GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

[LoooSeR]

[LoooSeR]

   As usual

 

Spoiler

 

 

[alanch90]

Where does the gunner sit in the Kurganets? Besides the driver and commander?

[TINDALOS]

On 4/13/2021 at 6:40 AM, alanch90 said:

Where does the gunner sit in the Kurganets? Besides the driver and commander?

The Kurganets you see in the parade is probably a mock up, the real one (please reference zvezda's TV show on kurganets 25) has gunner and commander sit side by side while the driver is in the front of gunner or commander (sorry I realy don't remember wether the driver sits infront of the commander or the gunner)

[LoooSeR]

   Photos on a subject

   Parade vehicle

 

   Vehicle that was going through tests. Driver is in front of rest of the crew.

[Dominus Dolorem]

Does anyone have any information or estimates of the T-14's frontal composite armor's physical thickness and layout?

 

Looking at it from above I am struggling to see how the composite armour could offer 900mm of KE protection.

[LoooSeR]

 

Spoiler

 

 

[alanch90]

On 4/16/2021 at 2:52 PM, Dominus Dolorem said:

Does anyone have any information or estimates of the T-14's frontal composite armor's physical thickness and layout?

 

Looking at it from above I am struggling to see how the composite armour could offer 900mm of KE protection.

What is most difficult is that so far we haven´t seen any pictures showing what the base armor is like. 
We do have indications pointing to it having a geometry more similar to Object 187´s or other late soviet designs. In terms of LOS thickness, it could be anywhere between 800mm and 1000mm, until we get clear images of the tank without Monolit we can´t be any sure.
Lastly about what the base armor actually is, we have no clue. We do know that Monolit is a type of SLERA/NxRA so it is possible that the base armor is based around a similar technology.

[Dominus Dolorem]

Well we do have photographs of the interior, but yes we still have no idea what it looks like underneath thoes front modules.

 

It just does not look like there is that mutch room for thick composite armour in there to me though. Judging by the position of the drivers hatch, the interior photographs and the start of the frontal slope.

This could however just be a quirk of the parade vehicle with the production Armata having 2m thick frontal composite armour for all I know though.

[alanch90]

Just now, Dominus Dolorem said:

Well we do have photographs of the interior, but yes we still have no idea what it looks like underneath thoes front modules.

 

It just does not look like there is that mutch room for thick composite armour in there to me though. Judging by the position of the drivers hatch, the interior photographs and the start of the frontal slope.

This could however just be a quirk of the parade vehicle with the production Armata having 2m thick frontal composite armour for all I know though.

It is from the interior pictures that we get the likeliness to Obj 187 since in both cases lots of instruments are bolted to the back plate (or what seems to be a back plate at least)and in a similar angle that seems to be about 60 deg. I made the following estimation a year ago.

[Dominus Dolorem]

Rather similar to my estimates, but such a thickness is comparable to the T-72's UFP. How could they possibly get 900mm protection against KE with armour that thin?

[alanch90]

First of all "900mm" vs KE is just a figure that´s floating around the internet but at least TRADOC saw it plausible enough as to support on its publicly available sources. But its just a somewhat educated estimation.
The thickest UFP a T-72 had was the B model 1985 with 587mm LOS. This is a far cry from that. It is more comparable thickness wise to modern western tanks front turrets actually (M1A2 has 860mm LOS at the right turret cheek).
In addition to being a lot more voluminous, the armor was made especially for T-14 (and we have official quotes from designers about that), meaning that it was made based on new armor technology. Lastly, since the UFP is the only heavy armor block present on the tank, it could be allowed to be weight inefficient in comparison to other armor modules on modern tanks. For example, an Abrams has 5 big blocks of armor: 2 for the front turret, 2 for the turret´s sides and 1 for the hull front. 

[Dominus Dolorem]

Ahh thank you for the clarification, it seemed rather thin to me. I guess it is probably just that the T-14 is a big tank and maybe also that I have been rather dissapointed in the armour of many recent UVZ vehicles.

[LoooSeR]

5 hours ago, Dominus Dolorem said:

Ahh thank you for the clarification, it seemed rather thin to me. I guess it is probably just that the T-14 is a big tank and maybe also that I have been rather dissapointed in the armour of many recent UVZ vehicles.

   Protection/armor is dictated by what MoD wants, not by UVZ.

[LoooSeR]

Arriving to Moscow

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

[eggs benedict]

Is there any source clarifying the role of the hexagon on top of the T-14?

