Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

.cOGtJMuESIk.jpg

Apparently they are going to put this turret on the Bumerang and Kurganets vehicles. I hope it's not a replacement for the Epoch turret. It looks kind of cheap.

 

This is turret for Typhoon-VDV, posted some info about it in Soviet tank thread. I didn't heard anything about this turret replacing *Epokha.

 

*Current turrets on Bumerangs and Kurganets is not Epokha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unmanned version of T-14 Armata to be made in 2018 according to Sputnik: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160909/1045123818/unmanned-robotic-armata.html.

If such a tank was to be made it would have a number of advantages over manned tanks. Firstly the tank would not be limited by human shortcomings. It would work in a more efficient manner since the crew would not be under pressure and stress from operating under battlefield conditions. Furthermore the crew would not be put into danger. Now imagine a hypothetical situation were a tank gets penetrated by an ATGM and kills one or more of the crew but the tank is left in tact and is in 'working condition'. Such a tank would be immobilized but the Armata would not. This happened to the Israelis in 2006 where scores of damaged but not necessarily destroyed Merkava tanks were abandoned just over the border with Lebanon. At the very least a damaged Armata could offer resistance. Also it would be fun killing people like in video games  :D  :D  :D . Just my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is turret for Typhoon-VDV, posted some info about it in Soviet tank thread. I didn't heard anything about this turret replacing *Epokha.

 

*Current turrets on Bumerangs and Kurganets is not Epokha. 

I was talking about the Epoch turret or Bumerang-BM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

   Эпоха \ Epokha is a turret for Kurganets and Bumerang (check first pages of this thread), current version is not completely an Epokha (needs different main gun). BMD-4 turret is version of Bakhcha-U. 

 

This is "almost" Epokha

EPOHA_01.jpg

 

Slide showing names of turrets. Was posted on page 3 of this thread. Current turret is just "Kurganets" or Kurganets-BM.

iT2NZNK.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

. This happened to the Israelis in 2006 where scores of damaged but not necessarily destroyed Merkava tanks were abandoned just over the border with Lebanon. At the very least a damaged Armata could offer resistance. 

abandoned? scores?

 

Every damaged tank was fixed and returned to combat within hours.

The only tank I know was abandoned was a Merkava 2 that was partially destroyed by heavy IED and later finished by the IDF and dumped somewhere.

 

scores mean there were many. 1 is not many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you have never heard of the Battle Wadi Saluki or 'Operation Change of Direction'. 20 immobilized Israeli tanks and armored vehicles were initially abandoned and were returned only after the ceasefire came in effect. But this is not the forum to discuss Israeli military losses.

 

abandoned? scores?

 

Every damaged tank was fixed and returned to combat within hours.

The only tank I know was abandoned was a Merkava 2 that was partially destroyed by heavy IED and later finished by the IDF and dumped somewhere.

 

scores mean there were many. 1 is not many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you have never heard of the Battle Wadi Saluki or 'Operation Change of Direction'. 20 immobilized Israeli tanks and armored vehicles were initially abandoned and were returned only after the ceasefire came in effect. But this is not the forum to discuss Israeli military losses.

We have a thread about Merkavas. Also, about casualties:

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/214-the-merkava-israels-chieftain/?p=5574

 

   I never heard about 20 immobilized Israeli tanks/AFVs at any point of 2006 Lebanon Missile war. I think this is some kind of BS, as number of tanks, that received any serious damage from RPGs/ATGMs was less than 15, another point - number of ATGM teams of Al-Mukowama was also pretty small (a little more than single digits number) in this conflict. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then you have never heard of the Battle Wadi Saluki or 'Operation Change of Direction'. 20 immobilized Israeli tanks and armored vehicles were initially abandoned and were returned only after the ceasefire came in effect. But this is not the forum to discuss Israeli military losses.

These numbers are overblown, as only 24 tanks received some form of penetration throughout the course of the entire war (IEDs mostly), and only 2 destroyed by ATGMs. Battle of Saluki was fought with mainly ATGMs and I haven't heard of forces running into IEDs.

