[Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

GarryB wrote:I would expect the Tunguska replacement within an Armata unit will already have a 57mm cannon and all the optics and sensors of all types to find and destroy helos and low flying aircraft... including air burst munitions to take out swarms of UAVs...

The net centricity should allow IFVs and BMPTs to also add weight of fire when the air threat is particularly bad but most of the time they will be looking for threats on the ground.

Yeah, but with a single barrel? I would suggest a 2 barrel configuration both for the AA and the BMPT, simply because these two vehicles would perform critical tasks on the battlefield, and by critical tasks, I mean convoy/sector air defense and the urgent clean-up of any hidden serious threats to tanks. Just think about it Garry, imagine that you are an 57 mm SPAA operator, and you would have to defend an entire tank battalion, and the last thing you would wish is that your single barrel would fail amidst the battle (the loaded round jams/cooks of, or firing mechanism malfunction would disable the gun), similar problem can also happen to a single barrelled BMPT. Plus a single barrel would greatly hinder the effectiveness of the BMPT, since some pew-pew (2-4) from a single gun would only kill an enemy infantry (10-16 soldiers) or dedicated anti-tank squad/detachment, while a 6-8 shot salvo from two guns would be able to wipe out platoon-sized units.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:An artist vision of BMPT-3.... looks like with 57mm gun to me

That is just a T-15 eqiupped with the Baikal-M combat module. It is possible that every new Russian IFV/APC would get it in the future.

One barrel is enough for a MBT... why would it not be enough for a BMPT or SPAAG?

A single barrel gun like a 57mm weapon will have all sorts of failsafes where rounds that fail to fire can be ejected or fired.

30mm cannons have squibs that burn hot jets of molten propellent into the side of cartridge case so if a primer fails the round can still be fired and cycled to load a fresh round.

In an unmanned turret such backup measures are even more important and so a failed round would be extracted and ejected and a fresh round loaded to continue firing.

Having two barrel greatly increases weight and cost with the increase in complication and size and weight for the vehicle... the 57mm gun will have multiple feed options so different rounds can be loaded for different targets... add another gun and that other gun will need multiple feed options too... and for what?

So you can fire 600 rpm instead of 300rpm?

Most of the time the 57mm gun will fire one or two rounds at most targets at a time.

Area targets could be engaged with a short burst of 4-5 rounds but as each shell has the power of a 76mm gun it would not need too many hits to be looking for new targets.

Having air burst rounds means even a swarm of UAVs could be engaged with a few shots of air bursting rounds.

With every air defence vehicle and every IFV with a 57mm gun I don't think there will be a problem if one has a gun malfunction.

Even MBTs with 152mm gun fired missiles will be able to take on air targets, and new SAMs like Morfei and SOSNA-R and TOR and PANTSIR will make airpower extinct near a Russian ground force of the future.

Armata-based Combat Vehicles to be equipped with surveillance drones

According to the Izvestia newspaper a local media, Russia’s advanced combat vehicles based on the Armata platform will be equipped with surveillance Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), which will be scanning the battlefield for dozens of miles around and will give situationnal awareness to the crew.


The UAV called Pterodactyl, developed by the Moscow Aviation Institute (MAI), will be connected to the vehicle through a cable and will be able to operate as long as the vehicle is running. The drone will be equipped with a radar and thermal scope and will have a maximum flight range of 100 meters.

"We are currently carrying out research and development work, and we will hand over the device for tests to the Defense Ministry in a year," Vitaly Poliansky, a research associate at MAI's department of aviation robotic systems, told the media outlet. The drone is expected to move with the same speed as the vehicle, and it will be capable of taking off from the hull of the machine. A tether management system will provide full data protection.

In April, Oleg Sienko, the director of UralVagonZavod, The company manufacturing the Armata platform, had told to RIA Novosti news agency about the possibility of equipping the Armata-based vehicles with surveillance drones.

“It is a necessary element at a tactical level. It is very hard to move forward in the column ‘without eyes,’ that’s why the UAV is provided there and we will be actively introducing it,” Sienko said.