[alanch90]

On 4/27/2021 at 3:16 PM, eggs benedict said:

Is there any source clarifying the role of the hexagon on top of the T-14?

It may be related to the Upper Hemisphere Protection System.

http://www.niistali.ru/products/nauka/protection/uplook_protection/

"The principle of operation of the complex is based on the detection of an approaching high-precision ammunition, striking from the upper hemisphere, and disruption of the operation of its guidance system either by a powerful electromagnetic pulse, or by creating a multispectral aerosol cloud and false IR targets over the protected object"

[LoooSeR]

52 minutes ago, alanch90 said:

It may be related to the Upper Hemisphere Protection System.

http://www.niistali.ru/products/nauka/protection/uplook_protection/

"The principle of operation of the complex is based on the detection of an approaching high-precision ammunition, striking from the upper hemisphere, and disruption of the operation of its guidance system either by a powerful electromagnetic pulse, or by creating a multispectral aerosol cloud and false IR targets over the protected object"

IIRC that hex thing was GLONASS antenna.

[eggs benedict]

Thanks , alanch.

[LoooSeR]

https://vk.com/wall-79534_23437

   Documents on Kurganets protection found by Wiedzmin. People on otvaga looked at those documents some more:

Quote

   The body of Kurganets is made of aluminum alloy ABT-102, the level of mine protection is 3-6 kg of explosive depending on clearance.

 

Spoiler

 

   Details name possibly contain actual thickness of plates. Looks like sides are made out of 40 mm almuniea plates, which is about the same as in BMP-3.

 

   Bottom section of Kurganets-25 chassis is made out of 2 plates of Almuniea alloy (ABT-102), each plate is 30 mm. On top of that designers put a floor plate for soldiers to walk on. 

   They arrived to such layout after several failed tests. First version of hull bottom:

 

   Results of testing:

Spoiler

   Destroyed hull bottom plates and penetration of floor plate with fragments.

 

 

Quote

   "As a result of the calculations, a two-layer bottom structure was proposed, made of two plates 30 mm thick from AMg 6 material with an offset weld seam. The structure has successfully passed the blast test. The work was carried out by order of JSC NII Stali (contract No. REC "ATDiSN" dated 01.10.2011), and its results were used to design the bottom structure of the new BMP, which is confirmed by the act on the implementation of the research results. "

 

Spoiler

 

 

Quote

The final version of the mine-resistant bottom of Kurganets. From the presentation (~ 2014, the drawing is designated "695. ...", rev. 695 - BMP B-11). Found by Wiedzmin

 

 

Spoiler

 

[LoooSeR]

   So we can now tell that Kurganets ballistic protection (without addon armor modules or addon ERA) is generally on the same level as BMP-3, vehicle will protect dismounts inside from blast of mines with 3-6 kg of explosives (more likelt 3-4, as 6 is achieved only at max clearance of suspension, if we read docs right).

   Also want to note that AT mines would do a number on that thing, for example plenty of Soviet mines have more than 6 kg of explsovies in them (7, 7.5kg in TM-62, TM-89 have 6.65)

[LoooSeR]

 

Spoiler

 

 

[alanch90]

7 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

   So we can now tell that Kurganets ballistic protection (without addon armor modules or addon ERA) is generally on the same level as BMP-3, vehicle will protect dismounts inside from blast of mines with 3-6 kg of explosives (more likelt 3-4, as 6 is achieved only at max clearance of suspension, if we read docs right).

   Also want to note that AT mines would do a number on that thing, for example plenty of Soviet mines have more than 6 kg of explsovies in them (7, 7.5kg in TM-62, TM-89 have 6.65)

Well, judging from pictures the Kurganets UFP could be 30-60mm of aluminium, plus add on ceramics. In comparison, BMP-3 UFP is 18mm of aluminium at a similar sloped angle. 

[LoooSeR]

4 hours ago, alanch90 said:

Well, judging from pictures the Kurganets UFP could be 30-60mm of aluminium, plus add on ceramics. In comparison, BMP-3 UFP is 18mm of aluminium at a similar sloped angle. 

   UFP is very small part of overal frontal projection of the vehicle. Also, nobody saw an actual prototype's UFP.

[alanch90]

21 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

nobody saw an actual prototype's UFP.

Well, we´ve seen the zone around the drivers hatch on the prototype that has the driver in a forward position.