The Russian Military Merged Thread- Army

[George Wallace]

OK

Who needs the threat of NATO, the Americans, or anyone else starting WW IV, if the possibility of one Nuclear Power committing hari-kari in the center of its capital exists.


This looks like a fluid leak on fire on an Anti-aircraft Missile Launcher, with fluid dripping onto street, and ICBM Missile Launchers following.  All with full loads of missiles.  Possibilities of a catastrophe causing multiple deaths are there.  Definitely a lot worse than a tank breaking down in the parade.

https://www.facebook.com/235931176424547/videos/1028360997181557/

 

[tomahawk6]

A bit more detail about the T-14 Armata tank.Unusual placement of the 3 man crew up front albeit in an armored compartment.Low silhoutte.anti-missile defense and very sleek.Heavily armored.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/russia_russian_army_tank_heavy_armoured_vehicles_u/armata_russian_main_battle_tank_technical_data_sheet_specifications_information_description_pictures.html

 

[The Bread Guy]

And here, attrached, are the RUS military Info-machine's graphics of their new hardware - more to follow ....

 

[The Bread Guy]

.... with the rest here - enjoy!

 

[MilEME09]

Right away I see two big flaws of the T-14, one huge exposure of the turret ring to the rear, two the turret being completely automated, i'd aim to hit it, not to take it out but to throw the electronics off enough that it is no longer combat effective. finally if suffers from driver error  >

 

[tomahawk6]

The big advantage the Russians have in tank design is that they dont have to worry about weight.Their tanks wont be flown for rapid deployment beyond Russia's borders.They can rly on rail or by ship.Cost is a factor as well.How many T-14's can Russia afford ?

 

[George Wallace]

Right away I see two big flaws of the T-14, one huge exposure of the turret ring to the rear, two the turret being completely automated, i'd aim to hit it, not to take it out but to throw the electronics off enough that it is no longer combat effective. finally if suffers from driver error  >

I see way too many flaws in the T-14.  They range from the number of crew, crew placement, remote control turret with an autoloader, remote control machine gun, gas turbine engine, and on and on.  Tank maintenance isn't really hard; mostly just HEAVY.  Just cleaning the main gun takes four or five people.  Russian auto-loaders are notoriously slow and dangerous.  Gas is one very volatile fuel, that most other nations have gotten away from.  There are many here who now have an opportunity to slice and dice this tank's design.

 

[MilEME09]

I see way too many flaws in the T-14.  They range from the number of crew, crew placement, remote control turret with an autoloader, remote control machine gun, gas turbine engine, and on and on.  Tank maintenance isn't really hard; mostly just HEAVY.  Just cleaning the main gun takes four or five people.  Russian auto-loaders are notoriously slow and dangerous.  Gas is one very volatile fuel, that most other nations have gotten away from.  There are many here who now have an opportunity to slice and dice this tank's design.

My biggest question is ammo still stored around the turret ring? if so combined with the gas engine this thing is a driving bomb and death trap rather then a tank

 

[George Wallace]

My biggest question is ammo still stored around the turret ring? if so combined with the gas engine this thing is a driving bomb and death trap rather then a tank

Agreed, but this time they have removed most of the crew from the turret and placed them in "safe" compartments.  How much confidence that builds, I am not sure.  ;D

 

[Old and Tired]

You have to remember that "Gas-Turbine" has nothing to do with Gasoline. It's simply the way in which the fuel/air mix is burned and the resultant power is harnessed for use.  Most turbine engines use fuels from the lower end of the distillate column because of their inherent lubrication properties.  The only two references that I've seen so far simply say it's powered by a "Gas-Turbine Engine" that produces somewhere in the region of 1,500 HP.  Nether of them say what kind of fuel or how much.  If the fuel consumption of previous Gas-Turbine tanks (M-1 Family and T-80 family) is anything to judge from, this tank must have very large fuel reserves to have a range of 500km.

 

[MilEME09]

true but lets say the ammo still is around the turret ring, if that gets hit and goes up, the explosion would be powerful enough to ignite said fuel reserves to either go boom or burn off for a long time

 

[Old and Tired]

True enough.  It all comes down to what the internal layout is.  How the compartments are divided and separated from each other.  I've looked over the photos as best I can, and I think there may be blow-off panels on the turret roof.  As well from the length of the bustle on the back I wonder if perhaps the 32 rds of ready load ammo for the main guns is stored there, with the idea being that it is a sacrificial storage unit that is easily replaced.  It would be the first time that the Russians make that type compromise in design.

 

[MilEME09]

In which case we are seeing a fundamental shift in Russian AFV designs which means unless we see these in combat we may not know what to expect

 

[tomahawk6]

More like an Abrams gas turbine I suspect.No Abrams was ever lost due to an enemy tank.No brew ups.Some mobility kills.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Here, reproduced under the usual caveats of the Copyright Act, are some detailed analysis of the Armata vehicles (T-14 and T-15), Kurganets-25, and Boomerang 8×8 AFV.

New Russian Armor – First analysis: Armata

New Russian armor – First analysis Part II: Kurganets-25

New Russian armor – Part III: Boomerang 8×8 AFV

Lots of photos not previously seen and a good preliminary analysis.

 

[Old and Tired]

More on the engine. Apparently its a 12C X configuration. I've seen two different numbers for displacement. One says 36 litre the other says 48 litre. Both agree that it is a 1,500 hp class engine.  The was also a photo of the engine, less transmission.  Looks to be a very compact machine.  Of note, it also said that the engine is common to all variants of the Armata family. Tank, BMP/IFV and the SPH.  If this is the case it seems that the Russians have also taken a long hard look at their logistics and maintenance support systems and have decided that the commonality will significantly lighten the burden.  It also explains the road range quoted since the internal fuel load isn't all that large.  1,125litres if I remember correctly.

 

[The Bread Guy]

.... when you can buy a "polite folks in green t-shirt" - here's the t-shirt store link in Russian, with some designs attached.

The kitty cat reference is even thrown in to an official statue in Russia.

P.S. - If you're interested in checking out Russian airborne shirts, check here, or for Spetznaz shirts here.

Edited to add:  That last t-shirt says "Thanks for Crimea" 

 

[tomahawk6]

More on the reactive armor.The Russians think their's have no equal. :camo:

http://www.businessinsider.com/russias-new-tank-can-resist-nato-anti-tank-weapons-2015-6

 

[GR66]

Curious noob question.  Has there ever been any research on a shotgun type munition that blankets the whole tank with a large number of sub-munitions that cause all of the reactive armour plates hit to detonate and possibly cause the target tanks to expend much of their active counter-measures on non-threatening incoming targets?

 

[Underway]

Curious noob question.  Has there ever been any research on a shotgun type munition that blankets the whole tank with a large number of sub-munitions that cause all of the reactive armour plates hit to detonate and possibly cause the target tanks to expend much of their active counter-measures on non-threatening incoming targets?

RPG 30 tries to do something like that, but on a smaller scale, both to activate reactive armour and/or activate Active counter measures. / BACK ON TOPIC