[Official] Armata Discussion thread #3

Werewolf wrote:

With english subtitles.

Shows autonomic target tracking without crew onboard, firing of training HEAT rounds of the footage that we have seen but without the secrecy and few other things mentioned.


This is the full documentary without english subtitles, you will have to use CC audio identification subtitles which actually suck.

Mother of god... the FCS is amazing.

Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

Mike E wrote:Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

The Thermals will be always lacking, because they probably will rely more and more on radar-based solutions. There's been a rumour about trend in the IDF to have the new guys use the tracking radar of the Trophy to check for movement. This off course for rather short ranges. I can see the Russians wanting to have that "silent capability" too. Off course there would have to be new models for radar pattern reckon and the tanks will heat up and ring like hell.

Mike E wrote:Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither the K-2 nor the Type-10 have 360 degree sensor coverage like the T-14 does.

Zivo wrote:

Mike E wrote:Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither the K-2 nor the Type-10 have 360 degree sensor coverage like the T-14 does.

Type 10 has 360 degree sensor coverage, day night optronics and also its probably the most sophistacted in the world atm when its about data fusion and battle managament system integration. Its slaved to JGSDF network and has Command, Control, Communication, Computer & Intelligence capabilities on its own so it shares data with basically every platform slaved to the system on the battlefield.

Here you can read abit more: http://www.mod.go.jp/e/jdf/no33/column.html and http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/mbt-x.htm

What has been seen and what therefor is assumed is that there is no other tank with sensor fusion as Armata, not to mention that there are no more than 3 tanks with more than one type of sensors.

Not just sensor fusion for passive/reactive and active counter measures but for offensive and optronic means.

Militarov wrote:

Zivo wrote:

Mike E wrote:Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither the K-2 nor the Type-10 have 360 degree sensor coverage like the T-14 does.

Type 10 has 360 degree sensor coverage, day night optronics and also its probably the most sophistacted in the world atm when its about data fusion and battle managament system integration. Its slaved to JGSDF network and has Command, Control, Communication, Computer & Intelligence capabilities on its own so it shares data with basically every platform slaved to the system on the battlefield.

Here you can read abit more: http://www.mod.go.jp/e/jdf/no33/column.html and http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/mbt-x.htm

Does the Type 10 have radar? None of the sensors look like arrays to me and I cant find anything about it in writing. It just looks like the same panoramic cameras that are on a few other MBT samples.

Because it has no radars it has only Shtora like LWR.

Zivo wrote:

Militarov wrote:

Zivo wrote:

Mike E wrote:Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but neither the K-2 nor the Type-10 have 360 degree sensor coverage like the T-14 does.

Type 10 has 360 degree sensor coverage, day night optronics and also its probably the most sophistacted in the world atm when its about data fusion and battle managament system integration. Its slaved to JGSDF network and has Command, Control, Communication, Computer & Intelligence capabilities on its own so it shares data with basically every platform slaved to the system on the battlefield.

Here you can read abit more: http://www.mod.go.jp/e/jdf/no33/column.html and http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/mbt-x.htm

Does the Type 10 have radar? None of the sensors look like arrays to me and I cant find anything about it in writing. It just looks like the same panoramic cameras that are on a few other MBT samples.

From what we know atm it does not have own radar, however data from artillery radars and UAVs that have radars can be fed to its BMS. Tho i expect it to get some kind of APS that will feature radar most likely, current model does not have it, if i had to bet it might be based on South Korean systems that is being developed for K2.

Militarov wrote:Yeah infantry telephone was not considered as required when M1 entered service, it was added later i assume after first Gulf War, and later in Second war in Iraq and then it became standard in this TUSK update, but still majority of M1A1/2s lack telephone.

You are welcome.

How many years after the Gulf war was the telephone introduced into the Abrams? I wonder why it took them so long to make it standard. They probably had those ungodly delays because of the way the Pentagon and the greedy military industrial complex operate. These are the same people that thought that the Bradley's replacement should be as heavy as 84 tons.

Garry B wrote:
But the point is that it will be all new and completely unrelated and not compatible with existing 152mm calibre ammo. Of course it could be that a self guiding missile could have been developed for both guns as the large calibre would allow lots of internal space for a decent fire and forget guidance system with top attack and a significant shaped charge warhead or warheads that would be useful for both MBTs and self propelled artillery.
Equally the HE shells could be unified, but assuming Armata uses something like ANIET then a HE round with a tail fuse rather than a nose mounted fuse with lots of fragments designed to be delivered forward and sideways would be ideal for a tank but not so for artillery where a nose fuse and side fragments are more effective.

