Jump to content


Photo

Armata


  • Please log in to reply
976 replies to this topic

#941 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Of the Veronica Cartwright Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,970 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 29 August 2017 - 0942 AM

 

Comfortably is a euphemism for 'Everyone has to be really great friends with each other'? :D

I suppose you could go even more radical and add a road wheel. The other option is an unmanned turret with a bustle autoloader and crew partly underneath it.

 

 

Look at BMPT. 3 up front. It is not necessary to maintain the hull deck as is. The remote turret module will be new so why tie yourself to the old carousel? Will it be very cheap...no but oth it will probably be quite a bit less than the ground up T14.

 

Well if they can fit an Armata turret on light afv chassis, they can probably fit it on damn near anything and save a lot of room  if they did it on legacy equipment.

 

In actual fact, that might be a better use of Armata turrets than plonking them on Armata hulls. As least a T72/T90 is a known deal as far as mechanical reliability.

 

Food for thought that.


  • 0

#942 AETiglathPZ

AETiglathPZ

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 703 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, IL

Posted 29 August 2017 - 1001 AM

T-72B3 is still designed to play an MTB role though, a lot of the cost of the upgrade is the FCS, with the aim of improving the ability to engage enemy armor. I am thinking something far cheaper, based mostly around improving the armor protection just to the point where you can throw some HE at infantry and not be terrified that it is going to cook up as soon as you get some ATGM return fire.

Realistically, Russia needs more of a edge in fighting its poorer former Soviet Union neighbors.

 

T-72B3 also is able to handle the latest ammo. Not sure what is modified inside with the autoloader to do that.

 

But, having a thermal imager to see infantry and vehicles sneeking in the night is a huge upgrade in capability. Adding a anti-missile system, next, can take care of allot of the protection requirement. Since they have been experimenting, and have a newer system with Armata, assume it is a matter of budget for procurement more than a technical issue.


  • 0

#943 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,451 posts

Posted 29 August 2017 - 1018 AM

Look at BMPT. 3 up front. It is not necessary to maintain the hull deck as is. The remote turret module will be new so why tie yourself to the old carousel? Will it be very cheap...no but oth it will probably be quite a bit less than the ground up T14.

If you have the ammunition pointing forwards in a non rotating carousel under the turret you can lift the round from the carousel, spin it to match the turret alignment, lift it again to draw it to the breech and load.That makes the ammunition storage shorter and more compact and you can use unitary rounds, freeing a bit of additional space under the turret to add to the crew compartment,


Edited by KV7, 29 August 2017 - 1019 AM.

  • 0

#944 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,012 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 August 2017 - 2105 PM

Looking good in a new paint job...

T-14%20Armata_International%20Military%2
  • 0

#945 Hakka

Hakka

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm trees and pearly white sand
  • Interests:Obscure facts about common tanks

Posted 29 August 2017 - 2248 PM

T-72B3 also is able to handle the latest ammo. Not sure what is modified inside with the autoloader to do that.

 

But, having a thermal imager to see infantry and vehicles sneeking in the night is a huge upgrade in capability. Adding a anti-missile system, next, can take care of allot of the protection requirement. Since they have been experimenting, and have a newer system with Armata, assume it is a matter of budget for procurement more than a technical issue.

 

 

I've heard some claims that the new autoloader is able to handle longer ammo because the new electric motor for rotating the carousel is smaller.

 

The T-72B is pretty good against anything short of a top-attack missile, and I've heard rumors that the K-5 panels on the T-72B3 are fitted with 4S23 reactive elements from Relikt instead of the original 4S22 elements, and this apparently increases the sensitivity of the ERA so that it can defeat tandem warheads. No idea if this is true though. 


  • 0

#946 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Of the Veronica Cartwright Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,970 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 30 August 2017 - 0150 AM

Looking good in a new paint job...

T-14%20Armata_International%20Military%2

 

Yes, and Ive got a 1.35 scale model kit that is just begging to be airbrushed in this scheme. :)


  • 0

#947 Mr King

Mr King

    Leet Russian Hacker

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,144 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Deep below Moscow
  • Interests:Vodka and Democrat Party Internet Servers

Posted 30 August 2017 - 1256 PM

I don't know if the Armata is going to be a practical success or not, but I think it wins on looks. 


