Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

Ob. 699 has turned up!

Udj2N.jpg

(found on tanknet)

I wanted to post it, but i was in bed when this photo surfaced otvaga forums and Gurkhan blog.

 

Note how close 3D render was to actual vehicle. On that photo BMP is driving without sideskirts. I don't understand why they try to hide turret- it was filmed pretty well months ago. In fact, people already found a patent for turret-mounted air intake for engine in hull, that is used with BMP's new turret.

 

BUMERANG-BM_140130_07.jpg

 

vhme993.jpg

 

148712_600.jpg

 

EPOHA_01.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That artist impression looks almost like something the Israelis would build.

Yeah, i posted that in T110 thread day before:

"lol, somebody likes how Merkava 3 Bet Baz dor Dalet looks. "

 

On a subject of leaks:

https://www.google.ru/maps/place/%D0%90%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE,+%D0%9C%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F+%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BB./@55.5388955,36.9662454,223m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x46caa89465ee6f95:0xd67333ab8d1ca003

 

That guy with a tennis court and pond have very interesting veiw from his house on Alabino prooving ground (west from his house). #CIAsalaries #taxpayersmoney #frenchwinesallday #Armataphotosfrommykichen 

 

QWc1_VW6II0.jpg

 

cFwcOgw.jpg

I hate Maskirovka sometimes.  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So i heard that T-14's rollers are 700 mm in diameter...

 

IdB4Lxs.jpg

Of course, if 700 mm rollers are actually 700 mm in diameter (T-80's rollers were IIRC 670 mm). And i feel that something is wrong with my measurements, maybe because of camera. Clearance is about 400-450 mm. Frontal part of hull height is around 1100 mm, but it could be actually bigger. 

 

Another measurements, from BMPD LJ comments, which is much better than my attempts.

68230_original.png(in sm). 

 

 

 

DM3CJ.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Frontal hull:

4f3bb6abfdd4.jpg

Possibly it is not equipped with ERA at this photo for safety/transportation reasons.

 

Stolen from Otvaga forum:

5isFz.jpg

Commander and driver are visible. Commander is on right side of tank, driver is in the center, and slightly "ahead" of commander. And size of that hatch (thickness)... i feel that they considered measures against top-attack weapons.

 

Possible layout of crew compartment: (Wrong)

zrPAj.png

 

8RNsP.png

Driver ("MB") is in the front center, commander (KT) on the right, gunner (HO) is on the left, while autoloader ("BO/A3") is behind driver/slightly between gunner and commander. 

 

armata.1427208391.png

Or like that.

 

First and second rollers have 2 different shock absorbers - "2" is telescopic shock absorber [metal detail to prevent overtraveling of the roller support arm], while "1" is rotary shock absorber, and all that system is similar to Merkava 4 shock absorbers:

3OKQY.jpg

 

 

Merkava 4:

105069-1-f.jpg

 

220px-Merkava_spring.jpg

 

merkava_3.jpg

 

Turret, another angle:

142718393665251891.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that was like the merkava you'd have a very short spring - it seems to hide entirely behind the road wheel. IMO thing #1 is a damper, and #2 is a bump stop in an odd place (acting on the swingarm connected to the damper, which probably made sense when they designed the thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If that was like the merkava you'd have a very short spring - it seems to hide entirely behind the road wheel. IMO thing #1 is a damper, and #2 is a bump stop in an odd place (acting on the swingarm connected to the damper, which probably made sense when they designed the thing)

Well, one guy on otvaga forum, that known more about Armata suspension than average human should IMO, noted several things about T-14's chassis. He said that it use rotary shock absorbers amongst other things. In fact, here is some of his posts (sorry for some mistakes, he use some professional jargon):

 

     "Supporting surface is increased. Therefore there was no need to "broaden" tracks. Longer length provides better passableness. However, it increases resistance to rotation. 

 

      In general, suspension is well optimized. Perfect geometry, correct rollers diameter. Note the lack of sagging in not loaded areas of tracks [he talk about tracks near/between support rollers]. Suspension is not active, but it is controllable, it is controlled by rotary shock absorbers. And because of this support arm is thick. "Telescopes" [telescopic shock absorber] - they are hydro stops that create a very progressive force when [terrain] is applying to much force ["trying to break trough"]. 

 

      Exhaust goes to the sides, where it is mixed with air [exhaust gases are going trough side armor module, where it is mixed with air]. Reduce thermal signature. It is [located] above vital units, so penetration does not resulting in damage to vital parts. Exhaust to the rear would impair state of health of infantry, which is moving behind the tank [during operations]. Layout [with side-mounted exhaust] is easier. Rear plate - without holes, provides the necessary rigidity for engine deck. 

 

      Engine is X12 diesel, steering gear and transmission are mechanical. Specified turning radius and shifting is controlled by an automatic movement system, as well as suspension. All fuel is under armor. Hatches have double armor plates [sort of spaced armor], as well as all the desired zone on the top [of hull]. Generally, there are no traditional weakspots))).

      Thick side armor covers, amongst other things, autoloader and ammunition. All ammunition is automated (in autoloader).
 
      Each person has his own hatch. There is no need to climd to other [crew working stations], because there is a duplication of control. Hatches are opened in such way, that in any position of the turret soldiers could leave the vehicle.

