Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

Domestic variant is about a year away from mass production, at least according to MoD. Trials are usually a year long process, so domestic variant should be finalised.

 

Did they build the production line already? 

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

Posted on otvaga, found docs about Armata soft-kill APS.    System type is reffered as SPN (anti-targeting system). Kit have 4 integrated sensors (multispectral) of working rocket engines an

For future use

Posted Images

On 2/6/2021 at 1:27 PM, Beer said:

 

Did they build the production line already? 

   Don't know about state of production line, but here are some news regarding production of Armata:

 

Quote

   Serial contracts for the supply of "Armata" were signed between the Ministry of Defense and UVZ.  

 

   "State tests are underway, we expect their completion in the next year or two. By the end of the 21st year, according to one of the contracts, the delivery of an initial batch of machines is planned. <...> Starting from 2022, we will reach stable serial deliveries of these machines," - said Andrey Terlikov, General Designer of the Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering, where Armata was developed.

   So first batch will be delivered in the end of 2021, at least according to current timetable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

T-14 has for the first time demonstrated the ability to detect and track targets autonomously, without participation from the crew: https://ria.ru/20210225/armata-1598859233.html

 

Quote

"The fire control system (FCS)" Armata "has a digital catalog with signatures of typical targets of the battlefield, including tanks, APMs, helicopters, etc. The elements of artificial intelligence allow the onboard computing facilities of the machine to independently search for targets against the background of a complex underlying surface, recognize them, including on the part of the object visible from behind the shelter, to carry out selection according to priority and take for escort, "he said.

Quote

At the same time, the interlocutor of the agency stressed, the decision on defeat is still made by the person - the vehicle commander. In other models of armored vehicles, including foreign tanks, now there is only a target tracking machine, which assumes that the crew finds and selects an object for tracking manually.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, alanch90 said:

Remember some years back when people were saying that T-14 could use its radars to scan for targets as well? There is nothing to back that up right?

I bet those people confused info about Obect 195 with Armata. IIRC one of 195 versions had radar on it, AFAIK it was supposed to use data from it and fuse it in FCS with other channels (optics). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, alanch90 said:

Remember some years back when people were saying that T-14 could use its radars to scan for targets as well? There is nothing to back that up right?


Usually, radar on armored vehicles (other than SPAA) is for either the APS (trophy / Iron fist), or more commonly to check the velocity of the projectile leaving the barrel, for accuracy purposes. This last I’ve seen mostly on artillery. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lord_James said:


Usually, radar on armored vehicles (other than SPAA) is for either the APS (trophy / Iron fist), or more commonly to check the velocity of the projectile leaving the barrel, for accuracy purposes. This last I’ve seen mostly on artillery. 

   There were attempts made in Soviet Union regarding radar-based sights for ground vehicles. IIRC based on them we were developing something for Object 195.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:

   There were attempts made in Soviet Union regarding radar-based sights for ground vehicles. IIRC based on them we were developing something for Object 195.

 

Wasn't there a radar for Rapira or some other towed AT gun as well? 

 

3 hours ago, alanch90 said:

Remember some years back when people were saying that T-14 could use its radars to scan for targets as well? There is nothing to back that up right?

 

IMHO that doesn't make much sense for two reasons. The first is that active radar is like a beacon. It gives away vehicle location to the enemy. There is a reason why APS radars are switched on only when a threat is detected by other sensors like UV or IR. The second reason is that IMO APS radar must have extremely short wavelength which means that its range may be just few hundred meters. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beer said:

There is a reason why APS radars are switched on only when a threat is detected by other sensors like UV or IR.

Primarily it's about power consumption, though. 

Engaging all of them continuously is unsustainable for AFV. 

 

Emcon is an obvious concern, but a second concern.

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://ria.ru/20210224/bumerang-1597880132.html

   VPK wants to design a wheeled death trap tank using Boomerang chassis, armed with Sprut-SD's main gun (125 mm 2A75 smoothbore cannon).

 

   Some other info:

Quote

   According to Krasovitskiy, the development of a unified wheeled platform "Boomerang" is close to completion - state tests of the K-16 armored personnel carrier built on it are planned until the end of the year.

   /.../

   Further plans include testing the promising K-17 BMP, special-purpose vehicles and other samples. The general director of the Military Industrial Company stressed that the rapid creation of a wheeled tank based on the Boomerang platform is not a problem for the industry.

 

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

   Posted on otvaga, found docs about Armata soft-kill APS.

SPe5u8B.jpg

   System type is reffered as SPN (anti-targeting system). Kit have 4 integrated sensors (multispectral) of working rocket engines and laser illumination detectors. 4 detectors combined create full coverage of upper hemisphere of vehicle. SPN was designed to not give away vehicle when it was turned on and working, so it uses only passive sensors.

   On scheme 1 is detectors, 2 are PPU (rotatable launchers) and 3 are 2 vertically aimed PUs (stationary launcher).

 

Spoiler

n2rDgCr.jpeg

 

GpqP2zK.jpeg

   PPU are firing "camouflaging aerosol grenades" ("GAM") at detected threat taking into account anticipated trajectory. GAMs are deployed in such way that protected chassis is going to be covered by smoke either because of it's own movement into cloud or/and because of strong wind.

   PUs are used vs threats from upper hemisphere, low speed of chassis and in low wind.

 

   GAMs are triggered by induction launch system, doesn't require cleaning of electric contacts. 

 

   System chooses what launcher to use and timing based on vehicle own movement speed, speed and direction of wind, vehicle position relative to threat. SPN warns crew, give recommendations to them. 

 

   Modernisation potential of SPN:

- collective protection of units

- usage of special grenades (HE, flashbangs, etc.)

- creation of library of signatures of AT systems, allowing creation and use of more specialised grenades. 

 

 

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

New concept for an ATGM carrier - tank destroyer, based on the Kurganets platform. Makes a lot of sense. The "turret" from where missiles are launched reminds a lot of Tor.

 

Spoiler

8811938_original.png

 

 

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/4276303.html?utm_source=fbsharing&utm_medium=social&fbclid=IwAR1Mvt1gCixvz_-PNXj0dt7nIZF-sDTKaKq1C0IhCum2_vvJsBUIoFvFJco

 

 

   Picture probably isn't representative of final product. Also:

 

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

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...