Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

T-14 ARMATA 

(edited)

        This thread is about glorious russian MBT T-14, known as "Armada", "T-95", "black eagle", "T-99" and other stupid Western names given to Object 148 (T-14 in some recent documents). Here is number of images connected to that vehicle.

 

w9ySXtI.jpg

Official model of unknown "artillery vehicle". Yeah, Putin, we know that this is T-14. Note Gatling gun on turret right side.

 

ydDLuG9.jpgArtist impression of T-14 based on known model, by Fyodor Podporin. 

 

S7DbA13.jpg

T-14 will use Relikt ERA, which is considerable improvement over Kontakt-5 in resisting to tandem HEAT warheads and EFPs.

vytlBcm.jpg

 

Side skirts would be thicker on a real vehicle, i think. Relikt have AFAIK bigger size than Kontakt-5 ERA build-in blocks.

oBFZcMT.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Whole album with renders: 

http://imgur.com/a/8Tn9b

 

Video of same render from same artist:

 

 

      People expect that tank would have turret weapon system like what you see on the BMP-3 "Bakhcha-U" turret - a lot of weapons in one turret for one gunner to work with. T-14 is rumored to be equipped with 30 (or even 57) mm autocannon, 4-6 barrel gatling type MG/HMG, new 125 (2A82) or even 152 mm (2A83) smoothbore cannons. Turret is unmanned, crew of 3 would be located in frontal part of hull, behind very serious frontal armor inside of compartment, well protected from all directions. Cannon would be loaded by new autoloading device. I hope that Burevestnik is working on them, those guys managed to make 100 mm Naval gun with RoF of 300 shots per minute.

 

      I really like how turret looks, but i don't understand why there is such a big turret "busket" for unmanned turret with all ammo placed inside of hull in special armored housing. Also, i don't see gunner sight and proposed FSC radar on 3D model (i assume that panoramic sight is for commander). Laser sensors on 3D model are from T-90A variant of "Shtora".

 

      Some officials mentioned works on new active protection system, that consist of powerfull radar station, that can work on "long ranges" and engage incoming projectiles (missiles) with that gatling MG. Will this system survive development stage and be presented on serial tanks is unknown. Although turret for T-15 Armata-based IFV already was shown with new APS "Afganit".

 

      If you pay attention you may see that artist used T-80 rollers for Armata chassis, and this is not a mistake - according to some sources Armata heavy chassis will use T-80 or T-80-like rollers to save weight. And looking at rear part of that tank you may notice a engine deck from gas-turbine equipped version of the T-80, which can be mistake becuase MoD want Armata with new ~1500 HP diesel engine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where does T-14 come from? Is it the 14th MBT mass produced by the USSR?

 

Or that little tidbit where it was announced as the T-14 in 2014.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this will end up like PAK-FA.  There were tons of studies and a handful of prototypes for new fighter aircraft in the late Soviet era, but PAK-FA was not a rehash of any of them.  People thought it would be based on 1.44, 7.01 or Berkut, but it was a novel design.  Internet speculation on its appearance was generally wrong.

 

A likely shopping list of features of Armata looks like this IMO:

 

-New 125mm gun that is backwards-compatible with existing ammunition stocks, but can use unitary ammunition with longer penetrators.  You probably can't get such a weapon to the same class as the Rheinmetall 120mm; there just isn't enough case volume to work with, but you could go a long way in bridging the gap, especially if the pressure ceiling were higher.

 

-Urban combat-oriented features like the JSDF Type 10.  Lots of cameras for driver and commander, remote weapons stations of some sort, thermal optics to highlight ATGM kill teams (how many times have you seen combat footage from Syrian and thought "man, those RPG tank-killer teams would be totally screwed if those T-72s had been refitted with thermals?"), short overall hull length, high-precision neutral steer, etc.

 

-Hydropneumatic suspension.  The Soviets have been playing with it since the 1950s, and now that the Russians aren't doing ginormous 10K production runs, they can splurge a bit on bling.

 

-Modular armor ala Merk IV seems to be the way to go.  For very little extra cost, you reserve the ability to up-armor your tank very easily in the future.

 

-Getting rid of the the frontal weak points around the driver's hatch and gun mantlet.  They've been trying to do this since Object 187, and Russian milbloggers love to harp on similar weakpoints on the abrams.

 

-Probably no turbine, alas.  Russian gas turbines still aren't as good as American or Western European models.  SFC and power density are comparable to their American counterparts and sometimes a little better, but TBO is still much, much worse.  A diesel should be fine, especially a fancy new common-rail fuel injector type.

 

-Auxiliary autocannon seems likely.

 

-I wouldn't rule out a driver-in-turret configuration.  The Soviets did more research on this arrangement than anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- T-14 will have a new gun - 125 mm smoothbore 2A82 cannon. AFAIK 2 new rounds are developed for it - Vaccum-1 (~900 mm long penetrator per rumors) and Vacuum-2 (DU). Also, it will have new programable HE-frag round - "Tel'nik" and new GL-ATGM "Sprinter".

 

- If you look at T-90M, you will see that it already have lots of cameras and RWS, pretty good thermal imager are in use by T-90A. I want to see a new active protection system, but i don't think they will go for such increase in price of a tank with ERA working as low-price solution.

 

- Suspension will be usual torsion bars, nothing new here.

 

- No info on armor.