 

I've heard plenty enough about the Battle of Saluki. Completely unnecessary operation ordered by an idiotic minister of defense who should have just resigned and kept working in his farm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

  Optical fiber in Armata was used in a general (multi-service integration) data sharing system. It is easier to assemble, easier to service, have much higher EMP resistance and more reliable. It also have higher "traffic capacity" that usual cables. 

(...)

   In targeting mode FCS can memorize the position and the priority of targets, marked by commander and give them to the gunner while aim weapons on the target. The tactical data exchange mode, the coordinates are automatically calculated of the objectives marked using GLONASS data, object distance, measured by LD, the azimuthal angle at the target angle and target locations.

   All this together with the tactical information about targets commander passes through the network of the unit, then the unit commander decides what needs to be send "up", and what to share just in unit network. In the "double" mode TC, takes over firing, and the gunner at this time can sit in the "hunter" mode, to continue observation/target searching. But gunner can't give the coordinates and tactical information into the net, he can not  - " we have means, but not enough right".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Article from the most reliable source ever: http://izvestia.ru/news/636502

The only reason I even bother posting it is because the information contained is basically a known: Armata will use an updated variant of the Kalina FCS as seen on the T-90MS. The article claims the T-72 and T-90 will receive but that's kind of unlikely for both unless the latter gets updated.

This plus other news basically means T-14 has a comparable FCS to any of the Western beasts (for the first time since the 70's on a Russian tank tbh). TC can designate targets that are then relayed to the Gunner's screen, said targets can be automatically tracked (and most likely that includes tracking prediction) with all important variables accounted for. I may be mistaken but it also seems like the TC can designate multiple targets in a specific order: so they can be automatically engaged once the last one has been destroyed/engaged. Gunner only has to press fire :P almost.

LoooSeR, you know anything more on the ammunition situation? One article made it sound like APFSDS was still in development when another claimed it was already being produced, or something like that. I know the guys at Otvaga discussed this but the translation barrier is very tall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 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 LoooSeR
      I want to show you several late Soviet MBT designs, which were created in 1980s in order to gain superiority over NATO focres. I do think that some of them are interesting, some of them look like a vehicle for Red Alert/Endwar games. 
           
           Today, Russia is still use Soviet MBTs, like T-80 and T-72s, but in late 1970s and 1980s Soviet military and engineers were trying to look for other tank concepts and designs. T-64 and other MBTs, based on concept behind T-64, were starting to reaching their limits, mostly because of their small size and internal layout. 
       
      PART 1
       
       
      Object 292
       
         We open our Box of Communism Spreading Godless Beasts with not so much crazy attempt to mate T-80 hull with 152 mm LP-83 gun (LP-83 does not mean Lenin Pride-83). It was called Object 292.
       
       
       
          First (and only, sadly) prototype was build in 1990, tested at Rzhevskiy proving ground (i live near it) in 1991, which it passed pretty well. Vehicle (well, turret) was developed by Leningrad Kirov factory design bureau (currently JSC "Spetstrans") Because of collapse of Soviet Union this project was abandoned. One of reasons was that main gun was "Burevestnik" design bureau creation, which collapsed shortly after USSR case to exist. It means that Gorbachyov killed this vehicle. Thanks, Gorbach!
       
          Currently this tank is localted in Kubinka, in running condition BTW. Main designer was Nikolay Popov.
       
          Object 292, as you see at photos, had a new turret. This turret could have been mounted on existing T-80 hulls without modifications to hull (Object 292 is just usual serial production T-80U with new turret, literally). New Mechanical autoloading mechanism was to be build for it. Turret had special Abrams-like bustle for ammunition, similar feature you can see on Ukrainian T-84-120 Yatagan MBT and, AFAIK, Oplot-BM.
          Engine was 1250 HP GTD-1250 T-80U engine. 152 mm main smoothbore gun was only a little bit bigger than 2A46 125 mm smoothbore gun, but it had much better overall perfomance.
          This prototype was clearly a transitory solution between so called "3" and "4th" generation tanks.
       
          Some nerd made a model of it:
      _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
       
       
      ........Continue in Part 2
    • 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?
×
×
  • Create New...