GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

[alanch90]

On 6/21/2020 at 5:56 PM, LoooSeR said:

 

   T-14

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. 

[LoooSeR]

1 hour ago, alanch90 said:

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. 

   Possibly because of track tension during turn.

[alanch90]

2 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   Possibly because of track tension during turn.

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. 

[LoooSeR]

5 minutes ago, alanch90 said:

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. 

That was captured long time ago and discussed here.

[LoooSeR]

   Tankoff on otvaga found patent for T-14 and T-15 chassis and engine compartment. On pics they used 6 roller per side model of Armata chassis. Link

   And possibly fuel system for Armata, patent, PDF

[LoooSeR]

   Boomerang IFV is cleared for export

Quote

   BMP on the Boomerang platform received the right to export - manufacturer

 

   Moscow. 12th of August. INTERFAX - An infantry fighting vehicle based on the newest unified combat platform Boomerang has received an export passport, which gives the right to sell to foreign customers, says the manufacturer - Military Industrial Company (VPK). "Boomerang BMP received: an advertising passport and an export passport, which will position the new AFV in the export market," - said "VPK" on its Instagram page on Wednesday. They recalled that the vehicle will be presented at the Army-2020 forum, which starts on August 23 in the Moscow region.
       
   In April, JSC Rosoboronexport announced that it was bringing the Boomerang combat platform to the world market. JSC Rosoboronexport (part of the state corporation Rostec) has begun to promote the newest unified combat platform Boomerang, developed and manufactured by Military Industrial Company LLC (VPK), to foreign markets, the company said on April 23. Rosoboronexport's head Alexander Mikheev said that the platform allows to create on its basis vehicles of the widest range of applications with various weapons and equipment. "The countries of Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia and the CIS have already shown interest in Boomerang. We estimate the export volume of this platform in the foreseeable future at about $ 1 billion," the head of Rosoboronexport said at the time.

 

[LoooSeR]

https://yuripasholok.livejournal.com/12958593.html

   Few more pics of catfish with new turret. On close up photos it is visible that optics is fake.

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

 

[LoooSeR]

   Viktor Murakhovskiy:

Quote

   I spoke at the Army-2020 forum about Kurganets-25 with GABTU specialists. It looks like the platform is "moving hard to the right" [postponed] for unknown amount of time. Company do not cope both in terms of performance characteristics or in organizing production. For the foreseeable future, there will be purchases of the BMP-3 both for the infantry and as platforms for weapons.

 

[alanch90]

Looks like "F" for Kurganets. Too bad, i was starting to like it.

[heretic88]

6 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

For the foreseeable future, there will be purchases of the BMP-3 both for the infantry and as platforms for weapons.

Upgrades to the base model, or something new, like the earlier Dragun?

 

I think whole K25 should be ditched. It has zero real advantages compared to BMP-3 Dragun, but far more expensive. Total waste of money.

[alanch90]

9 hours ago, heretic88 said:

I think whole K25 should be ditched. It has zero real advantages compared to BMP-3 Dragun, but far more expensive. Total waste of money.

It comes down to the following:

 

Kurganets was a VERY good IFV for today's standards, for tomorrow´s not so much. Unlike the T-14, K-25 increase in capabilities relative to what it was meant to replace were much more incremental than a leap ahead. Its protection characteristics are comparable to most other modern IFVs. Unmanned turret has been done before. Perhaps it was a little bit faster but not by a lot. What was indeed interesting was that K-25 could achieve that and still be capable of swimming. Another interesting aspect was the weapon selection, although the ATGMs badly need modern replacements and the turret itself can be installed in other older and cheaper vehicles. Not only the turret but also the armor and most of its systems may be mounted in a modernized BMP-3. If the russians choose to radically modernize BMP-3  or make a "BMP-4" on the basis of BMP-3 (like BMP-1 was to BMP-2) instead of pursuing the Kurganets program, the Dragun project or more specifically, the recently unveiled "Manul" is an excellent starting point; perhaps with an improved engine capable of supporting most or all of the electronics to be mounted on the K-25, together with improved armor (for example, the ceramic panels mounted on K-25 UFP) it could achieve comparable capabilities with a much lower price and less production problems.
Another aspect that could point to K-25 not being "ambitious enough" could be what we know about OMFV. Indeed the american program is much more forward looking, considering they may accept a 2 man crew in order to fit a full sized squad with the same vehicle internal volume. That requires a much more advanced FCS than what K-25 was aiming to have.  On the other hand, OMFV may be required to be protected vs the russian 57mm (at least the shorter one to be mounted on Kurganets) while K-25 armor most certainly can't defeat the american 50mm rounds.