It is not yet known which UAV will be used to fit into the vehicle, but it will certainly be one made in Russia, Sienko said, adding that it is for the Russian Defense Ministry to decide which device to choose as it runs the trials.

“We will install whichever one [the ministry] tells us to. But there will be one for sure,” he said.

The drone is expected to move with the same speed as the vehicle, and it will be capable of taking off from the hull of the machine. A tether management system will provide full data protection.


Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/november_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/armata-based_combat_vehicles_to_be_equipped_with_surveillance_drones_51811163.html

---

Good concept! With a "Takhion" drone, the vehicle would be perfect for artillery reconaissance, or with a "Leer-3" drone for electronic warfare (signal detection and jamming, or with a bit bigger one, for battlefield surveillance, or a drone that can be used as an airborne communications relay/node. The list of possibilities is endless.

Benya wrote:Armata-based Combat Vehicles to be equipped with surveillance drones

According to the Izvestia newspaper a local media, Russia’s advanced combat vehicles based on the Armata platform will be equipped with surveillance Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV), which will be scanning the battlefield for dozens of miles around and will give situationnal awareness to the crew.

The T-14 Armata Main Battle Tank (Photo V. Kuzmin)

The UAV called Pterodactyl, developed by the Moscow Aviation Institute (MAI), will be connected to the vehicle through a cable and will be able to operate as long as the vehicle is running. The drone will be equipped with a radar and thermal scope and will have a maximum flight range of 100 meters.

"We are currently carrying out research and development work, and we will hand over the device for tests to the Defense Ministry in a year," Vitaly Poliansky, a research associate at MAI's department of aviation robotic systems, told the media outlet. The drone is expected to move with the same speed as the vehicle, and it will be capable of taking off from the hull of the machine. A tether management system will provide full data protection.

In April, Oleg Sienko, the director of UralVagonZavod, The company manufacturing the Armata platform, had told to RIA Novosti news agency about the possibility of equipping the Armata-based vehicles with surveillance drones.

“It is a necessary element at a tactical level. It is very hard to move forward in the column ‘without eyes,’ that’s why the UAV is provided there and we will be actively introducing it,” Sienko said.

It is not yet known which UAV will be used to fit into the vehicle, but it will certainly be one made in Russia, Sienko said, adding that it is for the Russian Defense Ministry to decide which device to choose as it runs the trials.

“We will install whichever one [the ministry] tells us to. But there will be one for sure,” he said.

The drone is expected to move with the same speed as the vehicle, and it will be capable of taking off from the hull of the machine. A tether management system will provide full data protection.

The T-15 Armata Infantry Fighting Vehicle (Photo V. Kuzmin)

Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/november_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/armata-based_combat_vehicles_to_be_equipped_with_surveillance_drones_51811163.html

---

Good concept! With a "Takhion" drone, the vehicle would be perfect for artillery reconaissance, or with a "Leer-3" drone for electronic warfare (signal detection and jamming, or with a bit bigger one, for battlefield surveillance, or a drone that can be used as an airborne communications relay/node. The list of possibilities is endless.

I am rather prone to concluding it will be some type of quadcopter or hybrid rather than any of the conventional wing-desiegned UAVs as it will carry cable and will have to land on the hull too.

My first thought was some sort of mini airship for duration at relatively low speeds, but if it is linked to the tank all the time then all electric makes sense as the cable can be for two way data communication and power supply.

Some sort of quad copter would certainly be ideal, though tethering it to the hull might restrict the ability of the turret to turn as the gun would get in the way of the tether.

Perhaps attaching it to the turret top might be more sensible...

BTW the article above about the 57mm gun ammo being used for the IFV versions of Armata and the other vehicle types confirms what I had suspected.

The development of new 30mm ammo for older models and lighter types is interesting as well and can be used on a wide variety of platforms including the new Tigrs with the 30mm cannon turrets.

Making them more flexible and useful.