Sticking with the 152mm would certainly be wise on all counts, especially when one considers the time and money that Russia must have expended on developing this gun. I've never heard of a tail fuse but it sounds deliciously destructive.

Garry B wrote:

Knowing (Thinking) they are a force for good in the world helps them sleep at night... it is just sad that they don't care for the truth, they are living The American Dream... so sad they are in the matrix and don't want to wake up. That is not pride... it is denial. they would rather be false gods than nobodies... the same as everyone else...

Americans are hilarious - I actually like them, but their ignorance is unbelievable. They don't realise that globalist elites in CFR and such are ruining their country and making them hated the world over.

Werewolf wrote:

With english subtitles.

Shows autonomic target tracking without crew onboard, firing of training HEAT rounds of the footage that we have seen but without the secrecy and few other things mentioned.


This is the full documentary without english subtitles, you will have to use CC audio identification subtitles which actually suck.

Holy shit... now that's a tank for the 21st century. Thanks for this video, Werewolf.

Mike E wrote:Well, it isn't anything extraordinary. The most impressive stuff is of course the autonomy, which is also found in tanks like the K2 and Type-10.

I'm just really hoping the thermal sights are better than rumored.

And what is this rumored thermal issues you speak of?  Armata will more than like end up with Agat and Irbis K which already outperforme that of Catherine FC.

Ugh, issues? Never mentioned that

Going off of current data (found on Paralay I believe) it'll basically match the Catherine-XP in most parameters; x3 magnification, x2 zoom, 20 mK sensitivity (whatever it is), and a 600-ish resolution sensor. That's not bad, but simply put, it isn't up there with the top models. In all honesty, it just needs higher magnification and sensor resolution, which is where it is outperformed (for ex, FLIR gen 2 has a magnification of x25, and resolution of over 900 IIRC, while its' updated version can also output 1080p).

Hopefully it is better than expected, that, or a return to radar-assisted sights?

Mike E wrote:Ugh, issues? Never mentioned that

Going off of current data (found on Paralay I believe) it'll basically match the Catherine-XP in most parameters; x3 magnification, x2 zoom, 20 mK sensitivity (whatever it is), and a 600-ish resolution sensor. That's not bad, but simply put, it isn't up there with the top models. In all honesty, it just needs higher magnification and sensor resolution, which is where it is outperformed (for ex, FLIR gen 2 has a magnification of x25, and resolution of over 900 IIRC, while its' updated version can also output 1080p).

Hopefully it is better than expected, that, or a return to radar-assisted sights?

Let's remember now that the T-14 is a prototype, and that Russian MOD wants to get it in to service as cheap as possible, hence the reason why they went with the less radical 125mm smooth-bore main gun with the option (if deemed necessary) to upgrade to a 152mm smooth-bore main gun (among under future upgrades). At a estimated $3.7 million price tag (half the price of the best foreign analogues of an older generation), which means theirs plenty of 'economic elbow-room' to upgrade the T-14 to a higher standard if deemed necessary. Upgrades which could come in the form of a 152mm main gun, superior thermals, and or potentially DIRCM suite or even photonic based systems of various stripes.

One last thing, if the thermals match the Catherine-XP, then that's what they're probably using. At this point in time the Russian MIC is in a point of transition of radically reducing foreign dependency, and while the the Catherine-XP is tolerated (because they're domestically manufactured under license), it'll take time to replace them with a more advanced domestically made thermals (I estimate no less than 2 years). So in the mean time it's better to train your MBT operators with some thermals compared to training them with older, less capable domestic variants, or even worse, no thermals at all.

Mike E wrote:Ugh, issues? Never mentioned that

Going off of current data (found on Paralay I believe) it'll basically match the Catherine-XP in most parameters; x3 magnification, x2 zoom, 20 mK sensitivity (whatever it is), and a 600-ish resolution sensor. T

I'd expect that mK is sensitivity to temperature differences, in that it can distinguish a deltaT of as little as 20 milli-degrees Kelvins. One degree temperature difference is resolved into 50 levels.

What is important in sights is not the resolution but the wavelength of IR spectrum it can see and how it is processed. It is much higher importance to see further and actually have targets popping up on your 516p monitors rather than having 1080p resolution on a 516p monitor. It does you almost no good to have 1080P resolution when you have such an ununified resolution of military standard monitors. The picture of 1080p can not even be down sampled effeciently to fit that kind of resolution the screen can produce. Meening it is mainly waste and bigger monitors are out of question.

Detection range> target acquisition > target identification > image processing and then resolution comes in not before any of the others. The Armata and even older systems have exact that while no foreign tank besides Merkawa has that. The point is still we have to wait to see MWIR/LWIR or QWIP image processing on ground vehicles, which is good but also highly wasteful due to low ranges and environment they operate in.

