pretty sure that is the integrated plow, same kind used on T-90.

Ant-mine systems that use jamming to prevent detonation look like metal boxes with dielectric paneling.

I don't think we will be seeing anti-mine systems just yet.

And onother one

The claims on the crew protection capability are interesting.

But I wonder, if the plan is to have a mega level of protection, wouldn't it make sense to have the crew capsule at the rear?

There could then be a protective shield at the front, equipment behind that, and then a final protective shield infront of the crew at the back.

Firebird wrote:The claims on the crew protection capability are interesting.

But I wonder, if the plan is to have a mega level of protection, wouldn't it make sense to have the crew capsule at the rear?

There could then be a protective shield at the front, equipment behind that, and then a final protective shield infront of the crew at the back.

Having the crew in the back makes no sence, You have to much armour in the front and the engine = too much weight in the front, the vehicle is unbalanced

Do the dimensions and the space constraints make it possible to fit a T-14 turret to a T-15 allowing for a similar configuration to the Merkava?