Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

SH_MM tells us about NGP, which was sort of but not really like Armata


seppo
 Share

Recommended Posts

78b1489258.png

That's either supposed to say "father". Or you're just a retard who doesn't know how English works.

 

And at this point it might be either.

It's a typo. "Father of the Armata" doesn't imply "Russians stole the unmanned turret concept from the West".

I already explained why, but your dimwit brain can't handle more than one condition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NGP is in no way, shape, or form the father of the Armata.

 

Do the Msta, BTR-T, BMPT etc etc suddenly not exist anymore? You know, those things made on the chassis of other Russian vehicles?

 

 

This is Sturgeons House, not Germanwank United. 

Do you understand what the logical operator 'and' does?

Another proof that your dimwit brain can only handle one condition.

The vehicles you mentioned don't satisfy the remaining conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never claimed modular didn't exist before. Never claimed EGS used hydro shocks. It doesn't matter when KM started to develope the decoupled running gear. It's still an adaptation.

 

You have the reading comprehension of a six-year-old.

 

You didn't provide any sources either. Pics or it didn't happen.

 

Just stop trolling and move on. We got better things to do.

 

You want pictures of me providing sources? Maybe read the replies in this topic next time...

eH5vzsR.png

 

You want pictures of you claiming the EGS used a hydropneumatic suspension? Here you go, fam:

28W1bTD.png

(Adoption of the EGS suspension = torsion bar, which is incorret. But you have proven to have troubles with terminology already earlier.)

So, now you can go and try to learn something about the topic of this discussion before starting a topic on this forum with 0 accurate informations. People might get dumber because of all this missinformation you are spreading here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just stop trolling and move on. We got better things to do.

 

You want pictures of me providing sources? Maybe read the replies in this topic next time...

eH5vzsR.png

 

You want pictures of you claiming the EGS used a hydropneumatic suspension? Here you go, fam:

28W1bTD.png

(Adoption of the EGS suspension = torsion bar, which is incorret. But you have proven to have troubles with terminology already earlier.)

So, now you can go and try to learn something about the topic of this discussion before starting a topic on this forum with 0 accurate informations. People might get dumber because of all this missinformation you are spreading here.

You failed the reading comprehension test once again.

I didn't ask for pictures of you 'providing a source', i ask for a picture of the source.

'suspension' doesn't mean 'hydropneumatic suspension'. I mentioned 'suspension' because it's decoupled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You failed the reading comprehension test once again.

I didn't ask for pictures of you 'providing a source', i ask for a picture of the source.

'suspension' doesn't mean 'hydropneumatic suspension'. I mentioned 'suspension' because it's decoupled.

srsly?

Stop making sucht BS here.

 

source:

http://i.imgur.com/YsJkfaT.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/d7hgJor.jpg

 

Just buy this book:

https://www.amazon.de/Kampfpanzer-heute-morgen-Konzepte-Technologien/dp/3613027933

it cost only 72 Euro and eacht page of this book is worth this price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You failed the reading comprehension test once again.

I didn't ask for pictures of you 'providing a source', i ask for a picture of the source.

'suspension' doesn't mean 'hydropneumatic suspension'. I mentioned 'suspension' because it's decoupled.

 

If you are to stupid to find a book, after knowing it's exact name, then I cannot help you. It's not my task to serve you anything on a silver plater; you can buy the book, ask someone who owns the book or go to a library. Meanwhile you still have failed to provide any sort of source.

 

Suspensions means suspension, what you meant was a decoupled running gear. I already said that you have problems with terminology, just like you have a serious lack of manners or reading comprehension yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been skeptical about attributing any sort of biological lineage to armored vehicles. It seems silly to state than any one vehicle leads to the next one, especially one of a different nation that has its own history with much of the same technology that might be called evidence of descent. 

 

Much of the Armata's incorporated tech can be seen in earlier Soviet AFVs so there's no reason to even assume a German vehicle design is inspiration for the Armata.

 

So, to the NGP...

DVNvT7s.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how a test bed can't be a prototype, but whatever.....  :rolleyes:

Also i never claimed that the EGS was a prototype.

If you post the drawing of the TTK, I will correct the thread.

A prototype is an early version of something that is intended for actual use.

 

A testbed is just a means of testing the practicality of a particular technology or concept.

 

 

For example:

 

Testbed equipped with AGT-1500 engine.

 

M48_GT_01.png

 

Prototype equipped with AGT-1500 engine:

 

xm1chrys.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we just change the name of the thread please? There's quite enough tanks that I can call "Armata's daddy" simply by listing common features. 

 

As a side note; I've heard the story of stealing French ships (exciting stuff!), but not German submarines. If it's true, I want the story behind this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EXM, i have a question...What's the relationship between EGS and PzKW2000 ?

I cant find enough specific information about these two projects' connection ,but i always think they should be linked by something.

The EGS project began in 1989, and the PzKW 2000 was also terminated in 1989... so i guess EGS was a principle demonstrator for pzkw2000 programme, but its test results were applied to NGP programme

10753_900.png11062_900.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW - orgins of the Armata are placed not even in Ob.195 but in diffrent banch od russian tank industry.

There was whole family vechicles next to Ob.195, and those vechicles are real T-14 "grandparents"

Leningrad work on Object 299 and heavy IFV, recovery vehicle and mine clearing UGV on Object 299 chassis was basis for concept of family of vehicles for Armata.

But this is very off-topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason I'm not just nuking this flaming garbage can of a thread is that SH_MM has stepped up with some really interesting stuff.  Thanks SH_MM.

SH_MM also stepped up with some really dumb contradictions, like saying that no ngp prototype was ever build, but ngp was never cancelled. He litterally implied no Puma was ever build. How dumb is that?

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.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...