Sorry, but that makes no sense.

Who mentioned a 516p (what kind of resolution is that...) monitor?

To see far, you need a high-resolution array, high magnification, and maybe even high output (monitor) resolution (which improves the image when using electronic zoom).

I believe you are talking about digital processing, which isn't exactly an exclusive feature. MS, even the M1A2 use it.

Mike E wrote:Sorry, but that makes no sense.

Who mentioned a 516p (what kind of resolution is that...) monitor?

To see far, you need a high-resolution array, high magnification, and maybe even high output (monitor) resolution (which improves the image when using electronic zoom).

I believe you are talking about digital processing, which isn't exactly an exclusive feature. MS, even the M1A2 use it.

Made a little mistake the resolution for most MFD is 512p (640x512) which are very broad in use in military other resolution do exist aswell but HD is very bad to downsample to fit for such mediocre resolutions to actually improve the image without losing quality in the downsampling process and large MFD's beyond 640 are not in wide use and that comes due the space such MFD's would occupy.

Everything i listed is more important then high resolution cameras which monitors can't even provide pictures for without losing quality in process.



Cameras see and give pictures to commander aswell gunner unless he uses direct optical eye piece connected but still processed via camera. Resolution is provided to commander via monitor and most military monitors are MFD with resolution of 640x512 or similiar ranges of resolutions due the size limitations.

What i am talking about is entirely different than what you have assumed. What your cameras can capture has nothing to do what commander can actually see over a monitor. Optical resolution is not in use other than by gunner and will decrease over time due to moving on to other designs aswell having hard time to ensuring the current and past designs.

"Everything i listed is more important then high resolution cameras which monitors can't even provide pictures for without losing quality in process."

This is your problem, you are assuming the monitors will need to display a lower resolution, which isn't true. For example, the new IFLIR sight will be able to output 1080p to a new 1080p monitor.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Mike E wrote:Ugh, issues? Never mentioned that

Going off of current data (found on Paralay I believe) it'll basically match the Catherine-XP in most parameters; x3 magnification, x2 zoom, 20 mK sensitivity (whatever it is), and a 600-ish resolution sensor. That's not bad, but simply put, it isn't up there with the top models. In all honesty, it just needs higher magnification and sensor resolution, which is where it is outperformed (for ex, FLIR gen 2 has a magnification of x25, and resolution of over 900 IIRC, while its' updated version can also output 1080p).

Hopefully it is better than expected, that, or a return to radar-assisted sights?

Let's remember now that the T-14 is a prototype, and that Russian MOD wants to get it in to service as cheap as possible, hence the reason why they went with the less radical 125mm smooth-bore main gun with the option (if deemed necessary) to upgrade to a 152mm smooth-bore main gun (among under future upgrades). At a estimated $3.7 million price tag (half the price of the best foreign analogues of an older generation), which means theirs plenty of 'economic elbow-room' to upgrade the T-14 to a higher standard if deemed necessary. Upgrades which could come in the form of a 152mm main gun, superior thermals, and or potentially DIRCM suite or even photonic based systems of various stripes.

One last thing, if the thermals match the Catherine-XP, then that's what they're probably using. At this point in time the Russian MIC is in a point of transition of radically reducing foreign dependency, and while the the Catherine-XP is tolerated (because they're domestically manufactured under license), it'll take time to replace them with a more advanced domestically made thermals (I estimate no less than 2 years). So in the mean time it's better to train your MBT operators with some thermals compared to training them with older, less capable domestic variants, or even worse, no thermals at all.

It wont be. The chip is made by Orion which is 100% Russian.

Mike E wrote:"Everything i listed is more important then high resolution cameras which monitors can't even provide pictures for without losing quality in process."

This is your problem, you are assuming the monitors will need to display a lower resolution, which isn't true. For example, the new IFLIR sight will be able to output 1080p to a new 1080p monitor.

That is not an assumption but a simple fact. A simple MFD that has nowhere near the size to display 1080p will never be capable to display 1080p meaning the monitor will have to downsample the resolution to fit its own. It is like playing 4K resolution video game on a 14 inch monitor, not possible to appreciate the 4K.

T-14

First & Only Video of T-14 ARMATA Tank Firing

"Russian Land Forces will get T-14 Armata main battle tanks (MBT) among the newest armaments. The first batch to be fielded following the appropriate acceptance trials will include 32 MBTs (one battalion), according to the Land Forces chief, Colonel General Oleg Salyukov. Several research and development (R&D) works are in progress to create advanced armaments for armored vehicles, including T-14 MBT and T-15 BMP infantry fighting vehicle (IFV), respectively, Kurganets-25 IFV/armoured personnel carrier (APC), Bumerang (Boomerang) IFV/APC. The R&D were scheduled for completion by the next year’s end, Salyukov explained.

