Hosted by Darren Baker
Armata
Beastmaster
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 02, 2015 - 11:28 PM UTC
I was expecting it to have a lower profile after seeing the concept pictures.
Northern_Lad
Joined: September 17, 2012
KitMaker: 462 posts
Armorama: 417 posts
Posted: Saturday, May 02, 2015 - 11:54 PM UTC
The Soviets (oops I mean Russians) haven't actually finished the turret for the Armata. It's just a load of cardboard boxes under a tarpaulin with a lamp post for a gun!
Aieeeee
Aieeeee
jwest21
Joined: October 16, 2006
KitMaker: 3,374 posts
Armorama: 3,126 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 03, 2015 - 09:49 PM UTC
Some drawings showing what's under the canvas:
http://rt.com/news/255445-armata-russian-tank-unveiled/
http://rt.com/news/255445-armata-russian-tank-unveiled/
Dimitar
Joined: November 08, 2011
KitMaker: 414 posts
Armorama: 287 posts
Posted: Sunday, May 03, 2015 - 11:56 PM UTC
Have you not heard? It was my understanding that everyone had heard!
http://мультимедиа.минобороны.рф/multimedia/photo/gallery.htm?id=21804@cmsPhotoGallery
http://мультимедиа.минобороны.рф/multimedia/photo/gallery.htm?id=21804@cmsPhotoGallery
David1988
Joined: September 18, 2014
KitMaker: 91 posts
Armorama: 91 posts
Posted: Monday, May 04, 2015 - 12:13 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Have you not heard? It was my understanding that everyone had heard!
http://мультимедиа.минобороны.рф/multimedia/photo/gallery.htm?id=21804@cmsPhotoGallery
Not only have they released these images, they also took the canvas off when the vehicles were carrying out the latest rehearsal.
There are photos on this blog post from a number of angles.
The turret shape of the Armata looks quite complex and interesting.
David
andrekidbsb
Joined: April 03, 2006
KitMaker: 284 posts
Armorama: 273 posts
Posted: Monday, May 04, 2015 - 07:09 AM UTC
More photos here
http://portaldefesa.com/armata-revelado/
http://portaldefesa.com/armata-revelado/
andrekidbsb
Joined: April 03, 2006
KitMaker: 284 posts
Armorama: 273 posts
Posted: Monday, May 04, 2015 - 03:34 PM UTC
David1988
Joined: September 18, 2014
KitMaker: 91 posts
Armorama: 91 posts
Posted: Monday, May 04, 2015 - 04:15 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextHave you not heard? It was my understanding that everyone had heard!
http://мультимедиа.минобороны.рф/multimedia/photo/gallery.htm?id=21804@cmsPhotoGallery
Not only have they released these images, they also took the canvas off when the vehicles were carrying out the latest rehearsal.
There are photos on this blog post from a number of angles.
The turret shape of the Armata looks quite complex and interesting.
David
Another post from the same blog - turning out to be quite a good resource - with some photos along the lines of a walkaround.
Nizhny Tagil Supertank T-14 Armata in Detail (in Russian)
ejasonk
Joined: October 14, 2007
KitMaker: 314 posts
Armorama: 226 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 01:42 AM UTC
So, now there are a lot of pictures, also from above, where you can see, that everything looks quite empty under the skin. All of this cover sheets look like a few millimeters of alu plates, just to make the technic look "future", but most of the shapes don't make any sense. On the rear part of the Armata you can see, that for instance the fuel drum holder connectors are mounted as on T-90 series on the primery structure, while the shape itself is just a coverage by thinn sheet. As an engineer i see a lot of things that don't make sense in design and functionality.
They needed to show something on 9 may
They needed to show something on 9 may
Apollo11
Joined: July 20, 2006
KitMaker: 79 posts
Armorama: 71 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 02:05 AM UTC
I agree. I've been following this thread with interest. The turret looks like a work in progress. In one photo of the rear right lower part of the turret you can see the top edge of aluminium sheet that's escaped the spray booth. There are too many shell traps underneath the turret and on the side. Too many exposed electrical components and the profile is way too high. My Volvo is built tougher than this. The chassis looks more accomplished,I suspect the finished article will be quite different but Mr Putin does like playing mind games. It'll be interesting to see what design evolves..
griffontech
Joined: November 21, 2007
KitMaker: 237 posts
Armorama: 231 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 07:45 AM UTC
From the look of the IFV and MBT turrets, and from the setup of the main hulls with so many crew hatches, I'm guessing that both turrets might be unoccupied? All the crew in the main hull with the turrets using auto-loaders.
Great, now Trumpeter will be coming out with 5 or 6 new kits of russian vehicles....
Great, now Trumpeter will be coming out with 5 or 6 new kits of russian vehicles....
avenue
Joined: May 25, 2013
KitMaker: 544 posts
Armorama: 542 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 08:19 AM UTC
it look like the turrent was design to minimized radar detection .and has an option to carry bigger calibre tank gun.
