[Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

Militarov wrote:There are many great ideas of all-in-Wonder combat machines, but none ever worked, guess why.

Because of Marvel comics intellectual property?



@Isos like that?

Isos wrote:Yes but not with north korean technology

Tech is actually soviet one form 70s-80s :D:D
But why Armata should have it?! nonsense with Armatas move along all Sosna/Pticelovs /Tunguskas and 57mm gun modules. This fire and forget

Isos wrote:Iraqi wars showed how soviet tanks and tanks in general are vulnerable to air threats.

so what is the main difference between Soviet tand and Us tank of the same generation confrontation with air-force missiles?

And they are on the front during wars, air defences are behind and low flying helicopters use terrain to hide so they are hard targets for them thats why I think t-14 should have manpad controled from inside the tank to protect themselves.

imagine why nobody nobody wa sever installing this?

Isos wrote:
No one installed active defences against atgm too and they lost hundreds of tanks to atgm specially israel. Soviets designed the first active defence for tanks but it is only when israeli deployed their system that Russians started deploying their own on armata.

Whaaat?! Soviet systems existed since 80s and were applied many years before Russian immigrants created copies Israeli engineers build one in Israel.

Can I kindly ask what is your source of Afghanit on Armata news?!

About drozd,arena or afghanit I dotn have to provide linke , do i?

so what is the main difference between Soviet tand and Us tank of the same generation confrontation with air-force missiles?

There isn't. Both are vulnerable. But if its ok for you to lose tanks to air threats because US will also lose tanks to air threats then I don't know what to say.

Exactly what you'vejust said That regardless of US propaganda any tank is vulnerable to airborne means of assault.

Isos wrote: Yes russian active defence systems existed but were not deployed massively. Israel was the first one to deploy them on Merkavas.

Well, frankly? to me it seems Israeli BS-marketing, You know T-90 sont you?

Source for afghanit ? Why ?

because you wrote
only when israeli deployed their system that Russians started deploying their own on armata.

Only the presence of manpads on tanks will oblige the fighters to fly higher and be a more easy target for long range systems. Their use will help down many flying vehicules.

If you look at downed fighter during wars, a lot of them were by IR short range missiles.

As many as Shilkas in Vietnam or ZS-23-2. Tanks in Russia are accompanied always by Buks, Tors and Tunguskas to my knowledge. Much better than protection any manpad ever could be

Isos wrote:

only when israeli deployed their system that Russians started deploying their own on armata.

Ho this ... Well no source.

+And then Russia introduced its afghanit on armata

You see Merkava existed long before Armata so it would be hard to install anything before tank exists right? Israelis installed first time when? 2011?  Armata was nonexistent yet.


Perhaps in Israel they can install something that doesn't exist on tank still in projecting phase en masse?

But t-72/80/90 didn't have active defence system

->


One of Drozd's shortcomings was that it was only able to protect a 60-degree arc around the forward part of the turret. Each unit costs around $30,000, was 80 percent successful against incoming RPGs in Afghanistan, but proved to provide too high of a collateral damage issue to surrounding troops that were dismounted from their armored vehicles.

The project was abandoned by the Army, but completed by the Soviet Naval Infantry to increase protection for about 250 older T-55 tanks in 1981–82 (newer T-72s were problematic on landing craft, due to size and weight, and $170 million Drozd development was much cheaper than a commencement of an all-new time-consuming tank design). Tanks were upgraded to T-55M standard and equipped with Drozd at the tank rebuilding plant in Lviv, Ukraine, and kept in war stores for secrecy. The rebuilt tanks were designated T-55AD, or T-55AD1 if they had the newer V-46 engine. Drozd APS was later replaced by the simpler non-APS Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drozd

then merkava did well with its own system against modern atgm.

- copied Russian system? yes after T-90 already had in 80s and 90s

then merkava then  T-90 and T-80 had  

almost right but the other way around

The isreli experience was for sure analyzed by russian profesionnels. Before that they had Arena but didn't deploy it.So I guess that the fact that israeli utilization of trophy system played a major role in the decision for armata development.

  Absolute bulshit based on no data.
Are you working on Israeli marketing dept?      

Well, frankly? to me it seems Israeli BS-marketing, You know T-90 sont you?

Not really. Trophy proved to be effective. US are deploying it on abrams.

of course ! Because trophy as Soviet origin works as simple as that      
And trophy because they tried for many years to get Russian/Soviet copies but failed. Then vie Russian Jew-emigrants they made Israeli a copy of Soviet stuff.

As many as Shilkas in Vietnam or ZS-23-2. Tanks in Russia are accompanied always by Buks, Tors and Tunguskas to my knowledge. Much better than protection any manpad ever could be Smile Smile Smile

Agree. But like I said I see it like a self defence for the tank when its spot an helicopter or a bomber more than an air defence system.

