Why would it miss the opportunity to fight the most dangerous conflict between the world's superpowers since WW2?
[Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
lyle6- Posts : 2589
Points : 2583
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines
- Post n°101
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
Why would it miss the opportunity to fight the most dangerous conflict between the world's superpowers since WW2?
flamming_python, kvs, Hole, lancelot, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40541
Points : 41041
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
- Post n°102
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
jon_deluxe likes this post
Arrow- Posts : 3490
Points : 3480
Join date : 2012-02-12
- Post n°103
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
Why would it miss the opportunity to fight the most dangerous conflict between the world's superpowers since WW2? wrote:
Korea and Vietnam were probably more dangerous? The Ukrainian conflict is now more like World War I in miniature. That is, a war of positional rather than maneuvering.
lyle6- Posts : 2589
Points : 2583
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines
- Post n°104
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
The ground has started thawing so I don't expect much action from these units until summer. The delay would be beneficial though, since UVZ needs time to ramp up production just as they had with the succesful T-90M production at first.
GarryB, Big_Gazza, LMFS and Swgman_BK like this post
ALAMO- Posts : 7515
Points : 7605
Join date : 2014-11-25
- Post n°105
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
"Those don't have ERA!"
I guess he hardly recognizes what he sees.
GarryB, LMFS, Hole, Broski, Belisarius and Podlodka77 like this post
flamming_python- Posts : 9547
Points : 9605
Join date : 2012-01-30
- Post n°106
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
You can't assume anything, thaw or no thaw. Russian vehicles are built for even the muddiest conditions in mind, although of course to ignore the effect of weather conditions is foolish.
GarryB, Big_Gazza, kvs, Hole, Broski, jon_deluxe and Belisarius like this post
ALAMO- Posts : 7515
Points : 7605
Join date : 2014-11-25
- Post n°107
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
GarryB, Big_Gazza, zardof, Hole, Broski, jon_deluxe and Belisarius like this post
Mir- Posts : 3831
Points : 3829
Join date : 2021-06-10
- Post n°108
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
Lyle6 wrote:A company of T-14 MBTs with a T-16 RV.
I would feel a bit less nervous if they send a platoon of T-15's to tag along as cover
ALAMO- Posts : 7515
Points : 7605
Join date : 2014-11-25
- Post n°109
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
He knows already ...
Hole and Mir like this post
Swgman_BK- Posts : 163
Points : 185
Join date : 2022-02-10
- Post n°110
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
The Kornet has about 3x as much explosive power as a Javelin or NLAW and is a faster missile. If a tank can survive that , its armor is darn good.
jon_deluxe likes this post
flamming_python- Posts : 9547
Points : 9605
Join date : 2012-01-30
- Post n°111
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
Of course though the best solution to an enemy tank, is not your own tank, but an anti-tank weapon.
So long as they're in the right place at the right time.
GarryB, psg, Hole, lancelot, Scorpius, Broski, jon_deluxe and Belisarius like this post
lyle6- Posts : 2589
Points : 2583
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines
- Post n°112
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
They will. As the Russians have rediscovered, lightly armored IFVs just don't cut it anymore - you need heavy MBT-level armor to close the gap with the enemy's position and to stay and provide fire support. Remember, every meter you cover is one less meter your stormtroopers won't have to cover on foot. And if you have proper MBT level protection with the infantry support oriented firepower of an IFV you already have a BMPT - no need for dedicated vehicles.Mir wrote:I would feel a bit less nervous if they send a platoon of T-15's to tag along as cover Laughing
Not like there's anything they can do about it. NATO simply lacks the industrial capacity to support the force structure it had 10 years ago let alone realize a thorough modernization of its ground forces. They'll come up with token numbers of wunderwaffe but the core army would mostly be composed of obsolete cold war trash.Swgman_BK wrote:What is likely to be the reaction to the T-14 if Russia sends it out and it absolutely beats everything Ukraine has been given?
flamming_python, kvs, LMFS, Hole, lancelot, Mir, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40541
Points : 41041
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
- Post n°113
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
For instance sending a single T-14 means it has good fire power and good armour and good self defence equipment, but on its own if it did run over a mine or run out of fuel or whatever then their existing armour recovery vehicles could not drag it back to safety and friendly lines, so taking T-16s makes sense.
Of course T-14 on its own is OK but it would be better if it had the support of T-15s and Terminators and other things that allow it to make the most use of its sensors and information sharing capabilities like drones and modern attack aircraft.