The drone having a radar and a thermal imager would make it rather useful at 100m above the tank... standard tanks will have the recon capability that current recon vehicles only dream of.

more important in built up areas or areas of forest or hilly areas such a view would be a huge advantage.

More importantly with data sharing you just need to launch one UAV and pass the information on to HQ and other platforms... for the enemy there might be one Armata tank behind that low hill or there might be none... it could be a UAV operating from a Tigr... or there could be a huge number of tanks there just selecting a target to fire upon.

With the Sokol-1 missile using optical guidance the launching tank wont need a direct line of sight to find and hit a target... when they move to a 152mm main gun the space inside the projectile will likely allow MMW radar or IIR guidance which again can be fire and forget for specific targets.

They have integrated laser marking and aiming systems into the fire control systems of their new helos so they can launch laser homing and laser beam riding missiles without modification... if this drone carries radar and thermal optics it should be able to determine the actual location of the targets it detects and therefore GLONASS guidance with optical terminal guidance could be a cheap and simple option.

Benya did not quote the whole article form izvestia. There were a bit more interesting stuff tho:

Name = Pterodactl

scheme = tiltrotor

Compared to drones controlled by radio, "Pterodactyl" will be able to stay in the air for much longer and to carry more equipment, because you do not have to carry the batteries. Another advantage of the harness of the control system is fully protected from interception.

Another feature of the "Pterodactyl" is that it is made under the scheme tiltrotor — aircraft propellers which can rotate with the wings. This scheme allows to combine in one machine the advantages of aircraft and helicopters. Due to this, the drone can develop in the air high enough speed to move with the tank at full speed, however, he is able to rise into the air with the small square, including directly from the hull.

— The idea of a reconnaissance drone, operated by a flexible cable, is not new — the first such decision was implemented in the late 1960-ies on the West German unmanned experimental helicopter Dornier Do-32K. It was operated by a cable and it is getting fuel, — says the "news" military expert Oleg Teltonika. — Currently, the cable interface being used on the Israeli copter Hovermast, but it is not used in the combat car.

As said Oleg Teltonika, systems, when reconnaissance drone becomes directly part of the combat machine does not exist yet.

— The use of the lightweight UAV, equipped with a thermal imager and radar system to an external monitoring system seems a logical solution for prospective armored vehicles, a range that exceeds the range of the onboard detection equipment, — said the expert. For example, the main instrument of "Armata was" able to hit a target at a distance of 8 km, and the range of detection of enemy tanks via sighting channel is limited to 5 km. In addition, due to the presence of "Pterodactyl" tank will be able to open up the situation on the battlefield, staying in cover or hiding behind buildings or uneven terrain.

According to Teltonika, equipping armor external systems of observation, the ability to observe the terrain at least at a distance of 10 km, will provide the "Armata" a distinct advantage over any opponents.

Was it this one?

Interesting article. I decided to put it here since it is related to the T-14 at a lot of points

---

Uralvagonzavod from Russia to launch new production line of guns for T-14 and T-90MS tanks.

The Uralvagonzavod (Russian acronym: UVZ) scientific-research corporation will launch an automatized manufacturing line to produce newest high-precision guns for T-14 Armata and T-90MS main battle tanks (MBT), as well as for 2S25 Sprut-SDM air-droppable self-propelled anti-tank gun (SPATG) systems, the Izvestia newspaper said.


High-precision engineering tools allows rapid and precise drilling, rifling, and chrome coating of the bores, providing unique characteristics to the items. The manufacturing line will be integrated with the only enterprise in the country that produces tank guns, namely, Yekaterinburg-based Plant 19. The modified line will produce a new series of 2A46M-5 guns for T-72B3, T-90MS MBTs and Sprut-SDM SPATGs and 2A82-1M for T-14 Armata tanks. The delivery of the first guns to the Ministry of Defense (MoD) is scheduled for 2017. The accuracy of the guns will increase by 15-20%, while the scattering of shots during the firing from place and on the move will be reduced by 1.7 times. The new gun are unofficially named 'sniper' due to their high precision that does not come short of small firearms.