But it exists! it is called Svir/Reflx and Kobra.      
Both are beam riding/radio controlled  missiles unlike new one fire and forget.

The Sovtiets had planned to equip thier futre tanks with a hardkill APS since the 1980s the Merkava has absolutely nothing to do with the decision to equip the Armata with such a system.

And as far as defensive SAMs they would obveiously be a good idea. Exept in the eyes of some of this forums conspiracy theorists. To them ony bad idaes are worthwhile.

Anyway don't bother arguing with gunship he will just never listen.

Oh and all hail the lizard people

Isos wrote:

You see Merkava existed long before Armata so it would be hard to install anything before tank exists right? Israelis installed first time when? 2011?  Armata was nonexistent yet.
Perhaps in Israel they can install something that doesn't exist on tank still in projecting phase en masse?

Yes merkava existed with trophy on it before armata.

That's exactly what I am talking about! Armata is the new tank, Merkava is a one existing for some time now. Both use dynamic protection . Armatas dynamic protection though has nothing to do with Israeli. Why Russians owning IP rights to soviet solutions 40 years of experience were to be inspired of Israeli copy?

Besides they say Afganit also works against kinetic perpetrators (DU inclusive) which Trophy doesnt (yet)


And what history says? in 90s there was massive Jewish immigration from former Soviet Union. Many engineers who worked on dynamic protection had gone too. But they weren't owners of IPs, small detail tho. Couple years after Israel invented active protection.


Total coincidence. I agree.

Of course Russians looked at the results of trophy use in in real conflicts. I don't know what is the probleme here.

Of course they looked at results as ever time is happens but this is none of inspirations. Especially that after copying solution Israelis repeated same errors with infantry collateral damage.
I mean Russian errors form 80s were remade by Israelis in 2011.

Trophy is successfull in real operation. Western product are not only propaganda ...
When I say "installed on armata" I mean during conception phase.

It is not western but Israeli product

almost right but the other way around

T 80 and t 90 even MS version were never equiped with arena. They could be but they were not. So merkava is the first one. At least first modern one.
[/quote]

your right I was wrong here

No drozd or massive arena. They all had Kontakt-5 and some also Shtora soft-kill. Which Merkava had none of. What resulted in 10% or so of all Israeli armored force knocked out in 2006.

But it exists! it is called Svir/Reflx and Kobra.  thumbsup  thumbsup  thumbsup
Both are beam riding/radio controlled  missiles unlike new one fire and forget.

They are atgm with some capacity against slow moving helicopters. They need a constant pointing of the target. With an igla you shot and don't care about the missile.[/quote]


True! precisely like the new one for Armata fire and forget There will be no high velocity and range tank based AA missiles anytime in foreseeable future.

Isos wrote:Russian like you said had arena and drozd but didn't use them apart gor the gew t-55 you mentioned. Then markeva 4 came in and its concept of introducing ads in serial production was good enough that russian did the same with armata. It has nothing to fo with copying.

Soviets used it in Afhanistan pretty massively. With successes. AFAIK it was serial installed. System them was taken down on order of traitorous Gorbi not because been bad. Russian Marines used is AFAIK in secret on those 200+ tanks. Thus serial production was Soviet Drozd, first successful application was by Soviets. Israeli appeared like 25 years later. Who copied and was inspired whom is couch cough of course Russian s did

I know for the immigration of jews from russia to israel. Trophy isn't the only system that is a copy of soviet system. Most of israeli systems are copies like their anti air systems.

Israeli just keep their interests in focus. They used their chance since there will be no more Soviet disintegration anymore. Perhaps after USA gets dissolved they use Us inventions fo rown good

What resulted in 10% or so of all Israeli armored force knocked out in 2006.

All those who had trophy survived.

in 2006 none had, in 2011 they did

Following the series of tests of the Trophy system, the IDF Ground Forces Command declared the Trophy operational in August 2009.[22] It was scheduled to be installed in an entire battalion of Israeli Armored Corps tanks by 2010.[23]

after wiki.

True! precisely like the new one for Armata fire and forget thumbsup thumbsup thumbsup There will be no high velocity and range tank based AA missiles anytime in foreseeable future.

First I never heard about this missile. I can't argue on this.[/quote]

Me too that's why I copied this link with news too

And second, like I said I never talked about turning the tank into an airdefence system but only give it some self defences against air threats and I asked if the radars could detect helicopters and bombers at decent ranges to use those self defences, be it an atgm or igla or a unguided projectile help by an fcs. And I added that a mechanicle arm mounted on the top with two Igla wouldn't be bad to keep helicopter far away.

I hear you, AFAIK Armata can detect helos or drones on decent ranges. SO yes this is as you can see also into consideration. Though decent range you can use new missile as well. At least this is as problem is tackled now. Will 30mm gun to be added or mor missiles time will tell.

