[Official] Armata Discussion thread #4

That is some serious firepower and protection level. Amazing!

LMFS wrote:

That is some serious firepower and protection level. Amazing!

better in Terminator role then Terminator T-72 based

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

LMFS wrote:

That is some serious firepower and protection level. Amazing!

better in Terminator role then Terminator T-72 based

Don't be silly, Borisov said that T-72 is superior to any existing tank hence Terminator is by default superior to T-15

Thus spoke Borisov...

PapaDragon wrote:
Don't be silly, Borisov said that T-72 is superior to any existing tank hence Terminator is by default superior to T-15

Thus spoke Borisov...

T-15 is no tank and T-14 aint exist yet in lineunits and Borisov said: better comparing price/characteristics of existing combo isnt it?

so he was right

Some of you people are really hopeless. Even when reality is staring you right in the face u still wont exept it.

The thruth is that Russia is in a real pickel when it comes to the economy and of course this will also be seen in military orders.

Of course the Su-57, Armata and several more projects Will suffer becouse of this.

If the situation dont chance in the near future the armed forces Will start to suffer even more.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

LMFS wrote:

That is some serious firepower and protection level. Amazing!

better in Terminator role then Terminator T-72 based

Mmm, not muscular enough, needs moooore missiles to look like a proper Terminator

Terminator-3 on Armata platform is also foreseen I think, also supposed to have the 57 mm cannon but should have way more ammo inside, and the engine at the back for better survivability.

But of course, all this is looks very good... until you look at the price tag and go back to you T-72s

Wake us up when some official orders or program gets cancelled ok? Until now nothing has happened, and as other patient users have explained you, Russian budget is running a nice surplus so you come some years late with your news.

walle83 wrote:Some of you people are really hopeless. Even when reality is staring you right in the face u still wont exept it..

you can believe in whatever you want, even trolls but here we dont discuss your phobias but reality. Mind to focus on facts please?

LMFS wrote:
Terminator-3 on Armata platform is also foreseen I think, also supposed to have the 57 mm cannon but should have way more ammo inside, and the engine at the back for better survivability.

But of course, all this is looks very good... until you look at the price tag and go back to you T-72s

I'd say Afghanit + T-14 protection + 57mm + ataka an eventually machine guns/ag-17 should do the trick. And 80 rounds in only under turret. more than be surely stored in large hull. The problem her would be more in cooling of 57mm gun by intense use.



But true there is one more gatekeeper for this project.

Hahaha nice picture, you are inspired today

BMPT and MBT versions will have same protection, IFV inherently a little less since the engine is at the front. Good for the boys, bad for the vehicle, unless the active defence suit is very good. In any case this is as good as it gets I guess.

Rate of fire of the cannon with the available ammo should be ok for it to cool down, how many baddies do you want to kill??

Now, let's wait for some mod to clean this mess on the Kurganets thread

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

walle83 wrote:Some of you people are really hopeless. Even when reality is staring you right in the face u still wont exept it..

you can believe in whatever you want, even trolls but here we dont discuss your phobias but reality.  Mind to focus on facts please?

I don't think he understands generally people are agreeing with him everyone knows the Armata isn't going to be produced in huge numbers.

Yes Russia economic situation has limited how many new tanks can be acquired, I don't think anyone here is arguing that.

At this point I think people are tripping over mere wording.

Im not being a troll, im just looking at the situation in a surber way.
Im sure the budget is in the way some of u People r refering to. But when prestige projects like su-57 and Armata is being more or less cut back to nothing, something is terrible wrong.

walle83 wrote:Im not being a troll, im just looking at the situation in a surber way.
Im sure the budget is in the way some of u People r refering to. But when prestige projects like su-57 and Armata is being more or less cut back to nothing, something is terrible wrong.

The US is waging an extensive economic war on Russia. Russia is protecting it's economy by not spending more then it can afford while at the same time building up it's military strength. Check out those apples...

Yeah, Amiland is really successful in that. Russia had a surplus of 20 Billion $ in the first 6 month of the year.

It seems to me that some people is confusing:

- T-15: The Armata IFV. Infantry role.
- Terminator 3: The Armate BMPT. Air Defense + BMPT role.

They are 2 different applications of the Armata platform.

eehnie wrote:It seems to me that some people is confusing:

- T-15: The Armata IFV. Infantry role.
- Terminator 3: The Armate BMPT. Air Defense + BMPT role.

They are 2 different applications of the Armata platform.

Why??

Because the T-15 carries soldiers in its back, the BMPT will not (for more ammunition).

Hole wrote:Because the T-15 carries soldiers in its back, the BMPT will not (for more ammunition).

Yes, and also for more firepower.

I meant, I see nobody here confusing them. There has been some discussion about the necessity of BMPT, since normally IFVs should be more or less capable of fulfilling its role. I guess Gunship's comment was oriented in that direction. If your IFV has such firepower and protection, a BMPT is less and less interesting... unless it is a cheap version based on the T-72 and used on not so advanced army units. The increase on the numbers compensate the amount of missiles / ammo. That is a seriously powerful IFV, the elite in that category.

In regards of the influence of numbers, in the IFV case those weapons are present in all your infantry carrying units, instead only on specialised platforms, multiplying your organic firepower and easing the maintenance. Good luck fortifying machineguns nests or anti tank crews against a moderately numerous unit equipped with those IFVs, with their range, numbers and firepower they will mow you down from stand off distances in the blink of an eye.

franco wrote:

walle83 wrote:Im not being a troll, im just looking at the situation in a surber way.
Im sure the budget is in the way some of u People r refering to. But when prestige projects like su-57 and Armata is being more or less cut back to nothing, something is terrible wrong.

The US is waging an extensive economic war on Russia. Russia is protecting it's economy by not spending more then it can afford while at the same time building up it's military strength. Check out those apples...

@walle83 precisely as Franco explained.

Just my 2 kopecks: neither Su-57 not Armata is cancelled but introduction slowed down. Why? overspending is one (BTW Russian external debt is something now like 47 bln $) show me how many EU countries has less.?

France: ~ 500 €
UK: ~700 BLN €

And neither UK nor France are neither started 5gen fighter nor new gen of tanks programmes. They might appear (or not) in 2040s. Why Russia is to field more advanced weaponry since is not going to attack anybody? It i "peaceful friendly" West policy.

LMFS wrote:

In regards of the influence of numbers, in the IFV case those weapons are present in all your infantry carrying units, instead only on specialised platforms, multiplying your organic firepower and easing the maintenance. Good luck fortifying machineguns nests or anti tank crews against a moderately numerous unit equipped with those IFVs, with their range, numbers and firepower they will mow you down from stand off distances in the blink of an eye.

well 57mm is great gun but dont underestimate newest 40mm guns in UK/France. As antitank can be comparable but HE is by definition better for 57mm.

How many tanks are currently in service with Russian Military?

PapaDragon wrote:
How many tanks are currently in service with Russian Military?

Good luck with figuring out that one, many have tried and given up.... Maskirovka is intended to prevent Westeners from ever knowing.
The best judgement is probably "just enough".