A representative of the UVZ corporation officially told the Izvestia newspaper that the preparation for the installation of the hardware is ongoing. The modernization of the provision welding fabrication and the beginning of the low-rate initial production of the barrels are planned to be finished next year. All works will be finished within three years, and the manufacturing line will reach its rated capacity. "The whole technological process at the new facility - from components production and boring to final check-out of end products - will be an automatized one. In particular, the engine lathes, routers, and drilling machines have been replaced by a digital multifunctional center. Modern welding outfits will be used to increase the quality of welding and reducing its time. High-precision plasma burners and laser cutters will be exploited to produce details from panel material.

The Editor of the Arsenal Otechestva magazine, Viktor Murahovskiy told the Izvestia newspaper that the manufacturing of tank guns is one of the most sophisticated technological operations, considering the length of modern barrels.



"Each micron is important here. The other technological operations related to the further production of a tank gun and its mount with breech end depend on the precision of the processing accuracy. All these [processes] increase the precision and vitality of gun. The less scattering of shot is, the less it requires to conduct a calibration of gun," Murakhovsky said.

The analyst pointed out that the T-90MS tank is armed with a new 2A46M-5 gun that exceeds not only Russian-originated 2A46 guns of previous generations, but also 120 mm tank gun of NATO countries produced by the Rheinmetall AG corporation in the areas of precision and firepower.

The 2A46M-5 tank gun has a barrel length of 6 m. The barrel has an elevation angle of +15° and a depression angle of -5°. The gun has a firing rate of up to eight rounds per minute. It should be noted that 2A46M-5 can fire 40 types of rounds, including the armour-piercing subcaliber rounds and Refleks-M guided missiles, Izvestia said.

The 2A82-1M gun for T-14 Armata tank is supposed to be the most powerful serially produced tank gun. The new has much in common with 2A46M. According to Izvestia, 2A82-1M features advanced firing rate, muzzle velocity, and barrel service life.

Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/november_2016_global_defense_security_news_industry/uralvagonzavod_from_russia_to_launch_new_production_line_of_guns_for_t-14_and_t-90ms_tanks_tass_12711161.html

---

Rifling tools? For what? 90% of the Cold War/Modern era Soviet/Russian MBTs (late T-55s, late T-62s, T-64s, T-72s, T-80s and T-90s, plus the upcoming T-14) are used/using smoothbore guns. In my opinion rifled guns are only a viable option below 120/125mm (105/100mm). Let the British (Challenger 2 with 120mm /L55 rifled gun) and the Romanians (TR-85 with 100mm /L46 rifled "toy gun") use their rifled guns, but let it be their own problem.

But nevermind, let's return to the Russian guns. For the 2A82-1M, I think that...

... Muzzle velocity would be around 1800-1950 m/s (with APDS rounds), or with a cutting-edge, brand new type of propellant, plus an also cutting-edge, super-aerodynamical (and whatnot) APDS round, it could reach a whopping 2000 m/s.

Firing rate would be around 12-14 rounds/minute (Take the immense heat caused by the fired rounds into account here!)

Analysis : Russian Afganit active protection system is able to intercept uranium tank ammunition.

The Afganit active protection system (APS) equipping the Armata commonized heavy tacked platform’s derivatives has proved to be able to intercept depleted-uranium (DU) armor-piercing discarding-sabot (APDS) projectiles during tests, according to the Izvestia daily.


The unique system from the Instrument Design Bureau (KBP) detects incoming AP projectiles with its radar and destroys them with special fragmentation projectiles.

The first test intercepts of depleted-uranium APDS projectiles have taken place this year. The cutting-edge system has tackled such hard targets successfully, even though DU projectiles were believed to be invulnerable, a Russian Defense Ministry officer close to the trials told the Izvestia. Work is in full swing on refining the system, the computer software controlling the intercept in particular.

At present, the Afganit active protection system is organic to the T-14 tank and T-15 heavy infantry fighting vehicle.