But the unmanned turrent also carry some design risk.what if EO/electronic suffer from mulfunction or battle damage.someone has to enter the turrent to operate the turrent manually.
Lastly wondering if trumpheter or tamiya,dragon..going to come out with 1/34th armata tank.
But the unmanned turrent also carry some design risk.what if EO/electronic suffer from mulfunction or battle damage.someone has to enter the turrent to operate the turrent manually.
Lastly wondering if trumpheter or tamiya,dragon..going to come out with 1/34th armata tank.
Beastmaster
Joined: January 27, 2009
KitMaker: 592 posts
Armorama: 588 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 10:54 AM UTC
Pretty cool looking tank and the turret does look quite complex (still surprised it's not lower profile though).
What are those 2 rocket tanks in the bottom picture too?
What are those 2 rocket tanks in the bottom picture too?
chnoone
Joined: January 01, 2009
KitMaker: 1,036 posts
Armorama: 1,033 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 02:28 PM UTC
I believe this is all a hoax .... Putin propaganda trying to impress.
When looking at the T-14 I see some "Shot-traps", thin sheet metal, too high in comparison to existing Russian "auto-loader" systems.
I wonder how the smoke dischargers can work effectively when they discharge almost horizontally at about 1.5 -1.7m hight fired straight out.
The panoramic-sight with the MG weapon station on top does not look very convincing ... the whole shape of the turret hardly incorporates any "deflecting" kind of angles nor does it look like any composite armor "blocks" are integrated and exchangeable as on the Leclerc for instance.
If I look at the most sophisticated artillery system in service right now ... the Panzerhaubitze 2000 ... why is that new Russian thing still so huge ???
If that's what "we" might be really facing ... then fear not !
I am not even going down the "logistics and maintenance road" on all these new machines knowing the existing Russian structures.
Cheers
Christopher
When looking at the T-14 I see some "Shot-traps", thin sheet metal, too high in comparison to existing Russian "auto-loader" systems.
I wonder how the smoke dischargers can work effectively when they discharge almost horizontally at about 1.5 -1.7m hight fired straight out.
The panoramic-sight with the MG weapon station on top does not look very convincing ... the whole shape of the turret hardly incorporates any "deflecting" kind of angles nor does it look like any composite armor "blocks" are integrated and exchangeable as on the Leclerc for instance.
If I look at the most sophisticated artillery system in service right now ... the Panzerhaubitze 2000 ... why is that new Russian thing still so huge ???
If that's what "we" might be really facing ... then fear not !
I am not even going down the "logistics and maintenance road" on all these new machines knowing the existing Russian structures.
Cheers
Christopher
Kosakk
Joined: January 22, 2015
KitMaker: 40 posts
Armorama: 39 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 03:03 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Back when I was in the Army, the scuttlebutt was that Soviet tankers couldn't be taller than 5 ft 5 inches. Does that still hold for today and with the advent of the Armatas higher profile, would that be eliminated? (noticed how I slipped Armata in there to satisfy the "let's stay on topic" requirement)
From wiki: "There is a widespread Cold War-era myth, that T-72 and other Soviet tanks are so cramped, that the small interior demands the use of shorter crewmen, with the maximum height set at 1.6 m (5 ft 3 in) in the Soviet Army. According to official regulations, however, the actual figure is 1.75 m (5 ft 9 in)"
Quoted Text
I believe this is all a hoax .... Putin propaganda trying to impress.
When looking at the T-14 I see some "Shot-traps", thin sheet metal, too high in comparison to existing Russian "auto-loader" systems.
I wonder how the smoke dischargers can work effectively when they discharge almost horizontally at about 1.5 -1.7m hight fired straight out.
The panoramic-sight with the MG weapon station on top does not look very convincing ... the whole shape of the turret hardly incorporates any "deflecting" kind of angles nor does it look like any composite armor "blocks" are integrated and exchangeable as on the Leclerc for instance.
If I look at the most sophisticated artillery system in service right now ... the Panzerhaubitze 2000 ... why is that new Russian thing still so huge ???
If that's what "we" might be really facing ... then fear not !
I am not even going down the "logistics and maintenance road" on all these new machines knowing the existing Russian structures.
Remembering how the T-72 turret was later redesigned and changed, maybe the same thing will happen to T-14?
RobinNilsson
TOS Moderator
Joined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 04:56 PM UTC
and if/when the final version finally appears it will probably be named Владимир Путин 1 (in line with earlier naming practices ....)
Krokogen
Joined: January 09, 2009
KitMaker: 137 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 05:07 PM UTC
Quoted Text
and if/when the final version finally appears it will probably be named Владимир Путин 1 (in line with earlier naming practices ....)
Yes, let them be called whatever you like, but would not "Vasa"
RobinNilsson
TOS ModeratorJoined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 05:23 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Textand if/when the final version finally appears it will probably be named Владимир Путин 1 (in line with earlier naming practices ....)
