[Official] Armata Discussion thread #5

Hope to see it back in may.

Tank sense: the Defense Ministry this year will receive the first serial "Armata"

The troops will receive updated cars

Tank T-14 "Armata" after revision went into mass production. The first batch of 16 updated machines will go to the troops by the end of the year. On May 9, the new T-14s will take part in the parade on Red Square. After that, to check in conditions close to combat, they will be distributed in military units located in different regions. According to experts, the Armata with an uninhabited tower and an armored capsule for the crew surpasses all known foreign counterparts, including the American Abrams, the French Leclerc and the German Leopard 2.

Until the end of the year, 12 T-14 Armata tanks and four T-16 BREMs will go to the troops, several sources told the Izvestia sources in the Ministry of Defense. According to them, the serial "Armata" differ from the previously presented experimental machines: after testing a number of components and assemblies were replaced, new systems also appeared.

The first production tanks will have to take part in the Victory Parade. And after the ceremonial passage on the pavement of the Red Square, “Almaty” will be involved in military trials. 16 cars will be divided between military units located in different climatic zones.

In the corporation "Uralvagonzavod" "Izvestia" said that the UVZ has a contract with the Ministry of Defense for the production of tanks "Armata" and combat vehicles based on them, and it is strictly implemented

Remote power
Comparing the T-14 with Western models, military experts speak of superiority over the American Abrams, the French Leclerc and the German Leopard 2. The domestic machine is considered more efficient and more durable than the tanks of potential enemies, by 25-30%.

It is known that the "Armata" is a new diesel engine with a capacity of 1.5 thousand hp. The firepower of the tank provides a 125-millimeter 2A82 gun - according to the technical level, it, as the developers claim, surpasses all existing tank guns by 1.2 times. The muzzle energy of the 2A82 cannon is 1.17 times better than the best NATO weapon - the 120-millimeter system of the Leopard-2A6 tank. But at the same time, the length of the barrel of a domestic cannon is 60 cm shorter, which generally makes the tank more compact.

Tow for tanks
For the Russian army, the Armata is a versatile heavy tracked platform. At its base, it will be possible to produce not only tanks, but also heavy infantry fighting vehicles, engineering vehicles, heavy armored personnel carriers, tank support vehicles, reconnaissance and command and control.

BREM T-16 on the basis of "Armata", designed to evacuate damaged vehicles from the battlefield and their subsequent repair in the field, is ready. It is equipped with a set of special equipment, such as a bulldozer blade, and differs from the existing BREM-1M by a more load-lifting crane-manipulator, as well as a more powerful traction winch.


The conning tower T-16 is located in the front of the hull and shifted to the port side - the crew will be located there. It consists of three people: the commander, driver and operator. The protected capsule also provides space for the crew of the evacuated tank. Behind the habitable compartment is the engine compartment, where the diesel engine and automatic reversing gearbox are located.

BREM is not only heavily armored, but also has a dynamic and electronic protection system from guided weapons, a mine clearance system with electromagnetic fuses. For its own defense, a combat module with a large-caliber machine gun, remotely controlled from an armored capsule, is installed on the T-16.

Full article
https://iz.ru/844419/aleksei-ramm-aleksei-kozachenko-bogdan-stepovoi/tankovyi-tolk-minoborony-v-etom-godu-poluchit-pervye-seriinye-armaty

Well finally!

Now its time to replace thoes damn t90s and get to work on brining the next future tank off the drawing board and onto the streets of europe.

Is T-14s turret armored or not? The turret is tiny, not much place to put armor on.

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Is T-14s turret armored or not? The turret is tiny, not much place to put armor on.

It is. It's not tiny if you consider that there is no space for people inside.

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Is T-14s turret armored or not? The turret is tiny, not much place to put armor on.

It's armored

Since it contains no crew and only heavy machinery it requires much less armor, electronic components inside are all in small separate fully armored boxes

It doesn't matter if RPG round hits turret if there is nothing inside that can be damaged by that round

At best it will scratch paint on internal components, big deal

Crew section is armored beyond belief and that's most important thing

Internally it should be comparable to a bmp-1 turret profile IMO. The big external turret is probably empty and rounds specially the most used, i.e APFSDS, would go through and make 0 damage. Important systems are deep inside behind the crew. It also allows to make reduntant connections of optics in case wires are cut by a hit.

