[Official] Armata Discussion thread #6

lyle6 wrote:

See that gouge on the entry hole? The one that looks to be made by a slanted impact.

The projectile is supposed to arrive at close to a flat angle maybe a degree angle of descent at most, with the witness plate inclined at 60 degrees more or less. For the projectile to gouge the armor that way it must have a positive tilt relative to the armor surface...

A 10 degrees relative tilt is enough to reduce penetration by 20% - 20 degrees to 50%...

And is it just me or is the armor dented further below...

Look at the direction the removed plate is bent in, it is upside down. That taken into account the holes align such that the incoming projectile would be fired at zero elevation.

The thing I am not sure about is if the second plate is infact penetrated, that they did not remove it from the mount suggest it was not.

One other thing I noticed is that the ERA on the newer model T-14 seemed to get up to twice as thick as the ERA shown in this test.



Ofcourse this assumes that the ERA is mounted in a similar way to Relikt.

Its not. The top of the plate is the outer surface when it was hit - look at the slot for the lug. The plate is also bent downwards (inwards).

Obr. 2021 probably increased the overlap on the vertex to get rid of the edge problem with ERA.

In one of the frontline materials provided, one of the VDV Kornet operators explained that Kornet already has an indirect attack mode.
It must not fly along the laser beam, but can deviate to attack side/top.
Honestly, I have never heard it before.

Ahhh, that makes sense... I have seen videos... I think it was Combat Approved, about ATGMs... I think the Khrisantema, where they showed video footage of a missile that looks rather like Kornet, flying towards a T-72 type tank target, but instead of hitting it directly it flys like a Bofors Bill 2... it attacks from directly in front and the tank has its turret facing forward but it flies about 2m above the turret height and when it draws level with the tank directly over the turret it explodes with a plasma beam directed down through the turret and the turret is blown off... presumably it has a loaded autoloader and the ammo is hit directly by warhead...

The Kornet uses laser beam riding, so how hard would it be to send a pulse code through the beam it is riding on to the target to detonate the warhead as the missiles distance and the tanks distance are equal... a simple MAD detector would probably work too.

Just watched the Chrisantemum show and it mentions top attack weapons as a direction they are going with improved missile designs.

I thought it might have been on the Mi-28NM/LMUR video but I can't see it in that either.

lyle6 wrote:
Obr. 2021 probably increased the overlap on the vertex to get rid of the edge problem with ERA.

That would only apply if the hull used a "solid" wedge shaped composite array. It would also make no sense for them to have ever made a tank with the flier plates touching the hull in any section.

The-thing-next-door wrote:

That would only apply if the hull used a "solid" wedge shaped composite array. It would also make no sense for them to have ever made a tank with the flier plates touching the hull in any section.

No. There is another section of ERA where the interlap of the upper and lower wedge used to be. Look at the weld marks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PXt9TiYwVE
If they were doing this with the T72B like 20 years ago then it is expected for the T-14 to have a remote control mode as well

Atmosphere wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PXt9TiYwVE
If they were doing this with the T72B like 20 years ago then it is expected for the T-14 to have a remote control mode as well

A non-starter due to onboard REB jamming high bandwidth video transmissions en masse.

Between the SPN (active masking system) and REB (EW jammer) the EM spectrum is going to be highly contested. You can't kill what you can't see after all.

They could just get creative... a remote control vehicle is manually driven, but a modern flying drone uses an autopilot and waypoint navigation system to move around the battlefield without input from the operator.

Remember this is a sophisticated tank with auto loading guns and auto targeting optical systems that just requires the man inside to choose to fire or to not fire so shifting that responsibility to a remote operator wouldn't be that hard.

And penetrating the jamming system could be achieved in a few different ways including the coded laser based communication system they developed for the MiG-35 based on a satellite based system used between Russian satellites.

Obviously it is a direct line of sight system but to intercept it you would need to get between the two communicating lasers... which is not as easy as it sounds.

I mean they could even have a tethered drone that has a fibre optic cable through its tether that can be launched 300m up into the air and be clear of the jamming system to receive and transmit data like a submarine under water.

You could power the drone via the tether and have serious hardware on it like AESA radar and LIDAR and EO systems for recon and data collection... they are supposed to have something like this for the manned vehicle so why not the robot?

I would guess the first vehicles they make into robots will be older cheaper simpler models.

In fact fill them up with nitrogen gas which will prevent internal fire, and the enemy will have to hit something rather important before such a vehicle could be stopped.

Taking out tracks means it can still shoot and transmit information about enemy positions around it for attack by drone or helicopter or artillery.

To be useful the T-14 needs to be able to receive drone feeds and other video and audio signals so that REB system needs to be flexible and able to be turned off.

I suspect FPV drones will suffer the most from such a system though.

GarryB wrote:
To be useful the T-14 needs to be able to receive drone feeds and other video and audio signals so that REB system needs to be flexible and able to be turned off.

REB only needs to be activated during an attack. The jamming then gets lifted after the vehicle is safe.

GarryB wrote:
I mean they could even have a tethered drone that has a fibre optic cable through its tether that can be launched 300m up into the air and be clear of the jamming system to receive and transmit data like a submarine under water.

They do. Its called Pterodactyl I think. But they would have their pick of combat tested UAVs anyway. Think a hexacopter with greater payload, carrying an actual cooled IR camera, high powered optics with antennas to enable clear comms thru the REB zone...

Ob 477

Think a hexacopter with greater payload, carrying an actual cooled IR camera, high powered optics with antennas to enable clear comms thru the REB zone...

If it is a tethered drone then it can use a fibreoptic cable to transmit data and information to and from the tank and drone and it can also supply power to the drone which means the drone wont need to carry batteries or a motor/power supply.

Power from the tank could easily run a computer and AESA radar and IIR optics and LIDAR as needed...

The AESA radar could be used as a datalink to transmit information over significant distances too.