The Afganit is a complex radio electronic system combining active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars, a computer subsystem and dischargers firing special rounds, whose fragments destroy incoming projectiles. Pictures of T-14s and T-15s show both the peculiar tube-shaped submunition dischargers sitting at the base of the T-14’s turret and on the T-15’s sides and the radars looking like small plastic plates.

"The Russian-made Arena and Drozd APS’s and the Israeli-made Trophy are quite capable of defeating antitank guided missiles and rockets. In particular, they say that Palestinian fighters have failed to take out a single Merkava tank protected by the Trophy since 2011," expert Vladislav Belogrud told the Izvestia. "However, ATGMs and AT rockets are far easier for the APS to deal with than APDS projectiles are. In particular, the ATGM has a velocity of a mere 300 m/s. The missile itself is essentially a thin metal tube stuffed with electronics, the propellant and shaped charge and rather vulnerable to the frags generated by a nearby APS projectile explosion. The APDS projectile, on the other hand, is a monolithic steel structure travelling at a velocity of 1,500-2,000 km/s to boot."


Developed as far back as the 1930s and first used en masse in the Second World War, the APDS projectile remains a most effective means against heavily armored vehicles. The weapon is based on a spear- or dart-shaped core made of a dense and strong metal and designed to punch through the armor of enemy tanks.

"The idea is simple enough: focus the projectile’s energy on a small area of the armor by using the subcaliber core made of a very dense and strong metal. Previously used tungsten carbide is a hard, albeit fragile, material," expert Valery Mukhin told the Izvestia. "Penetrating the armor, the tungsten core is strongly compressed by the armor it is passing through. Therefore, once inside, it fragments into small pieces. This is useful for dealing with homogenous armor, but this projectile is no threat to up-to-date tanks featuring multilayer armor. Hence, there has emerged a new generation of projectiles made of relatively ductile materials - a tungsten alloy and depleted uranium that behave like a stream of liquid when punching through the armor."

The front part of such projectiles is splattered on impact, with the remainder penetrating the armor layer by layer. The density of uranium is higher than that of tungsten. Hence, uranium-alloy projectiles feature a higher armor penetration capability than the ones made of tungsten. In addition, DU core fragments (uranium ignites at the drop of a hat) ignite after having gotten inside the tank, inflicting extra damage on the hardware and the crew.

Advanced APDS projectiles are rather expensive. While the venerable US-made M829A3 basic long-rod penetrator cost the US taxpayer $5,000 a pop, its successor, the M829A4, is twice as expensive, according to the Izvestia daily.

Source: http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technology_uk/analysis_russian_afganit_active_protection_system_is_able_to_intercept_uranium_tank_ammunition_tass_11012163.html

---

Well, shaped charges (including RPG missiles, HEAT-FS rounds) aren't much of a problem, since they can be defeated by the use of bar-slat/cage armor, while ATGMs can be blown up in mid-air by the use of electronic countermeasures (and if they come really close, by the APS itself). APDS-FS rounds are the real problem here.

But honestly, I'm not a fan of DU-tipped APDS-FS rounds, since despite the fact that they don't produce a lot of radiation, they are still very hazardous to life. I'm not talking about the round itself, but its fragments. So for example, there was an urban combat scenario, when a tank deflected a DU-tipped round fired from an enemy tank, and the richocheted round hit a house wall. Whoever will try to remove it from the wall, will be exposed to radiation.

If this is related to density of the rods, then this was already proven feasible with the "old style" Nozh, which as I have described before is an EFP turned ERA.

Here we have a missile system instead of an effect system, which AFAIK works a little differently and has own issues. These are hit/interception probability not interception capability. Basically the system is going to stop a lot of crap thrown at the T-14, IF the system reacts fast enough and accurately enough.

But honestly, I'm not a fan of DU-tipped APDS-FS rounds, since despite the fact that they don't produce a lot of radiation, they are still very hazardous to life. I'm not talking about the round itself, but its fragments. So for example, there was an urban combat scenario, when a tank deflected a DU-tipped round fired from an enemy tank, and the richocheted round hit a house wall. Whoever will try to remove it from the wall, will be exposed to radiation.

