Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

alanch90

Contributing Members
  • Content Count

    195
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

alanch90 last won the day on November 29 2019

alanch90 had the most liked content!

About alanch90

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. You are falling short with that description. But its not only that. Militarly a vehicle like that doesn´t make any sense for its weight and terrain crossing capabilities. Our tanks don´t weight more than 30 tons for good reason and they are tracked. Besides the strykers are going to be impossible to maintain, just buying enough parts for more than 2 years would be a historical achievement. Most likely in 5-10 years if the Strykers are brought here, they are going to be cannibalized for parts or for the black market. "Big" weapons/equipment acquisition, even for civilian use, from overseas has always been problematic and riddled with corruption. Besides, its going to be very difficult for the government to sell this to the public and many more things are more important and urgent than military expenditures. Things are really really bad here. Just as a reminder/example: the contracts for the TAM modernization program have been signed almost a decade ago and no single tank has been updated. Fishy stuff going on behind the scenes. The last government (which was a particularly shitty government if i might say so) tried to buy junk Super Etendards from France and it didn´t go well. Most likely this is going to end just the same.
  2. I remember when the T-14 first appeared in Moscow some people filmed the tanks lifting the forward roller wheels when taking sharp curves. But that was never captured in photos until now.
  3. Just now i´m noticing that in this picture the tank has its forward right suspension arm lifted while taking a curve to the right.
  4. Interesting the bit about the specific ammunition made anew. I guess that can only point to the ´Vacuum´ apfsds. On the other hand the description the author gives about the ATGM also points to what we know about Sokol-V, but the journalist calls it "Reflex-M" ON the other hand, what does Murakhovsky mean by " The entire fire control, reconnaissance and surveillance system is only the technical channels of view, there are no direct optical channels for reconnaissance, target designation and firing" ?
  5. An article on the "Chinese Armata" has surfaced. Most important design characteristics: unmanned turret and 2 man crew. Judging by the drawings, it may suggest less emphasis on armor compared to T-14, even on the front of the crew compartment. The shape of the crew compartment is very reminiscing of the front hull of the Abrams, but in this case the UFP actually has a composite layer. As for the turret it looks very much like a clusterf*ck in my opinion, lots of sights and very uncommon placement for other turret equipment. The main gun seems like a 125 or even a 105mm, if its supposed to to be a traditional one or something border sci-fi like electrothermal-chemical is still unknown. I still don't know what to think about this thing, i'm still digesting it. But judging from the overall characteristics it suggest a tank lighter than T-14, perhaps in the 40 ton class, which makes sense so that its less restricted in terms of operation depending on the terrain, unlike heavier tanks such as Type 99A. https://club.6parkbbs.com/military/index.php?app=forum&act=threadview&tid=15471684
  6. I meant in the latest pictures you posted. Back when Kurganets was first unveiled it had that arrangement but then in other TV shows about the vehicle, other preproduction variants had the driver sitting in front and left of the commander (with the engine by his right), and now again the driver and commander appear to be sitting side by side...its a little confusing to be honest,
  7. So in the current crew arrangement for Kurganets, the commander sits side by side to the driver?
  8. Should be interchangeable, its the same caliber and gun. However i dont know if T-15 has the guiding equipment.
  9. As far as i know, the russians are already working on guided 57mm ammo but i think that its going to be compatible with the larger case and used for AA, which makes a lot of sense.
  10. Just by the size of the case, the "short" 57mm for the Epokha (57x185mm according to my estimations) might be comparable or slightly more powerful than the american 50mm (50x228mm). The "big" 57mm as used on the Kinzhal/Baikal (57x348SR) would just be overkill IMHO and i don´t see how an IFV that remains in the sub 40 ton category (or even sub 50 ton) might survive the "short" 57mm frontally. For IFV use, the "short" 57mm is just more convenient, takes up a lot less space, even using about half of the internal volume of the Epokha (the whole right side is used for the baby Kornets for which i don´t see any practical justification) it can fit more 57mm shells than the Kinzhal/Baikal turret (80 vs ~170). What seems more problematic than which 57mm is better would be that these futuristic IFVs lack ATGMs with modern features (fire and forget, LOAL, top attack, etc.).
  11. Wouldnt the "ballasts" be those seemingly added blocky structures to the turret?
  12. Now here´s the karma for making up stories about taking the T-14 to syria with no supporting evidence: anybody else can just claim that the tanks failed in combat. It amazes me how fake news can just pile up on top of eachother, next week we are gonna here from some russian official that T-14 had an astounding baptism of fire in Syria killing 500 terrorists . https://topcor.ru/14417-zajavleno-o-potere-odnogo-tanka-t-14-armata-v-sirii.html?fbclid=IwAR0bEGtvO_VXonVNM2uTfCuxyvOlEjIrjS1Smk9OA48vbhs3JO4s8FFJ5cU
×
×
  • Create New...