 

[heretic88]

My opinion about this whole russian future AFV program is that it is a disaster. And this disaster started in the end of 90s and early 2000s with a series of cancellations of promising new platforms.

 

Bumerang: Russia needed a modern wheeled AFV to replace the old BTR-80. They had that replacement, the BTR-90. Ready for mass production. Yes, yes, it wasnt such an ambitious project as the Bumerang, but I think it was fine in the '90s. It was a huge improvement in firepower compared to BTR-80. Protection was also improved, also the mobility. Today it would be quite obsolete, but I think the base vehicle had great potential for upgrades. One prototype was already fitted with the quite nice Berezhok turret. Another with a BMD-4 turret.

 

Kurganets: I do not even know why they started this program. BMP-3 was, and still is a good base platform. Yes, it has problems. Worst is the not so ideal infantry compartment. But as Dragun proved it, it can be fixed. Second problem is protection. While it was quite good in the 90s, it is lacking today, but I think it wouldnt be hard to improve.

 

Armata: I think this is the worst crime against the state. Russia had the Objekt-195, passed tests, almost ready for mass production! And it was a far more powerful tank. Yes, expensive. So what. Armata is also expensive, actually even worse, because the added costs of starting from zero. And still very far from being ready.

 

Koalitsiya: Well, this is an exception, I see bright future for this. When I just look at the 2S35, my first impression is that its a finished weapon system, ready for mass production. (and I think the only one that will reach it)

 

+1, the BTR-T. Another missed opportunity I think. Yes, today it would be quite obsolete, thanks to the Kontakt-5, but that would be easy to replace with Relikt. It would also need a new, unmanned turret. But then, it would be a quite nice heavy APC, with better protection than anything except the Namer.

 

 

 

[Beer]

I would not dare to say that Objekt-195 was ready. How do we know? I seriously doubt that an early 90' project with unmanned turret would not have serious situation awarness issues. The development of optics, thermals and software made a huge jump since that time and even today we can see that the actual performace of systems depending solely on machine vision is still somewhat doubtful. Also at that time the monstrous 152 mm gun was a an overkill bringing only logistical and practical use issues. IMHO even today it's still not needed.   

[LoooSeR]

   Object 195 is indeed a black horse when we speek about if it was ready for use in the Army. It is hard to judge them (how "good"/"bad") they are) only by photos and some snippets of info/rumors.

   I suspect that both T-14 and "T-95" have unsolved problems with vision from inside of tank and general situational awareness being on level of T-90/80/72 or worse in some cases (and better in others because of panoramic sight). I do have feeling that some sort of AI assisted spotting using vision with 360 coverage (like on tech demonstators for Karmel) will allow to extract most of techvision system. But one point also can be made that for generic Russian tank crew those problems are going to be as critical as positive qualities of T-14, like separated crew compartment from ammunition and fuel.

   "T-95" would be harder to get to effective combat-ready condition in early/mid 2008 compared to T-14 in 2020.  

[skylancer-3441]

I doubt BTR-90 might be called satisfactory at any year of its development, 

one could just look at its potential adversaries (and wonder how exactly it was pitched to back than Soviet Army) -

starting all the way back in mid80s when Wehrtechnik (1985-02, 1988-08) and International Defense Review (1988-10) were publishing articles on Western next generation wheeled AFV development - namely West German EXF and Daimler Benz proposal of family of vehicles based on it, including such things as 32t APC. (while research phase which started in mid80s have led Soviets to next generation 21t vehicle, with preliminary project ready in 1989)

 

 

...and all that without paying much attention to BTR-90's layout, with no exit at rear, even narrow one - an abomination repeated yet again -

while at exactly the same time, in 1989, other developers in WarPac - presumably Czech, given striking resemblance to PSP Zubr - have presented this:

https://btvtinfo.blogspot.com/2019/11/blog-post_10.html?m=1

[AndreyKryuchenko]

Walkaround T-15 Armata heavy IFV with 57mm combat module Kinzhal. 4K

 

 

[heretic88]

15 hours ago, Beer said:

I would not dare to say that Objekt-195 was ready. How do we know? I seriously doubt that an early 90' project with unmanned turret would not have serious situation awarness issues. The development of optics, thermals and software made a huge jump since that time and even today we can see that the actual performace of systems depending solely on machine vision is still somewhat doubtful. Also at that time the monstrous 152 mm gun was a an overkill bringing only logistical and practical use issues. IMHO even today it's still not needed.  

