HOME | DD
Ralph1989 β Armata's charge
#armata #t14 #battle #charge #combat #mbt #platform #russia #tank #new_generation #uniwersal
Published: 2016-02-23 11:41:52 +0000 UTC; Views: 8250; Favourites: 226; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description
T-14 Armata (Object 148) is a Russian new generation main battle tank (MBT), which was developed as a part of Armata Universal Combat Platform program from experience with prototypes of Black Eagle and T-95 (Object 195) tanks. It was first seen in public during 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade. According to the principles of the Russian Armed Forces modernization program, to 2020 the army plans to acquire 2,300 T-14s, and first of them in 2016.
T-15 Armata's heavy infantry fighting vehicle drawing: fav.me/d9userh
Related content
Comments: 71
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 1
Glad this tank exists. Finally a new platform instead of a T-54 upgrade. More survivable in low intensity conflicts too. Maybe it'll push the other nations to discard the cold war era designs and start new platforms of their own too.
π: 0 β©: 1
Russians said there was no Black Eagle project or tank but I think there might have been many similar projects. Anyway, this si quite an expensive machine they've made. Looks good!
π: 0 β©: 2
The concept makes some sense. If they can manage to combine a universal chassis with a lot of room for upgrades in the future, like the British managed with the Centurion, it could be an extremely cost-effective workhorse that can stay cutting-edge without the need to develop an entirely new vehicle.
π: 0 β©: 1
Well, it launches rockets from the barrel. Those can be replaced. They'll be able to replace the turret, I'm certain about that.
It's not really that relevant how cheap it's going to be in the future. It matters how expensive it is right now. The Russians brought back into service T-72s that were retired to replace the T-80s that had to be retired. The T-14 has to replace those 2, the T-64s and any other older tank that the Russians might be using. They've stopped making the T-90 to make the T-14.Β
π: 0 β©: 2
The rocket-firing barrel is a common feature in warsaw-pact design, and allows larger warheads to be loaded into the gun.
In a conventional cannon, increasing warhead size and weight without sacrificing range requires that more propellant be loaded in the shell. This introduces two problems.
Firstly, semi-auto breach blocks that eject shells after firing have difficulties extracting longer shell casings, leading to failure-to-extract jams. When this happens, the crew cannot fire another round until the loader retrieves a special set of heat-resistant mittens for this specific task, puts them on, removes the jammed shell casing from the breach, removes the mittens so he has the dexterity to handle shells easily again, and THEN load a new round. That kind of delay kills tanks.
Secondly, more propellant increases chamber pressure, which can damage the cannon and recoil mechanism over time, and even lead to catastrophic failure.
Rockets loaded into a cannon can get away with being longer than a shell, as the barrel does not need to be long enough to ensure proper propellant burn, like they do with a cannon shell. This, combined with the fact that a missile fired out of a cannon leaves no shell casing to extract, means cannon-launched rockets provide their vehicles with the ability to launch a much larger warhead when required.
π: 0 β©: 1
MOre propellant or a different propellant which is hard to obtain and maybe even manufacture.
I know the advantages of rockets, I just mentioned one of them in the long term.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
The rocket-firing barrel is a common feature in warsaw-pact design, and allows larger warheads to be loaded into the gun.
π: 0 β©: 1
Yes and that can help with keeping the tank as it is for a longer time. The problem remains the current price. They're not making T-90s anymore and they have to replace the older tanks.Β
π: 0 β©: 0
ΠΡΠ³Π» Π² ΠΏΠΎΠΌΠΎΡΡ!
π: 0 β©: 1
dA is English-speaking ;] I don't have time to translate.
π: 0 β©: 1
This word can not be translated into English. "Beauty" in Old Russian dialect.
π: 0 β©: 1
I doubt that this so called "Super tank" has any punches in it at this point of time. Maybe I'll give it credit after these things suffer casualties.
π: 0 β©: 2
Let's see how well it survives IEDs. The turret is completely automated. The entire crew is in the vehicle. The Russians were quite fixated on this feature.
π: 0 β©: 1
Or maybe ambush by highly mobile ATGM vehicles from different angle. There are a lot of cheap option to take down an expensive tank. And the US Army knows this because they've been through it before.
π: 0 β©: 1
To be honest that turret doesn't look that well designed to deflect an attack from the back. You can't rely too much on active protection systems. Still, the turret can be replaced. They did that to the T-90.
π: 0 β©: 1
To top that off, I am a little bit suspicious about the idea having the crew rely completely on the tank's sensors and cameras to see around them. That sounds like some bad idea that can kill the crew when the sensors are damaged or destroyed.
π: 0 β©: 1
Or hacked. Americans have replaced the periscope with a camera on their subs and they can view everything on screens. I hope they have a back up plan. Still, that's a sub. This is a tank. It's gonna be visible!Β
π: 0 β©: 1
Yeah, the Russians may have ideas that sound cool on paper but not so practical in practice. I'll give them that.
π: 0 β©: 1
And they really want to apply them. The idea of taking out the crew from the tank's turret sounds good until you realise that IEDs might just kill the entire crew. They developed the so called T-95 or Object 195 based on this concept and even after Afghanistan and Iraq they wouldn't let go of the idea. This is how this tank appeared. To be honest the T-95 had a lot of crazy features that wouldn't be that useful and all those features made sure it never reached production because they couldn't make them work. After Iraq and Afghanistan its fate was sealed because of the lack of protection underneath. Β
The T-80 is another good example. It was fast but burned a lot of fuel and required a lot of maintenance. The turbine engines they used on it weren't that good.
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, Russian propaganda is now on its greatest moments since USSR's collapse. I wanna see how this tank takes punches from TOW-2B, Javelin or Hellfire and then I will say that T-14 Armata is super tank or "maskirovka";]
π: 0 β©: 0
Well, I've seen it literally charging during the last parade. Here's the video (not mine, FYI):Β www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZtXStβ¦
π: 0 β©: 1
Isn't this Armata which had broken down at the Russian Parade? Β
π: 0 β©: 2
It was a prototype. Shit happens.
π: 0 β©: 0
thx, but in English please in the next time ;]
π: 0 β©: 0
Nice one buddy! I definitely like the fog light effect. What pencil do you use to get your dark values so dark (like the muzzle and shadowing underneath the turret?
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>