 

      About the participation of rollers in protection of the sides - it is far-fetched. The probability of hitting this zone is small. If there is a hit, it is usually a small caliber weapon. Protection of the sides - new modular screens/skirts and thick, non-homogeneous side armor [of the hull]."

 

 

     Although this guy don't know anything about turret design. Well, at least it is what he said for now. And that all can be just joke or something else. 

 

Anyway - this vehicle is clearly was copied from Western designs - it doesn't have a SUPERIOR SOVIET LOG!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 "Supporting surface is increased. Therefore there was no need to "broaden" tracks. Longer length provides better passableness. However, it increases resistance to rotation.

 

This has been bugging me - if it's true, then it seems reasonable to assume the ground pressure is no greater than that of T-90. And since the tracks are the same width, then we can set an upper limit on the weight using only the relative increase in track length. With this image on my screen the T-72 track on the ground is 11cm long, and the T-14 track is 13cm long, so the vehicle has a maximum weight of about 18% more than T-90 - or about 55 tonnes, going by the T-90S weight from uralvagonzavod. So about the same as a Mk5 chieftain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

txCiP.jpg

I feel that Spotters are sitting on all trees around Alabino.

 

They even infiltrated Alabino itself!

kEDsI0zRmF8.jpg

T-34-85, lol.

 

    Ok, look at Kurganets-25 IFV - there is something mounted on the edge of UFP. I think those are camera systems for driver, because he is located in such place, that engine obscure driver "close" vision - he don't see 5-7 meters in front of the vehicle.

 

4bmzeds.jpg

 

There is a photo of the BMP-3 with some kind of device, similar to what Kurganets-25 have, although rumors say that this device on BMP-3 is part of "Veer" active protection system.

w_31372540.jpg

 

2993535_5cbe1d286564a521cfaeed73329d135e

Yeah, those 3 things looks like some kind of active protection system. Allegedly.

 

    Side armor plates are installed, they look like Relikt ERA blocks from armor package for BMP-3. Compare tracks width of the Kurganets and BMD to the right from it. IIRC they have comparable length of tracks, so Kurganets is noticeably heavier. Frontal hull is also equipped with some sort of add-on armor plates, 1 big and 2 smaller blocks at lower part of hull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Xlu, on 26 Mar 2015 - 04:45 AM, said:

This has been bugging me - if it's true, then it seems reasonable to assume the ground pressure is no greater than that of T-90. And since the tracks are the same width, then we can set an upper limit on the weight using only the relative increase in track length. With this image on my screen the T-72 track on the ground is 11cm long, and the T-14 track is 13cm long, so the vehicle has a maximum weight of about 18% more than T-90 - or about 55 tonnes, going by the T-90S weight from uralvagonzavod. So about the same as a Mk5 chieftain.

That image is not right. It shows T-72, and it assume that T-72's rollers have same size as T-14s, which is unlikely.

 

d2608f454424.jpg

T-80BV and T-14 size comparison.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such secrecy, very protected, much canvas.

 

 

T-15 spotted, exhaust in frontal part of side plate, and unmanned turret with 30 mm autocannon + 4 Kornets ATGMs. 

 

2993909_1370b9ce951e85f73734b91842696ebf

T-14 with side skirts/ERA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russians are masters of maskirovka!

 

I suspect there should be room for a dismount or two in T-15, due to the layout - it's ideal for a rear hatch. The spaced armour on the front reminds me of ERA mounts on russian turrets, and the angle of the lamppost reminds me of russian dashcam videos :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All these "Armatas" are actually old bicycle parts, cardboard boxes, and some tarps they found, built to mislead foreign spies.

Sounds good to me. Let's go lads...

...

Wait just a cotton picking minute!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaks... they don't stop coming! Today Object 195 photo was leaked.

pne1XKS.jpg

So now you know why somebody was thinking that the T-14 can have 30 mm autocannon as co-axial weapon?  :)

 

 

 

T-15 heavy IFV uses Armata chassis, only backwards (engine is in the front) with strange looking frontal armor. Side skirts are removed.

 

And it is a f cking land battleship.

ADUy1PL.png

 

pft0iIc.png

 

y6dM05w.png

 

Note that T-15 is equipped with same unmanned turret as Kurganets-25. single 30 mm 2A42 autocannon, 4 Kornets, 7.62 GPMG. Later, it could be upgraded with 57 mm autocannon, 57 mm LShO assault heavy grenade launcher, or 40 mm autocannon.

 

Turret:

Screenshot_3.jpg

Note 57 mm LShO heavy grenade launcher on lower part of this photo.

 

%25D1%258D%25D0%25BF%25D0%25BE%25D1%2585

 

This turret have 500 rounds inside for 30 mm 2A42 autocannon, 4 Kornet ATGM with max range up to 8-10 km, 

 

There is some information about FCS:

- Can search camouflaged targets with "optical locator";
- Can engage 2 targets simultaneously;
- High-performance shooting against air targets using automatical target tracking at elevation up to 70 degrees;
- Combat operation in remote control;
- Can engage targets using external target designation;
 
iT2NZNK.jpg
Stages of development of this unmanned turret. 
1. Berezhok (turret for upgraded BMP-2s)
2. Kurganets (current turret)
3. Epokha (future system).

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 LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
    • 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.
       
       

       

×