I too have a problem with using genotoxic materials on a battlefield for a purpose that will result in them being reduced to powder and introduced into the environment.

It is perfectly true that DU has less radiation than normal background radiation levels in most places... the problem is that when it is used as a weapon it burns and is reduced to a very fine powder that is easy to ingest by animal and plant life... outside your body in solid form it is no threat... inside your body it destroys and mutates at a cellular level that effects the genes you pass on to your children...

Of course nothing is perfect... if a tank uses radar to detect incoming threats then that becomes a way to detect and target a tank... and also a way to bypass a defence... note it also wont stop land mines...

It is just another useful layer of defence...

But honestly, I'm not a fan of DU-tipped APDS-FS rounds, since despite the fact that they don't produce a lot of radiation, they are still very hazardous to life. I'm not talking about the round itself, but its fragments. So for example, there was an urban combat scenario, when a tank deflected a DU-tipped round fired from an enemy tank, and the richocheted round hit a house wall. Whoever will try to remove it from the wall, will be exposed to radiation.
................

If other side uses it than it is perfectly valid and recommendable option.

By not using it you are endangering lives of your own men for no reason other than hollow rhetoric.

How is the future of Armata tank?I've heard that UVZ got some problem.
Does somebody has detailed information about that?

GarryB wrote:
It is perfectly true that DU has less radiation than normal background radiation levels in most places... the problem is that when it is used as a weapon it burns and is reduced to a very fine powder that is easy to ingest by animal and plant life... outside your body in solid form it is no threat... inside your body it destroys and mutates at a cellular level that effects the genes you pass on to your children...

DU is weak alpha emitter and while it is mostly harmless when on the skin, it becomes far more fangerous when ingested. Being a heavy low-energy particle (essentially a helium nuclei) it lacks the power to penetrate the outer epidermis, but internal body tissues have no such resistance and alpha particles can easily disrupt genetic materials in cells.

The use of DU in war is no better than the use of bio-weapons or nerve toxins. They are utterly unethical and should be banned. Of course, they never will as the Yankistani bastards find them too useful.

If other side uses it than it is perfectly valid and recommendable option.

By not using it you are endangering lives of your own men for no reason other than hollow rhetoric.

So what you are saying is anything goes?

I am surprised at you being Serbian... if there had been a ground war over Kosovo then there would be lots of places contaminated with DU... its low level of radiation means it is pretty much a permanent problem regarding picking up the pieces afterwards.

Ask someone from Vietnam about post war problems with Agent Orange and all the other deadly chemicals the US dropped on the country for a decade... deformities, reduced lifespans, sickness... a gift that keeps giving.

The reality is that there are alloys of Tungsten that can be almost as effective as DU but without polluting the environment basically until it is absorbed by the local wildlife or removed.

The Abrams is no super tank you need a cruise missile to defeat.

Of course if you intend to fight on the territory of others then it is OK because it wont be your problem...

DU is weak alpha emitter and while it is mostly harmless when on the skin, it becomes far more fangerous when ingested. Being a heavy low-energy particle (essentially a helium nuclei) it lacks the power to penetrate the outer epidermis, but internal body tissues have no such resistance and alpha particles can easily disrupt genetic materials in cells.

The main problem is that the body ingests the tiny particles and confuses them for Calcium particles and uses them to build bone mass... which of course leads to serious problems for the future.

The low energy emission means they will remain dangerous for thousands of years.

It is actually rather worse than any chem or bio weapon because it remains persistent for thousands of years.

GarryB wrote:

If other side uses it than it is perfectly valid and recommendable option.

By not using it you are endangering lives of your own men for no reason other than hollow rhetoric.

So what you are saying is anything goes?

I am surprised at you being Serbian... if there had been a ground war over Kosovo then there would be lots of places contaminated with DU... its low level of radiation means it is pretty much a permanent problem regarding picking up the pieces afterwards.
...............