  • 0

#948 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,131 posts
  • Interests:tanks. More tanks. Guns. BIG GUNs!

Posted 31 August 2017 - 1109 AM

The new camlooks great.
  • 0

#949 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Of the Veronica Cartwright Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,970 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 11 September 2017 - 1253 PM

http://uk.businessin...017-9?r=US&IR=T

It turns out that around the same time Russia claimed that its MiG-31 successor would fly in space, it also claimed that not only its next generation T-14 Armata tank, but the entire Armata armored vehicle series, will be able to run on Mars.

"Magic Starter: Armata Engines Make It Fit For Martian Temperature" was the headline of an article from Sputnik in late August. 

"Russia’s Armata tanks and armored vehicles are to receive mobile power stations to ensure immediate and smooth engine starts at temperatures of even minus 50 degrees Celsius," Sputnik, a Russian state-owned media outlet, said.

The Armata Universal Combat Platform is a new series of Russian tracked armored vehicles that have interchangeable hulls and parts. The vehicles have not been mass produced yet, but the series, which was unveiled in 2015, supposedly includes the T-14 tank, the T-15 (the next generation "Terminator"), the T-16, the huge Koalitsiya-SV, and maybe more.

Essentially, Sputnik is claiming that the Armata engines will run on Mars because they have new super-condensers, similar to start-stop technology, that allow the engines to start in temperatures as low as -58 Fahrenheit.

But, as The National Interest pointed out, not only is the average temperature on Mars at -80 Fahrenheit, and it can even get as low as -195 Fahrenheit, but the internal-combustion engine would also probably not be able to handle the Martian atmosphere.


  • 0

#950 Hakka

Hakka

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Palm trees and pearly white sand
  • Interests:Obscure facts about common tanks

Posted 11 September 2017 - 1624 PM

:wacko:


  • 0

#951 Adam Peter

Adam Peter

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 941 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sopron, Hungary
  • Interests:history, music

Posted 12 September 2017 - 1240 PM

No,they are not claiming that, Martian temperature is not equal to neither Martian surface nor Martian atmosphere. The average temperature of Mars? Who measured and when? Anyway, even the US Pathfinder mission reported -43 Celsius degree average.


  • 0

#952 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Of the Veronica Cartwright Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,970 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 12 September 2017 - 1247 PM

Well its not altogether clear whom made the Martian linkage, but it was certainly a headline on Sputnik news.

https://sputniknews....a-power-armata/

 

 

As a fan of the Arcade machine 'Battlezone' I could appreciate the irony of this. :)


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 12 September 2017 - 1307 PM.

  • 0

#953 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,579 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 January 2018 - 1210 PM

...


Edited by GARGEAN, 05 January 2018 - 1215 PM.

  • 0

#954 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,482 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 05 January 2018 - 1628 PM

Going from discussing the Armata series to talking about engines on Mars, could only happen on Tank-Net.  :D

 

The idea of using the Armata turret on other tank hulls (T-72, T-80, T-90) is an interesting one.  It would be a cheaper way to upgrade the firepower and presumably the protection (with APS) of the vehicle, without having to build a new hull.  Can a T-14 Armata turret, however, actually be mounted on a T-72 or T-90 MBT chassis?

 

Going back a few years to when the Obj.640 "Black Eagle" was being talked about on every military forum going, there were at least two versions in pictures that I've seen.  One was a modified T-80U hull with 6 roadwheels.  The other was the Black Eagle "proper" with 7 roadwheels.  Hmm maybe they had the same idea then?  Upgrading tanks with a new turret that is?  I've only really read that the vehicle was designed as a technology demonstrator and never actually intended for production, more than a handful of concept vehicles anyway.

 

Must admit I like the new camoflague too.  I was concerned it was going to be covered in this rather awful digital camo style that seems more common these days.  Yuck.  Might look even better in a ghillie suit...if you could spot it that is!  


  • 0

#955 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,579 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 05 January 2018 - 1829 PM

Going from discussing the Armata series to talking about engines on Mars, could only happen on Tank-Net.  :D
 
The idea of using the Armata turret on other tank hulls (T-72, T-80, T-90) is an interesting one.  It would be a cheaper way to upgrade the firepower and presumably the protection (with APS) of the vehicle, without having to build a new hull.  Can a T-14 Armata turret, however, actually be mounted on a T-72 or T-90 MBT chassis?
 