Unmanned turret is the logical choice for russians since they used auto loader for like 50 years.

Everything that needs protection has armour, but most things that need protection like the crew, the ammo, and the engine are inside the hull and protected by heavy armour.

The turret contains electronics and sensors and the gun.

If you shoot the gunners optics with a 120mm APFSDS round the gun can still be aimed and fired using the commanders sensors... actually hitting the sensors on a moving Armata would be an impressive feat... but don't you think that shows the success of the Russian military... that the west has to resort to blinding their tanks because they don't have much chance of penetrating the hull and killing the crew...

When the enemy has to resort to firing HE shells at your tank tracks to disable your tank then it is a bit like a big row of early war Sherman tanks taking on a Tiger... or Panzer IIs taking on KV-1 and T-34 tanks.

They could put lots of heavy armour on the turret... but why... what do you want to protect?

Western armies have tanks with weak side and rear turret armour so what we are talking about is frontal arc armour and the armour on the armata tank covers the frontal arc of the turret where the gun and autoloader is located.

In addition the Afghansi APS system defends the tank from attack from any direction so HEAT rounds and APFSDS rounds are defeated at a distance from the armour so penetration will be dramatically reduced anyway.

Big_Gazza wrote:The first 16 cars "Armata" experimental-troop of the party will arrive in 2019

According to the newspaper "Izvestia" in the article by Alexei Ramma, Alexei Kozachenko and Bogdan Stepovoy "Tank sense: the Defense Ministry this year will receive the first serial" Armat ". The troops will receive upgraded vehicles ”, the T-14 Armata tank, after completion, went into mass production. The first batch of 16 updated machines will go to the troops by the end of the year. On May 9, the new T-14s will take part in the parade on Red Square.

link

Obviously, we are talking about "troop testing" of the basic vehicle -T-14 MBT. Anyway, in the West there is nothing similar to "Armata" platform! No need to hurry. Russia has about 3.000 "combat ready" first line MBT`s west of Urals, which is much more than Europe as a whole. Wait and see. There are rumours that Russia`s ordnance factories has problems with production of the 2A82 gun. The situation is aggravating for Russia, but, there is still much time left! If there are any problem, russian gunsmiths will solve them!

Uralvagonzavod has sent a new batch of T-14 and T-15 that will participate in this years Victory Day parade.

Point is, that this year we will see new serial tanks T-14 and T-15 and not prototypes as before. It will be interesting to see all diferences between serial and previous tanks.

Probably just be that it now has a coaxial MG and a Kord in the RCWS instead of the PKT.

Is it me or does it look like there might be some significant changes vs the prototypes?

T-15 will propably show the new turret (57mm gun).

Maybe we will see the drone?

I should probably point out that on that video those are BMPT's and T-14's and not T-15's. They've sent them, but they are not on video.

BREM T-16 on the basis of "Armata", designed to evacuate damaged vehicles from the battlefield and their subsequent repair in the field, is ready. It is equipped with a set of special equipment, such as a bulldozer blade, and differs from the existing BREM-1M by a more load-lifting crane-manipulator, as well as a more powerful traction winch.

Should point out that the bit in bold is perfectly normal... the BREM-1M is for recovering earlier T series tanks and their engines, while the T-16 will need to be able to recover the T-14 and other Armata based vehicles which of course will be heavier.

So the Armata family of vehicles will have a T prefix, which is interesting because previously each vehicle type has a prefix based on its role... troop transports were BTR, infantry fighting vehicles were BMPs, command vehicles were ACRVs, and artillery vehicles were 2S1 and 2S19 type designations.

First pics from the rehearsal, from one of the greatest heros of our time (Vitaly)!!!

Are there any armor layouts that could make gun manlets have equal armor to the rest of the turret? For some reason all russian tanks up to the T-14 have had very weak mantlet armor. Could the T-14 be an exception?


BTW the ideal tactic to take out the afghanit is to use AMRs and autocannons to destroy the AESAs on the turret. Apart from intense infantry support, there is simply no way to protect the unarmored AESA radars on the T-14's turret.

Also does the T-14 have high gun depression?

PapaDragon wrote:

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Is T-14s turret armored or not? The turret is tiny, not much place to put armor on.