"On completion of the acceptance trials, which may last a year or more, a battalion complement of these machines (32 machines of each type) will be acquired for trial operation with the troops undergoing all stages of combat training. Based on results, their final functions and amount of supplies will be defined," the commander added. In 2015, the Land Forces will adopt for service two brigade complements of Iskander-M mobile ballistic missile system, one for the Southern, the second for Eastern Military Districts. Pursuant to a long-term government contract, the troops are to receive two brigade complements every year. To date, four complements have been delivered. A fifth is due to be made available before the end of the current year for a missile unit of the Central Military District.

The Russian Land Forces consider the possibility of acquiring the Terminator-2 combat tank support vehicle. The issue of its further employment would be determined following completion of work on the development of the future concept of the Land Forces, Salyukov said.At the same time, no plans are made for procuring the BTR-90 APC. "Now we are buiyng BTR-82A APCs that includes the latest achievements in armament package, fire control system, protection, mobility, and operability", Salyukov said.



Two independent motor rifle brigades (in Murmansk District and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Territory) will be formed for the Arctic Army Group. "The Arctic troops will be equipped with off-road two-modules transport vehicles, snowmobiles, air-cushion vessels, special purpose armaments and gear. The combat training will be organized taking into account the climatic conditions," the commander added. Before 2020, the Russian Land Forces will get a total of 5,000 new and 6,000 upgraded combat vehicles, and around 14.000 modern trucks. Those would include T-72B3 MBTs that revealed their outstanding capabilities during the tank biathlon and Vostok-2014 (East 2014) exercises, BMP-3 and upgraded BMP-2 IFVs, and BTR-82 APCs, the commander said. He pointed out that "the procurement of BMP-3s is resumed. We are planning to supply the Land Forces with (several) battalion complements next year."

Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/february_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/the_first_batch_of_32_t-14_armata_main_battle_tanks_will_enter_in_service_with_russian_army_10302163.html

"The new Russian T-14 Armata main battle tank (MBT) is equipped with a new-generation ERA armor, according to a source in JSC Tractor Plants. The ERA was developed by NII Stali (a subsidiary of Tractor Plants). "It (the new ERA) can be described as an innovative one. Its specifications exceed those of Contact-1, Contact-5 and Relict", said the source. He didn't provide further details, saying only that the ERA has "no known world analogues". The source said that the new armor's resistance to armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot rounds (APFSDS) was significantly increased in comparison with the older ERA systems. "The high protective characteristics of the new armor aren't provided by the simple increase of explosive mass in its containers", said the source. He pointed out, that the detonation of an ERA container wouldn't damage the electronics and other equipment installed under armor.

"The new ERA can resist to the anti-tank gun shells adopted by the NATO countries, including the state-of-the-art APFSDS DM53 and DM63 developed by Rheinmetall. It also resists to prospective anti-tank guided missiles (ATGM) with high-explosive anti-tank warheads" the source told. T-14 is also equipped with bar-slat armor located at the rear part of the hull. It was also developed by NII Stali, the source told. "It provides the protection from 50-60% of RPG grenades", he said.



Armata is also equipped with metal-ceramic plates as basic armor. Novosibirsk-based enterprise NEVZ-Ceramics has already launched the serial production of such elements, told the head of the company's armored ceramics bureau Andrey Nikitin. "We finished the trials this year, and the elements revealed their declared capability", he said. Nikitin pointed out, that the armor-ceramic plates resistance is in one and half time higher, than of the full-metall ones. According to his words, the new armor plates will be installed not only on T-14 tank, but also on T-15, Kurganets-25 and Bumerang infantry combat vehicles.

The decision to equip the new T-14 Armata with ERA armor seems to be in line with previous tank-developing concept. The first Soviet-designed ERA, namely Contact-1, was introduced in the early 1980s and installed on T-72B. The modern Russian tanks T-72B3, T-80UE-1 and T-90 are equipped with Contact-5 or Relict ERAs. But the installation of them on the armor leave some key areas, for instance, rooftop and driver's hatch, vulnerable to HEAT munitions and ATGMs. T-14 has ERA integrated in its armor construction. This measure significantly increases the Armata's resistance to modern anti-tank weapons."

Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/russian-made_main_battle_tank_t-14_armata_protected_with_new_generation_of_era_armor_10402161.html