My understanding is that that new missile will be better then Kobra and fire and forget.


There is existing Kobra missile 9M112 after wiki:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/9М112_«Кобра»
Tactico-technical characteristics
Caliber: 125 mm
URS weight: 37.2 kg
Length of URS with propellant charge: 1000 mm (If in flight 968 mm, then 1000 - 968 = 32 mm, 32 mm length of propellant charge!
Length of URS in flight: 968 mm
Range of fire:
on the ground target - 100-4000 m
by helicopter - 4000 m (when issuing target designation from 5000 m)
Maximum speed of a moving target:
ground - 75 km / h
helicopter - 300 km / h


Maximum altitude of the target helicopter type: 500 m

GunshipDemocracy wrote: Trophy isn't the only system that is a copy of soviet system. Most of israeli systems are copies like their anti air systems.

You mean thier captured Shilkas thoes aren't even copies

The-thing-next-door wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote: Trophy isn't the only system that is a copy of soviet system. Most of israeli systems are copies like their anti air systems.

You mean thier captured Shilkas thoes aren't even copies

eh well if it works why to discard? economy of war isnt it?

BTW this quote is from Isos

a
@Isos as for MANPADS - they dont have a vertical launch. They need to be directed towards incoming/outgoing target. So not really much of change comparing to barrel fired missile to me. Besides you need to add manpads + vulnerable arm. So extra mass and potentially failure in battle.

And be sure to tune in next time for the Armata based combat oil platform

Anyway is there any news/ speculation (for the love of God not from Garry) on the Armata AD vehilce?

The-thing-next-door wrote:And be sure to tune in next time for the Armata based combat oil platform

Anyway is there any news/ speculation (for the love of God not from Garry) on the Armata AD vehilce?

For me likely it will be 4 different AD systems mounted on the Armata platform (ordered by range):

S-350 on Armata
Pantsir on Armata
BMPT on Armata: Terminator 3 with double 57mm weapon
Sosna on Armata

The amount of missile launchers or 57mm weapons would be addapted to the size of the Armata platform.

The same for the Kurganets, Bumerang and BMD-4(M) platforms.

lol this is weird

Vice Prime Minister Borisov complained about the high cost of the tanks "Armata"

Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov believes that now there is no need to equip the Armed Forces of Russia with a large number of such equipment as Armata or Bumerang BTR, since the latest versions of the T-72 tanks have high efficiency

The Russian Armed Forces do not aspire to purchase the tanks of "Armata" in large quantities because of their high cost, preferring to increase the combat potential of existing military equipment due to its modernization, Deputy Prime Minister Yury Borisov told reporters.

"Well, why should the Armed Forces flood all the armed forces, our T-72s are in great demand on the market, everything is taken from it, compared to the Abrams, Leclercs and Leopards, for their price, efficiency and quality, It's the same situation with "Boomerangs," Borisov explained.

"We have no special need for this (mass purchases of new equipment - Ed.), These models are quite expensive in relation to existing ones," the Deputy Prime Minister said.
Instead, smaller funds are used to modernize old equipment, allowing to save budget funds, RIA Novosti reported.

"We succeed, having a budget ten times less than NATO countries, due to such effective solutions, when we look at the modernization potential of old models, to solve the tasks set," Borisov said.

I am not against updating older equipments to make them more capable, but still there is no alternative to producing newer, more advanced equipment. like you can continue upgrading the T-34 to make it a modern Tank..,
The T-95 was cancelled because of its high costs, the Armata is supposed to be its cheaper/ affordable version and now they are complaining its expensive too, all i can say is i do not like the direction they are going in here

Russia currently has a debt/GDP ratio of 13.2%. The lowest of any major economy. The US is at 107%, 235% in Japan, and 82% across the EU. At current oil prices, the Russian budget is running a surplus of approximately $5 billion per month. The National Wealth Fund (counting money being held at the Central Bank) is already at $90 billion. So, how is Russia economic policy handled? What was the investment return on the reserve funds which at one point reached around $150 billion over decades? 0.2% Horrific. Any investment advisor in the world would be fired with that performance. This ultra-conservative incompetence literally cost Russia tens of billions of dollars. What about the Central Bank's interest rate policy? With inflation at 2.9%, they maintain the highest real interest rates of any major economy with interest rates pegged at 7.25%. A major drag to GDP. High real interests also have a negative correlation with birthrates.

It is not a question of money. It is a question of priorities and frankly incompetence.

"Large quantities" is the magic word.

Russia got one of the highest birthrates in Europe.

The reserve fund is not for Investment. It´s a security net. There are other russian state funds for that with better returns than any other in the world, except for this fabulous western funds who exist in otherworld.