Exactly, anything goes. If there is one thing that me and pretty much everyone else here in Serbia learned over the past couple of decades is that nice guys finish last.

If it works, use it. And use it a lot. Victory is everything in war, go soft even for a second and you are screwed. No prizes for second place.

Besides, numerically DU anti tank rounds are not that big a deal. How many of them are used on average even in large conflicts? Effects are pretty negligible overall. Aerial stuff is different matter.  




And you are right, south Kosovo is choke full of depleted uranium but that is from A-10s not tanks. NATO pilots can't shoot for shit against even remotely competent enemy but that does not mean that they did not try pretty damn hard.

Cancer rates in Kosovo are off the charts but since it would be PR no-no everyone there keeps it under wraps. Seriously, look it up. Locals pretend that no such thing as cancer exists, like asking about mafia in Sicily.  

On the upside, entire Serbian population has been exiled from those parts so they skipped DU cancer. Silver linings and all that.

There is some new about 125mm rocket assisted ammunition?

Exactly, anything goes. If there is one thing that me and pretty much everyone else here in Serbia learned over the past couple of decades is that nice guys finish last.

Yeah.... NO.

If it works, use it. And use it a lot. Victory is everything in war, go soft even for a second and you are screwed. No prizes for second place.

Of course there is no prizes for second, but if you have no morals then what is the point of winning? What makes you worth supporting?

Besides, numerically DU anti tank rounds are not that big a deal. How many of them are used on average even in large conflicts? Effects are pretty negligible overall. Aerial stuff is different matter.

Show me a map of birth defects in the Middle East and I will show you all the major tank battles in Iraq...

I am not squeamish... war is hell and the idea is to kill the other guy... but what price victory when the territory you fight over is ruined in the fight... for America it is fine... they don't give a shit... they just pack up and leave, but for a war that is a fight for your own land fucking up the land you are fighting over is super stupid...

On the upside, entire Serbian population has been exiled from those parts so they skipped DU cancer. Silver linings and all that.

So the real lesson is only use these types of ammo on land you do not intend to occupy after the conflict...

The US loves DU because it is cheap... it is spent nuclear power plant fuel... that is why they use it. And of course the fact that they don't have to live with the consequences as they pretend about what causes Desert Storm syndrome etc.

Great news!

---

Russian Armata Tanks, Armored Vehicles to Become 'Smarter'

RUSSIA 16:42 24.12.2016(updated 17:26 24.12.2016)

Russian tanks and combat vehicles will soon sport a state-of-the-art damage control and information system, the newspaper Izvestia reported.

The unique system, dubbed GALS-D4, will make it much easier for the crews to monitor the gauges and inform their commanding officers about the condition of their fighting vehicles.

The GALS-D4 ensures stable navigation and keeps in its hard disk memory all information about the vehicle’s whereabouts and condition of the past ten years.

The complex consists of a microprocessor, computing and navigation modules, each weighing up to 2.5 kilograms and placed under the driver’s and commander’s seats.

They feed data onto a 20 cm touch-sensitive screen in the commander’s compartment. The GALS-D4 has several modes of operations. In diagnostic mode, information about all of the vehicle’s electronically operated elements is sent to a touch-sensitive screen.

In navigation mode, a pre-loaded area map is fed to the operator’s screen showing the vehicle’s exact location in real time.

“The system is still being brought up to speed with the combat modules to be eventually operated via remote-control, Sergei Mosiyenko, chief designer at Volna Central Research Institute, told the newspaper.

The GALS-D4 is currently installed on a number of Taifun armored cars now being tested by the Defense Ministry and also on the all-new Armata tanks, which boast a number of back-up target acquisition and technical control systems.

Source: https://sputniknews.com/russia/201612241048960217-russia-tanks-smart/

Benya wrote:Great news!

---

Russian Armata Tanks, Armored Vehicles to Become 'Smarter'

RUSSIA 16:42 24.12.2016(updated 17:26 24.12.2016)  

Russian tanks and combat vehicles will soon sport a state-of-the-art damage control and information system, the newspaper Izvestia reported.