It's armored

Since it contains no crew and only heavy machinery it requires much less armor, electronic components inside are all in small separate fully armored boxes

It doesn't matter if RPG round hits turret if there is nothing inside that can be damaged by that round

At best it will scratch paint on internal components, big deal

Crew section is armored beyond belief and that's most important thing

You do know that APFSDS darts desintegrate when they hit armor and also are pyrophoric if they're DU?
Also if the Turret has little. armor then NATO tanks can simply use 120mm HE rounds to eviscerate it.

Also even if the electronics are in boxes wires still have to connect them.

bolshevik345 wrote:Are there any armor layouts that could make gun manlets have equal armor to the rest of the turret? For some reason all russian tanks up to the T-14 have had very weak mantlet armor. Could the T-14 be an exception?


BTW the ideal tactic to take out the afghanit is to use AMRs and autocannons to destroy the AESAs on the turret. Apart from intense infantry support, there is simply no way to protect the unarmored AESA radars on the T-14's turret.

Also does the T-14 have high gun depression?

PapaDragon wrote:

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:Is T-14s turret armored or not? The turret is tiny, not much place to put armor on.

It's armored

Since it contains no crew and only heavy machinery it requires much less armor, electronic components inside are all in small separate fully armored boxes

It doesn't matter if RPG round hits turret if there is nothing inside that can be damaged by that round

At best it will scratch paint on internal components, big deal

Crew section is armored beyond belief and that's most important thing

You do know that APFSDS darts desintegrate when they hit armor and also are pyrophoric if they're DU?
Also if the Turret has little. armor then NATO tanks can simply use 120mm HE rounds to eviscerate it.

Also even if the electronics are in boxes wires still have to connect them.

That is why the turret is designed to be more than a metal hull. Any weight savings from the T-14 turret are from the reduction in the interior volume
which does not have to support humans. There is no way that the designers of this tank would make such a simple mistake.

Are there any armor layouts that could make gun manlets have equal armor to the rest of the turret? For some reason all russian tanks up to the T-14 have had very weak mantlet armor. Could the T-14 be an exception?

The gun mantlet is probably the only part of the turret armoured to stop 120mm rounds... why would the rest of the turret need armour that heavy?

BTW the ideal tactic to take out the afghanit is to use AMRs and autocannons to destroy the AESAs on the turret.

What makes you think they wont be armoured to protect them from small arms fire?

Those AESAs will detect incoming rifle rounds and auto cannons so those firing on the tank will get 125mm HE rounds fired right back at them and they will be marked on the battle management map and probably get a bit of artillery attention too... not to mention drone strikes as well... if the drones don't spot them first of course.

Apart from intense infantry support, there is simply no way to protect the unarmored AESA radars on the T-14's turret.

Laser system detecting optical scopes for AMRs and autocannons and blinding them should protect the tanks from enemy fire for a little while...

Also does the T-14 have high gun depression?

High depression?

You do know that APFSDS darts desintegrate when they hit armor and also are pyrophoric if they're DU?

If they did then how could US DU rounds exit the rear of T-72s in Desert Storm?

If they shattered after penetrating armour the effect inside the target would be devastating, but what if they shattered after penetrating the ERA and still had the main tank armour to penetrate?

Designing it to fragment and shatter would weaken it to the point where it would be useless as a penetrator.

Something is either designed to penetrate or to fragment... both would be a contradiction.

Also if the Turret has little. armor then NATO tanks can simply use 120mm HE rounds to eviscerate it.

What are you expecting a 120mm HE shell to do?

BTW HE rounds are much slower and much less accurate than APFSDS rounds.

Plus are you saying that any western tank can be defeated simply by hitting the side or rear of their turrets with HE rounds?

Also even if the electronics are in boxes wires still have to connect them.

Shockwaves propagate well through metal structures but air compresses so armour and then a space and then an armoured object has quite good protection from an explosion... plus a HE round would be much easier for Afghanit to stop than any anti armour round.

Probably nit. HE is like HESH it hat it can be defeated very easily even by simple countermeasures - even a 10mm starter plate will render it completely ineffective. IIRC no tanks have composite armor at the hull side but all have some kind of metal skirts.

Well one could use a thin flexible armor layer to absorb the shockwave, it would look something like the Armata's turret.

No 30mm autocannon yet, no news about that, was cancelled?