Going back a few years to when the Obj.640 "Black Eagle" was being talked about on every military forum going, there were at least two versions in pictures that I've seen.  One was a modified T-80U hull with 6 roadwheels.  The other was the Black Eagle "proper" with 7 roadwheels.  Hmm maybe they had the same idea then?  Upgrading tanks with a new turret that is?  I've only really read that the vehicle was designed as a technology demonstrator and never actually intended for production, more than a handful of concept vehicles anyway.
 
Must admit I like the new camoflague too.  I was concerned it was going to be covered in this rather awful digital camo style that seems more common these days.  Yuck.  Might look even better in a ghillie suit...if you could spot it that is!  

Nope, T-14 turret could not be properly installed on any other tank without extensive hull rebuild. Just no space for crew. Proper "drop-in" turret for whole T-series was Burlak, but sadly it died.
  • 0

#956 Ben Dejo

Ben Dejo

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 181 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 January 2018 - 1116 AM

Going from discussing the Armata series to talking about engines on Mars, could only happen on Tank-Net.  :D

 

The idea of using the Armata turret on other tank hulls (T-72, T-80, T-90) is an interesting one.  It would be a cheaper way to upgrade the firepower and presumably the protection (with APS) of the vehicle, without having to build a new hull.  Can a T-14 Armata turret, however, actually be mounted on a T-72 or T-90 MBT chassis?

 

 

 

The one thing I see working against this is hull height, the T-14 is noticeably taller than T-64/T-72, and if the propellant charges are longer than what 2A46M is using I'm assuming that they would have to go to a vertical stowage arrangement ( making the hull taller)...The more I look at this in my mind T-72 doesn't work as well with this but M-60 might just be fantastic as far as rearranging the interior.  (lose the hull bomb, replace with crew), heck with Armata turret it might even be shorter


  • 0

#957 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,482 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 07 January 2018 - 1139 AM

Thank you for the replies.  I figured it wouldn't be as simple as just replacing one turret with another, even without the added issue of where the tank crew would actually be located within the vehicle.  I still wonder even now how someone managed to shoehorn a BMP-3 turret onto a BTR 8x8 chassis...

 

I haven't heard of this Burlak project before.  Without looking to drag the discussion too far from topic, is there any information available on this?


  • 0

#958 KV7

KV7

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,451 posts

Posted 07 January 2018 - 2051 PM

It would take too much work. You could cut the hull roof off, extend the glacis, and shift the engine back to make room but by the time you do that you may as well start from scratch.


Edited by KV7, 08 January 2018 - 1549 PM.

  • 0

#959 Blunt Eversmoke

Blunt Eversmoke

    despicable hypocrite with nothing to crow for

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,040 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sellin them conre durgs to kid,s in a school near YOU, sport! I culd go onand on!!
  • Interests:Trollin'. Get'n paided. No bonuses, tho.

Posted 08 January 2018 - 0246 AM

Thank you for the replies.  I figured it wouldn't be as simple as just replacing one turret with another, even without the added issue of where the tank crew would actually be located within the vehicle.  I still wonder even now how someone managed to shoehorn a BMP-3 turret onto a BTR 8x8 chassis...

 

I haven't heard of this Burlak project before.  Without looking to drag the discussion too far from topic, is there any information available on this?

For a quick read-up, scroll down on this page. Since Burlak is at least conceptually related to Black Eagle, there is some info on Burlak there. It's even in Ye Olde Englishe.


  • 0

#960 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,482 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 08 January 2018 - 1329 PM

 

Thank you for the replies.  I figured it wouldn't be as simple as just replacing one turret with another, even without the added issue of where the tank crew would actually be located within the vehicle.  I still wonder even now how someone managed to shoehorn a BMP-3 turret onto a BTR 8x8 chassis...

 

I haven't heard of this Burlak project before.  Without looking to drag the discussion too far from topic, is there any information available on this?

For a quick read-up, scroll down on this page. Since Burlak is at least conceptually related to Black Eagle, there is some info on Burlak there. It's even in Ye Olde Englishe.

 

Great find, thank you  :)


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users