Yes, let them be called whatever you like, but would not "Vasa"
Nah, Vasa was overloaded and unbalanced, one too many battery decks, senior management, a.k.a. the king, had interfered with the design work ....bloody managers ;-)
If the ship hadn't capsized when it did it would have turned upside down a little later.
Lesson learned: Never let political management interfere in the work of engineers (or economics or justice).
It will be interesting to see what the real final product will look like. Right now it looks like Маскировка and дезинформация
/ Robin
Krokogen
Joined: January 09, 2009
KitMaker: 137 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 07:37 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Right now it looks like Маскировка and дезинформация
/ Robin
So it should be
RobinNilsson
TOS ModeratorJoined: November 29, 2006
KitMaker: 6,693 posts
Armorama: 5,562 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 07:42 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextRight now it looks like Маскировка and дезинформация
/ Robin
So it should be
Bonaparte84
Joined: July 17, 2013
KitMaker: 338 posts
Armorama: 331 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 08:26 PM UTC
Guys, English please? My Russian is a little rusty
Contrary, to what others have been saying, I don't think the turret looks modern or futuristic, but rather like a mock-up or movie prop.
Also, I 'cant find signs of an active protection system as has been advertised several times. Right now, everything is pointing at a turret with hastily slapped together.
Some folks here have pointed out the shot traps on the design, as well as bad deflection properties. I'm unsure about that point. I have read from different sources that this aspect isn't a major issue anymore nowadays, since modern AT ammunition is able to penetrate armour at impossible angles, as low as 10°. Therefore, mordern armour design is less about bouncing enemy shells then providing a robust armour package the shell can't penetrate. In other words, with today's penetration angles, one could claim there is no such as shottraps anymore, except maybe for smaller calibres that can also cause sme damage to on-turret equipment.
I hope I made myself clear and would like to know what others think of it, especially those with actual knowledge of modern arour physics and design. One thing for sure, both armour and tank guns have come a long way since WW2...
Contrary, to what others have been saying, I don't think the turret looks modern or futuristic, but rather like a mock-up or movie prop.
Also, I 'cant find signs of an active protection system as has been advertised several times. Right now, everything is pointing at a turret with hastily slapped together.
Some folks here have pointed out the shot traps on the design, as well as bad deflection properties. I'm unsure about that point. I have read from different sources that this aspect isn't a major issue anymore nowadays, since modern AT ammunition is able to penetrate armour at impossible angles, as low as 10°. Therefore, mordern armour design is less about bouncing enemy shells then providing a robust armour package the shell can't penetrate. In other words, with today's penetration angles, one could claim there is no such as shottraps anymore, except maybe for smaller calibres that can also cause sme damage to on-turret equipment.
I hope I made myself clear and would like to know what others think of it, especially those with actual knowledge of modern arour physics and design. One thing for sure, both armour and tank guns have come a long way since WW2...
Krokogen
Joined: January 09, 2009
KitMaker: 137 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 09:05 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Guys, English please? My Russian is a little rusty
It's time to teach! And then suddenly we will come, but you're not ready
Bonaparte84
Joined: July 17, 2013
KitMaker: 338 posts
Armorama: 331 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 09:22 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted TextGuys, English please? My Russian is a little rusty
It's time to teach! And then suddenly we will come, but you're not ready
If you're coming the way I think you're implying you will, I'm sure we will find a language you WILL understand
Krokogen
Joined: January 09, 2009
KitMaker: 137 posts
Armorama: 135 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 10:06 PM UTC
Quoted Text
If you're coming the way I think you're implying you will, I'm sure we will find a language you WILL understand
Bonapart was sure ... How symbolic ...
And Karl 12th was sure.
And Friedrich ..
And Bonapart and Wilhelm II, and Hitler
Do not worry, we will not arrive anywhere, as in the past did not come. But visitors have to wait for ever
Therefore, apparently, Armata made not for urban fighting, but for tank battles (IMHO).
Bonaparte84
Joined: July 17, 2013
KitMaker: 338 posts
Armorama: 331 posts
Posted: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 - 11:02 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Quoted Text
If you're coming the way I think you're implying you will, I'm sure we will find a language you WILL understand
Bonapart was sure ... How symbolic ...
And Karl 12th was sure.
And Friedrich ..
And Bonapart and Wilhelm II, and Hitler
Do not worry, we will not arrive anywhere, as in the past did not come. But visitors have to wait for ever
Therefore, apparently, Armata made not for urban fighting, but for tank battles (IMHO).
Unlike you, I was nowhere near implying an invasion... Why would anyone want to? I will not comment on you never arriving anywhere...
My nickname does bear some irony, though, I'll give you that.
Now, back on topic: Anyone care to comment on modern armour physics (see my earlier post)?
 |
WEB HOSTING BY
Copyright ©2021 Armorama and Kitmaker Network, a subsidiary of Silver Star Enterprises
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
All Rights Reserved. Please read our Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.