Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Basically what this whole thing means is that Emperor Palputin will conquer Galaxy with Space Marines and T-72s. T-72B3s to be precise.   I posted this on other Capitalist internet site 3 mo

For future use

Hey guys, look, a photo of Armata in Syria was posted!    Totally real!

Posted Images

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

   News about Armata. Apparently it was in Syria, and was put through additional tests. Also, vehicle production was moved to 2021.

Quote

   Russian military tested the Armata tank in Syria

 

   Moscow. April 19th. INTERFAX.RU - The new Russian tank T-14 Armata was tested in Syria, said the head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov.

   “Yes, that's right ... they were in Syria,” he said on Sunday in a program on the Russia-1 television channel (VGTRK).

   According to the minister, these tanks were sent to Syria "in order to take into account all the nuances in combat conditions." "In Syria, as you know, it is precisely this kind of test," Manturov said, noting that this would help form the "final look" of the tank, which will be supplied to the Russian army.

 

   As the minister noted, serial deliveries to the army will begin in 2021.

   According to him, the T-14 Armata is an expensive tank. “It’s expensive also because it goes through a series of additional tests, modernization. As production and supply volumes increase, of course, the price will decrease,” Manturov said.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

  Hey guys, look, a photo of Armata in Syria was posted!

Do

   Totally real!

 

Do you think that this is reality or a fake in best photoshop quality? BTW pretty nice front girl! Can't believe she would have been in Syria more that she is posing in a Moscow film studio.5

Link to post
Share on other sites

... and why are both hatches closed? This photo is definitely a fake and may be a good promotion for Russian internal purposes. Why should this prototype be sent to Syria in urban terrain? IMO the risk to fail or be knocked out would be pretty to high and a huge disgrace.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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 :lol:.

 

https://topcor.ru/14417-zajavleno-o-potere-odnogo-tanka-t-14-armata-v-sirii.html?fbclid=IwAR0bEGtvO_VXonVNM2uTfCuxyvOlEjIrjS1Smk9OA48vbhs3JO4s8FFJ5cU

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
6 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

I can't make up my mind on which 57mm gun will be more useful in the long run, but I'm leaning towards the 'low velocity' one.

   I think opposite is true - high velocity version have higher margin to improve AP shells.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that installing the high velocity one on smaller and lighter vehicles will be a problem therefore I expect that there will be many more low velocity ones fielded in the end. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what is the state of this Kurganets? Turret is real, or mockup? I still have the feeling that these are still just half complete prototypes, and the only vehicle from these later developments that really has a chance for mass production is the 2S35 Kolaitsiya. And I still think the BMP-3 Dragun would be a better choice than the K25.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

I can't make up my mind on which 57mm gun will be more useful in the long run, but I'm leaning towards the 'low velocity' one.

 

8 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   I think opposite is true - high velocity version have higher margin to improve AP shells.

 

8 hours ago, Beer said:

I guess that installing the high velocity one on smaller and lighter vehicles will be a problem therefore I expect that there will be many more low velocity ones fielded in the end. 

 

 

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.).

Link to post
Share on other sites

The full 57mm seems more future appropiate to me, as rounds get more electric and high tech, the bigger round becomes more sensible, and the full 57mm is more of a antiair/naval round.

 

Future threats of drones and atgm will be easier to defend against using the full 57mm.  Particularly the army can share a programmable airburst with the navy.  (Or even a hypothetical steerable round)

 

Think syria/libya/ukraine.  

Good accuracy at limit range of atgm is good.

Valid airdefense capacity against uav is good.

Indirect artillery support based on uav spotting is good.

 

The short 57mm in can is also a valid round, cheap and cheerful. A different class of cost, a different class of use, more of a see it with naked eye type range use.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2020 at 11:51 AM, alanch90 said:

 

 

 

 

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.).

 

I wonder how well it would work with MAD-FIRES.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MRose said:

 

I wonder how well it would work with MAD-FIRES.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, alanch90 said:

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.

I think that the guided ammo is used by Derivatsiya-PVO. I don't know if it's interchangeable with the T-15 gun ammo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Beer said:

I think that the guided ammo is used by Derivatsiya-PVO. I don't know if it's interchangeable with the T-15 gun ammo.

Should be interchangeable, its the same caliber and gun. However i dont know if T-15 has the guiding equipment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Beer said:

I think that the guided ammo is used by Derivatsiya-PVO. I don't know if it's interchangeable with the T-15 gun ammo.

 

Probably closer to ALaMO than MAD-FIRES.

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...