The unique system, dubbed GALS-D4, will make it much easier for the crews to monitor the gauges and inform their commanding officers about the condition of their fighting vehicles.  

The GALS-D4 ensures stable navigation and keeps in its hard disk memory all information about the vehicle’s whereabouts and condition of the past ten years.

The complex consists of a microprocessor, computing and navigation modules, each weighing up to 2.5 kilograms and placed under the driver’s and commander’s seats.

They feed data onto a 20 cm touch-sensitive screen in the commander’s compartment. The GALS-D4 has several modes of operations. In diagnostic mode, information about all of the vehicle’s electronically operated elements is sent to a touch-sensitive screen.

In navigation mode, a pre-loaded area map is fed to the operator’s screen showing the vehicle’s exact location in real time.

“The system is still being brought up to speed with the combat modules to be eventually operated via remote-control, Sergei Mosiyenko, chief designer at Volna Central Research Institute, told the newspaper.

The GALS-D4 is currently installed on a number of Taifun armored cars now being tested by the Defense Ministry and also on the all-new Armata tanks, which boast a number of back-up target acquisition and technical control systems.

Source: https://sputniknews.com/russia/201612241048960217-russia-tanks-smart/

Its all fine and nice but... "hard disk memory"... really? I could understand it 10 years ago but now...

Militarov wrote:

Benya wrote:Great news!

---

Russian Armata Tanks, Armored Vehicles to Become 'Smarter'

RUSSIA 16:42 24.12.2016(updated 17:26 24.12.2016)  

Russian tanks and combat vehicles will soon sport a state-of-the-art damage control and information system, the newspaper Izvestia reported.

The unique system, dubbed GALS-D4, will make it much easier for the crews to monitor the gauges and inform their commanding officers about the condition of their fighting vehicles.  

The GALS-D4 ensures stable navigation and keeps in its hard disk memory all information about the vehicle’s whereabouts and condition of the past ten years.

The complex consists of a microprocessor, computing and navigation modules, each weighing up to 2.5 kilograms and placed under the driver’s and commander’s seats.

They feed data onto a 20 cm touch-sensitive screen in the commander’s compartment. The GALS-D4 has several modes of operations. In diagnostic mode, information about all of the vehicle’s electronically operated elements is sent to a touch-sensitive screen.

In navigation mode, a pre-loaded area map is fed to the operator’s screen showing the vehicle’s exact location in real time.

“The system is still being brought up to speed with the combat modules to be eventually operated via remote-control, Sergei Mosiyenko, chief designer at Volna Central Research Institute, told the newspaper.

The GALS-D4 is currently installed on a number of Taifun armored cars now being tested by the Defense Ministry and also on the all-new Armata tanks, which boast a number of back-up target acquisition and technical control systems.

Source: https://sputniknews.com/russia/201612241048960217-russia-tanks-smart/

Its all fine and nice but... "hard disk memory"... really? I could understand it 10 years ago but now...

According to NATO experts we are 20 years behind, looks as if they've miscalculated! We're ten years behind

Its all fine and nice but... "hard disk memory"... really? I could understand it 10 years ago but now...

I think someone mixed up ''hard drive'' and ''hard disk''

Besides, if there is one thing that is easy to replace it's hard disk. Replace with SSD that is...

PapaDragon wrote:

Its all fine and nice but... "hard disk memory"... really? I could understand it 10 years ago but now...

I think someone mixed up ''hard drive'' and ''hard disk''

Besides, if there is one thing that is easy to replace it's hard disk. Replace with SSD that is...

Using HDD in such devices is mostly abandoned due to their MAJOR issues with mechanical damage and vibrations. And i cant think of a thing that will have to deal with more vibrations than a tank so i hope this was a mistake by author.

Doesnt have to be SSD, you can use high cappacity flash memory too, very cheap and good enough for what this is supposed to be. Not all that very complex to start production even.