 

- Already implemented, if known information is true.

 

- No cannon, sadly. MG/HMG and AGS-type of grande launcher as secondary weapons.

 

- Crew is in hull between frontal armor and turret/ammunition compartment. If crew compartment is arranged in same way as 195's/T-95s, tankers will found themselfs in more comfortable place compared with T-72/80/90. 

 

   Anyway, T-14 is aimed to be cheaper Object 195. 195's gun worked for 200 shots maximum, after wich it was becoming to prone to destroy itself (pressure was 2-3 times higher than any 125 guns tested before). Also, this vehicle actually had 30 mm autocannon. T-14 is planned to be new T-72, i guess, which can be a erroneous decision for future. 

   I really like idea of arming several elite divisions like Kantemirovskaya with Object 195 tank/TD and rest of Russian army with T-14 "MBT".       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

195's gun worked for 200 shots maximum, after wich it was becoming to prone to destroy itself (pressure was 2-3 times higher than any 125 guns tested before).

 

And they're not making it? but I need 200k psi guns in my life :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

   Anyway, T-14 is aimed to be cheaper Object 195. 195's gun worked for 200 shots maximum, after wich it was becoming to prone to destroy itself (pressure was 2-3 times higher than any 125 guns tested before). Also, this vehicle actually had 30 mm autocannon. T-14 is planned to be new T-72, i guess, which can be a erroneous decision for future. 

   I really like idea of arming several elite divisions like Kantemirovskaya with Object 195 tank/TD and rest of Russian army with T-14 "MBT".       

 

M829A3 has an EFC of 2, so over a total life of 1,500 EFC that comes to 750 rounds.  So 200 shots for something with completely nutso pressure isn't that bad.

 

Per Tanknet, M829A1 was 4 EFC, so you were down to 300-some shots with that stuff.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T-95 also had problems with non-existent side armor. It is like Ferdi IMO - TD for long ranges with crazy frontal armor and mediocre-at-best side armor. At least it have 30 mm autocannon to defend itself from pesky infantry, unlike Ferdi with its 1 and only weapon.

 

Although tankers had enough space to sit in that armored capsule. They had like 30 sm between crewmembers elbows! Dirty capitalists!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we know if Russia plans to export them or do they want to keep for domestic use only?

Unknown, although i expect that T-14 would not be avaliable to export, at least for some time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GLORIOUS "KURGANETS" 3D RENDER. Artist - Leonid Karyakin.

 

This is Object 699 IFV (BMP), based on Kurganets-25 unified chassis. 

 

YHL9eyV.jpg

 

tW8EqTD.jpg

 

iHz4YoI.jpg

 

CIzRkJN.jpg

 

4viCrlu.jpg

 

IlTDIoQ.jpg

 

tomVHKJ.jpg

 

CndHvAj.jpg

 

lgwXR7k.jpg

 

RiH0xfZ.jpg

 

 

3D model was based on different information, including this:

bOGgQfU.jpg

 

ICcOdSX.jpg

 

 

GLORIOUS KURGANETS WITH 57 MM AUTOCANNON.

Ja4dBFs.jpg

 

aj0RIhT.jpg

 

bsBhX5F.jpg

 

l2Zfdj9.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does it have half an IR countermeasure system?

ARTISTS IMPRESSION STOP OPPRESING ME YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW DARE YOU PLEASE STOP 

 

Yeah, this is Shtora 0.5. 0.5 litres, just like most popular vodka bottles! On serious side Shtora IR dazzlers are useless, i don't think we will see them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By seppo
      Hello,
      this is my first post. Please no bully. :3
       
      Panzerkampfwagen 2000
      In 1988 Germany developed a concept for a tank with two crew men. In order to test whether it's possible for only two crew men to operate a tank effectively, a Leopard 1 and a Leopard 2 were modified. 


      Field trials were held in 1990 and subsequently it was concluded to be a viable concept in 1992. The project was however canceled, because the downfall of the Soviet Union meant, that a new battle tank was no longer needed. Furthermore Israel stealing submarines and reunification meant that the budget was not sufficient either.
       
      Neue Gepanzerte Plattform
      In 1995 a concept for a whole family of armored vehicles(SPAAG, MBT, IFV) was developed, where the MBT would be manned by two man, just like the Panzerkampfwagen 2000. A prototype was build and tested in 1997. However a further budget cut lead to the cancellation in 1998. Wegmann desgin: Turret + autoloader:
      http://www.patent-de.com/pdf/DE19644524A1.pdf
      Diehl developed an APS for this tank: AWiSS


      EGS:
      Hull length = 8,67m
      Full width = 3,98m
      Width between the tracks = 3,5m
      Height = 2,71m
      The intended combat weight for the complete tank was between 55t and 77t.
      Can anyone calculate the the cross section areas and the protection levels for the front and the side, assuming mid-90s filler materials were used?
       
      Thanks for your attention!
    • By Tied
      Yes
       
      i personally support it, by finding the KGB Felix Dzerzhinsky greatly improved state scurrility both inside the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and abroad (their jurisdiction was only domestic, but they kept the internationally influential people safe at night)   a dedicated defender of both the Revolution and all the Soviet peoples     what do you think of this news?
    • By LoooSeR
      Well, we have thread about Yemen conflict and Ukrainian war, so in light of recent changes in situation in Syria, this thread became relevant enough, IMO.
       
       

       

×