It was stated many times before that the 195 was almost ready. But here is the latest from UVZ itself.

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2020/08/95.html

Also it is noteworthy that one of the two prototypes passed 15.000km, and fired 287 shots. I doubt that all of Armata prototypes together reached this level.

And I do not think the 152mm is overkill. 125mm is at its limits, I think even the 2A82.

 

 

 

[Voodoo]

Is there a picture of 152 mm APFSDS??

[SH_MM]

33 minutes ago, Voodoo said:

Is there a picture of 152 mm APFSDS??

[Beer]

8 hours ago, heretic88 said:

It was stated many times before that the 195 was almost ready. But here is the latest from UVZ itself.

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2020/08/95.html

Also it is noteworthy that one of the two prototypes passed 15.000km, and fired 287 shots. I doubt that all of Armata prototypes together reached this level.

And I do not think the 152mm is overkill. 125mm is at its limits, I think even the 2A82.

 

 

 

 UVZ is a manufacturer. Whatever they claim doesn't mean it was to be accepted by the army.

 

That text clearly states that the state trials, which were supposed to end in 2005, were stopped in 2008 without being finished. For me that clearly means that it was not a finished product. 

Quote

"29 декабря 2008 года - Постановлением Правительства РФ государственные испытания опытного боевого танка "объект 195" были приостановлены и больше не возобновлялись.

 

As I said it's very hard to believe it would not suffer from situation awarness issues.

[heretic88]

21 hours ago, Beer said:

That text clearly states that the state trials, which were supposed to end in 2005, were stopped in 2008 without being finished. For me that clearly means that it was not a finished product. 

The text also says that all remaining problems were fixed. 

According to another article, the tank passed first stage of tests in 2006. 

https://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/1028975.html

22 hours ago, Beer said:

As I said it's very hard to believe it would not suffer from situation awarness issues.

I do not disagree. But probably its the same with the Armata.

[skylancer-3441]

IMO it's would be very reassuring to know for a fact that in 2000s Russian Army and military-industrial complex have departed from that thing happening with Soviet Army and Soviet MIC  every once in a while - with T-64, T-80, BMP-3, and presumably other things too, which all had quite a bit of problems with reliability for couple of years before and after adoption, but still were accepted by what looks like lowering standards and believing promises, and/or been very accurate about how to make a report which "smells like a rose".

[alanch90]

Gurkhan shared this, from Army Forum 2020. Official data of T-14 by UVZ:

 

 

Hull width, including side armor modules, is 3820mm which led me to update my estimation of the thickness of the hull armor itself:

 

 

Now the most likely hull base armor LOS thickness in my opinion is 938mm.

 

Another interesting info from UVZ is that T-14 does have a coaxial 7.62mm machine gun finally ending years of debate. Also the maximum on road speed is no less than 75 km/h and we know that the tanks speedometer goes up to 85 km/h. Cruising range is also not less than other standard Russian service MBTs (T-72s, T-90s).

[LoooSeR]

   Kinzhal turret (with 57 mm gun and ATGMs) on T-15 use sights from Peleng (Belarus)

   Gunner sight is PPK and commander use OES OP (called in this brochure pic), but picture here is same as "Sakura" sight from their PR material (could be name for export). Stats, from Soviet tanks thread:

 

   PPK. Supposed to be panormaic, on Kinzhal it is limited by turret body.

 

Quote

Panoramic observation - 360^o

Ranges of depression and elevation of sight: -15^o to +60^o 

Determination of sighting angles

 

Channels:

Optical/TV main

Optical/TV observation

Thermal imager (uncooled)

Laser rangefinder - 1.54 μm

 

Stabilization - independent 2 axis

 

   Range of (optical/TV, main): 

Detection  - 6500 m

Recognition - 3500 m

 

Field of views:
- wide 6.2^o x4.6^o

- 2x zoom 3.1^o x 2.3^o

- digital 2x zoom 1.55^o x 1.15^o

 

   Range of (optical/TV, observation): 

