Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

Kurganets-25 mock-up with new turret based on BMP-3's turret.



Hatches on top of this turret suggest that it is/was planned to carry shots for 100 mm gun-launcher, ammunition for 30mm autocannon, and maybe MG too.


Seems very Western-looking. And here I am talking about how IFVs are dumb...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Older picture of T-14, from official presentation of programm.


Turret looks very similar to Object 195's turret, active protection system located in the same place (near turret ring), gun mounted in same way, as it was in Object 195, and general looks of turret is close to Object 195's turret minus 30 mm co-axial autocannon. 


Possible layout of the T-14 frontal armor:


Blue is crew protected "capsule", while red is additional armor that creates spaced armor effect. T-15 Heavy IFV use that layout, BTW.


Koalitsiya-SV, SU-100, T-34-85s, Kurganets IFV, Rakushka APC for VDV, Typhoon-Y MRAPs, etc.




wrUiZLrJWQM.jpgKurganets frontal part managed to get into that photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



This article have several mistakes.


1)The T-14 use diesel engine, X-shaped, 12-cylinder engine.

2) There is no confirmation that T-14 have 30 mm autocannon, or 12.7 HMG. The Object 195 had 30 mm 2A42 Shipunov's work horse.

3) Export is not very likely to be priority for 5-6 years after this year. Those years would be used to "cure" T-14 from problems, connected to creation of new design.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i thought that leaks are over...



At second minute of this video Kurganets can be seen moving, at minute 7 - Koalitsiya SPG, and in the end (13:16) you will see a new Boomerang APC!


8tXfIe0.jpgKurganets-25 (note a different turret, i don't think it is an IFV) have similar size to the BMP-3. So Kurganets ~= BMP-3 (at least in height). Also those "holes" in frontal part of side armor are just steps for crew to get to their hatches.



Different turret? I don't see a 30 mm autocannon. Compare it to that Kurganets:



Turret is bigger, and there are those active protection system parts (allegedly), mounted on hull roof neat turret (under canvas), which i don't see on previous picture.


Answer in simple - there are 2 vehicles on B-11 Kurganets-25 chassis. First is tracked APC, Object 693. Here it is:



And here is IFV based on B-11 Kurganets-25 chassis, Object 695:


Turret is give away.



And some new toy:


This is not BTR-70/80/90, judging by wheels, hull shape, turret placement and turret size. And no side doors.



Those new wheeled APCs are VPK-7829 "Boomerang" vehicles. Apparently, "spotters" were so bussy with T-14, that they managed to not notice those things until this day. Drivers locations suggest that there is engine compartment right next to them, very similar to BMP-1/2.




Rear doors, and note where this guys are siting - if it was old BTR-80, it would be engine compartment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hu1nf.pngSomebody made this, vehicles are roughly at same distance from cameraman.



Kurganets-25 hull have very similar height to SU-100, lol.




Those are either cameras for crew, or active protection system parts (launcher and radars), or both.


Size comparison between BTR-82A and Boomerang APCs.




Of course, it is rough comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

%25D0%2591%25D0%25A0%25D0%259C+%25D0%259Possible looks of the Kurganets-25 APC (Object 693), although this picture shows B-11 Kurganets-25 - based reconnaissance vehicle. 



This is possible unmanned turret of the Object 693 (B-11 Kurganets-25 chassis based APC) and Boomerang.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


T-14 and Leo 2A6.



Also, rollers are much more visible at new video, and they are indeed from T-80. You can compare:


T-80BV in St. Petersburg.




Even number of bolts is the same - 10 per each roller.


      So they are 670 mm rollers, which means that my own previous estimation is wrong, and estimation from BMPD LJ comments by one reader is correct (~8.5-8.6 meters long hull with APU, tracks contact surface is ~5.2 meters long, turret is possibly ~4.5 meters long (without gun, with unknown "box" behind that look like T-90MS-like turret basked). 




    For some reason turret of the T-14 from new video looks wider than from "old". I still don't know what is this giant thing on top of this turret, can be combination of RCWS and commander panoramic sight, or it can be a device similar to Object 195's sight system. There are rumors that a "box"/turret rear is T-90MS-like ammunition box. I really hope that it is not true, or it was seriously improved.


   Object 195's unknown divece on top of the unmanned turret:


     Note size of this thing.


     T-90MS turret ammunition compartment:






        Yeah, it is just a stupid box with ammunition for a main gun. Reasons why it is there, where crew can't get it from inside of tank? Vodka, of course!




     And here is RCWS with commander panoramic sight. This thing could be mounted on top of the T-14.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can see the suspension even better now, and I'm still sure we're looking at some kind of rotary damper on the end wheels of a torsion bar system

2 pages ago i posted a post from otvaga, that says that those are rotary shock absorbers (sort of), they are used to control suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anybody is interested, heavy IFV T-15 would be Russian "version" of that vehicle:








Namer heavy IFV/APC with Samson RCWS (unmanned turret with 30 mm cannon, 2 ATGMs and external ammunition). Sounds very much like T-15's specs, lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting double-layered sideskirt design.  Reminiscent of the old British conqueror heavy tank.  The inner layer looks like it's rubber, but perhaps with some sort of metal sandwiched inside like on the leo 1's sideskirts.


Why are there what look like sideways-folding hinges on some of the outer sideskirts?  Surely they haven't brought back the weird folding side armor from the early T-72!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting double-layered sideskirt design.  Reminiscent of the old British conqueror heavy tank.  The inner layer looks like it's rubber, but perhaps with some sort of metal sandwiched inside like on the leo 1's sideskirts.


Why are there what look like sideways-folding hinges on some of the outer sideskirts?  Surely they haven't brought back the weird folding side armor from the early T-72!


I think it's just rubber to keep the dust down - looking at how it's bending I'd be surprised if there was steel in there. Like on the SPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Current side skirts are placeholders IMO. T-90MS side skirts were much more substantial. If you look at side parts of T-14 you will see big amount of shit metal used to improve "looks" of a tank, rather than protection (side skirts don't reach upper part of hull), 




Skirt covers a whole side of the hull height, only less protected at engine compartment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of reasons why unmanned turret have advantages over classical tank designs:



      In short: those graphics shows increased number of turret hits from 1967 to 1990s. 74% of total hits were turret hits. This pic also shows distribution of those hits by height. "Latest" graphic shows that area of a tank higher between 1.5-1.8 meter and ~2.3-2.5 meter is most likely to be hit, while parts located lower than 1.5-1.8 meters are unlikely to be damaged by enemy fire.



Link to comment
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.

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
      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:
      Diehl developed an APS for this tank: AWiSS

      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
      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...