Most tanks that get destroyed likely don't even see what hits them, whether it is because it was an RPG crew that were hiding behind something and didn't pop up and fire till the target tank was 40m away... which obviously makes things hard, but that is what drones would be useful for... spotting ambushes.
Being a unit with all the best and testing new stuff I would expect a T-72 robot vehicle would lead the way with mine rollers attached to deal with land mines, and fitted with electronics to set off explosives too so even deeply buried mines intended to take out the third or fourth vehicle to pass over it will be set off or neutralised by destroying their electronics etc.
They would have all sorts of drones of course as well as other robot types that can be sent forward to probe defences and shoot things up a bit...
The point is that these are weapons of war and if they have faults and weaknesses it makes more sense to find out about them now so they can fix or modify them or to change tactics so their weaknesses don't matter.
This is not about weapons sales but defence of Russia and if they have a system that doesn't work and needs to be upgraded or modified then it makes sense to find out sooner rather than later.
Unifying their air defence into one branch that works together and supports every other branch of the Russian military would be a good step forward too.
In the conflict in Georgia the VDV and the Naval Infantry found they worked better when working together and so after the conflict in 2008 they started training together and learned to work together properly which likely helped at the start of this conflict where the VDV and Naval Infantry worked together on this attack.
zardof, mnrck, lyle6, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3490
Points : 3480
Join date : 2012-02-12
- Post n°114
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
lancelot- Posts : 3172
Points : 3168
Join date : 2020-10-17
- Post n°115
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
GarryB and Hole like this post
lyle6- Posts : 2589
Points : 2583
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines
- Post n°116
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
GarryB, kvs, LMFS and TMA1 like this post
Swgman_BK- Posts : 163
Points : 185
Join date : 2022-02-10
- Post n°117
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
lancelot- Posts : 3172
Points : 3168
Join date : 2020-10-17
- Post n°118
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
As for the J-35 the Chinese have tried to sell it abroad, but no one has been biting for much the same reasons, i.e. it is a paper aircraft. And their traditional clients for aircraft cannot afford it either.
Arrow- Posts : 3490
Points : 3480
Join date : 2012-02-12
- Post n°119
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
But at this point it probably makes little sense to switch from T-90M to T-14 wrote:
It makes sense because the T-14 is a significant improvement even over the T-90M. It is much better in every way and it protects the crew better. Of course, it is better to make large quantities of T-90M during the war. Switch to the T-14 after the war, especially if it works.
The-thing-next-door likes this post
caveat emptor- Posts : 2024
Points : 2026
Join date : 2022-02-02
Location : Murrica
- Post n°120
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
Mir- Posts : 3831
Points : 3829
Join date : 2021-06-10
- Post n°121
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
DerWolf- Posts : 204
Points : 204
Join date : 2015-12-06
- Post n°122
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
lyle6- Posts : 2589
Points : 2583
Join date : 2020-09-14
Location : Philippines
- Post n°123
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
GarryB, kvs, LMFS, Hole, Broski and Belisarius like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40541
Points : 41041
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
- Post n°124
Re: [Official] Armata Discussion thread #6
The T-14 is more expensive than the T-90s and the latest model T-90s are actually very good and less of a risk.
If you want to buy T-14s right now parts will be classified and not for export so what you will get is probably a T-14 shell but early design components and perhaps components going in to T-90 upgrades instead of the latest and the best the Russian troops will be getting.
Unless you buy thousands of them and spend billions doing so it does not make sense to hand over all that tank design technology even to a trusted country because the CIA is everywhere and criminals work for everyone...
Of course rather than improve its export potential it would be in Russias interests to get T-14s into real combat to see how they perform and what works and what does not. For it to work properly it would need to be working with all the things it was designed to work with... ie infantry with Ratnik III for instance which might allow better communication and coordination, and of course drones and artillery and air support communication would be important too.
Most designers work best when they listen to users feedback about problems doing this or that... sometimes solutions are actually easy, but the designer didn't think of it because he didn't understand the problems on the front line properly.
The testing of the Terminators seem to be a success...
A few years ago I had a disagreement with someone who claimed the Terminator was terrible and could only fire one barrel at a time... pretty clear he was wrong.
kvs, Hole, Broski and jon_deluxe like this post
galicije83- Posts : 211
Points : 213
Join date : 2015-04-30
Age : 44
Location : Serbia
- Post n°125