Detection  - 3000 m

Recognition - 1500 m

 

Field of view - 18^o x13^o

 

   Range of (thermal): 

Detection  - 4000 m

Recognition - 2000 m

 

Field of views:
- wide 6.2^o x4.6^o

- narrow 3.1^o x 2.3^o

 

Laser rangefinder:

Ranges - 100 - 7000 m

Discreteness - 5 m

 

Stabilization:

Independent 2 axis

Ranges of depression and elevation - -15^o to +60^o in vertical, 360^o in horizontal

Speed of aiming 0.02-10^o/s

Speed of traverse - 60^o/s

 

   OES OP stats and pic suggest that OES OP and Sakura are the same sight.

 

Quote

Panoramic observation - 360^o

Ranges of depression and elevation: -15^o to +60^o 

Can receive external targeting information

9M119 guidance channel

 

Channels:

Optical main

Optical observation

Thermal imager (3-5μm)

Laser rangefinder - 1.54 μm, monopulse or multipulse/frequency mode

Missile guidance with conitnues laser raster modulation for 9M119

 

Stabilization - independent 2 axis

 

   Range of (TV channels) detection in observation/narrow FOV: 

- UAV 700 / 4 900 meters

- helicopter 5 600 / 12 000 meters

- plane 6 400 / 12 300 meters

 

   Range of detection in observation/narrow FOV [i suspect this is for observation TV channel]: 

- UAV 200 / 2 200 meters

- helicopter 2 500 / 9 300 meters

- plane 3 000 / 9 900 meters

 

Field of views (diagonally):
- observation 30^o

- wide 9^o

- narrow 1^o

 

   Range of (thermal imager): 

Detection  - 10000 m

Recognition - 4000 m

 

Field of views:
- wide 25^o x 20^o

- narrow 10^o x 8.3^o

- narrow with electronic zoom (2x) 10^o x 1.6^o

 

Laser rangefinder:

Ranges - 100 - 15000 m

Discreteness - 5 m

 

Laser guidance system:

Wavelength - 0.875μm - 0.92μm 

Range - 6000m

 

Stabilization:

Independent 2 axis

Ranges of depression and elevation - -15^o to +75^o in vertical, 360^o in horizontal

Speed of aiming up to 40^o/s

Speed of traverse - 60^o/s

 

[LoooSeR]

   A bit of timelines regarding Boomer and Armata.

https://ria.ru/20200507/1571037470.html (article from May of 2020)

 

   Boomer. Preliminary tests completed, state trials planned for 2021. Vehicle (at least IFV version, AFAIK) received export passport

Quote

- In accordance with the schedule for development work "Boomerang", "The Military Industrial Company" (VPK) together with the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and research organizations of the military department completed preliminary tests of prototypes based on this unified interspecific wheeled platform in Last year.
   The K-16 wheeled armored personnel carrier and the K-17 wheeled infantry fighting vehicle were created on this chassis. During the preliminary tests carried out, the prototypes confirmed the characteristics stated in the technical specifications.
   Based on their results, we decided to slightly change the armored hulls, as a result of which the conditions for placing soldiers in the troop compartment will be improved, as well as the vehicle's buoyancy will increase.

   Now at the production facilities of the "VPK" assembly of new prototypes of "Boomerang" is underway for state tests, which are planned to be completed next year. In addition, at the enterprises that are part of our management perimeter, the production base is being updated and prepared for the serial production of equipment based on this platform. So, for example, the Corps Plant JSC has completely manufactured the necessary equipment for the production of new armored hulls.

 

   Armata. Preliminary tests completed, state trials planned to be completed before end of 2020. Armata also received an export passport

Quote

   "The state tests of the Armata tank are planned to be completed in 2020. Based on the test results, the Russian Ministry of Defense will determine the delivery time for serially produced equipment to military units," Manturov said.

 

   Kurganets-25 is behind both vehicles, Preliminary test in 2021 and state trials from end of 2021, up to end of 2022.

Quote

   The Defense Ministry and the military-industrial complex have agreed on a test schedule for BMPs and armored personnel carriers from the Kurganets-25 family, sources in the military-industrial complex said. Judging by the work schedule, which Izvestia got acquainted with, from May to October 2021, preliminary tests of combat vehicles will be held. And state tests will begin in November and, according to plans, should be completed in 12 months. It is noteworthy that testing of individual components and assemblies of armored vehicles is already underway.