• Russia finally fully unveils their newest generation of mechanized armoured vehicles
    172 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;47662543]Yeah, it's bigger than T-90, which is a T-72 refit that's 20 tons lighter than Abrams. [editline]5th May 2015[/editline] And don't forget the actual operational turret is probably like half the volume of what you can see as it's uncrewed housing for the autoloader. Even then Abrams is much huger.[/QUOTE] [img]http://i.imgur.com/KzAIqZl.jpg[/img] The crew is now ammo.
[QUOTE=goon165;47662749][img]http://i.imgur.com/KzAIqZl.jpg[/img] The crew is now ammo.[/QUOTE] Yeah and that whole primary ammo magazine sits in the hull. The rear magazine for autocannon ammo is probably separated by another bulkhead. Either way, his to the turret will unlikely be fatal to the vehicle, probably disable it's ability to engage and force or to retreat.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;47662806]Yeah and that whole primary ammo magazine sits in the hull. The rear magazine for autocannon ammo is probably separated by another bulkhead. Either way, his to the turret will unlikely be fatal to the vehicle, probably disable it's ability to engage and force or to retreat.[/QUOTE] That's the thing too, it's a bastard of a designed vehicle. ERA all over the place and a small crew confined and protected from essentially everything that could go wrong meaning that knocking the thing out is a complicated undertaking, stopping it shooting at you might be one thing, but actually irrecoverably destroying it is another ballgame. I'll give them credit it's a very smartly engineered tank all things considered. If they actually managed to overcome the problems of giving the commander both the fire-control and situational-awareness workload that is. which if it's this far along they probably did to an acceptable degree.
Question; is sloped armour even relevant nowadays?
nope
The Koalitsija-SV is very interesting, looks like a combination between a tank, an armored personnel carrier and an anti-air gun.
[QUOTE=angelangel;47662983]Question; is sloped armour even relevant nowadays?[/QUOTE] Better to have it than not, if only for the chance that you MIGHT cause something to hit at a weird angle and bounce off rather than stopping a direct hit.
[QUOTE=angelangel;47662983]Question; is sloped armour even relevant nowadays?[/QUOTE] Not really anymore. [t]http://i.imgur.com/ePgAxLD.jpg[/t] [editline]5th May 2015[/editline] Like, it depends on what is your vehicle and what kind of projectiles are you hoping to survive getting hit by, but in full out MBT-on-MBT combat, sloped armour is kinda irrelevant.
[QUOTE=Jund;47661596]anything with two wings can drop mavericks[/QUOTE] But you can't say that anything with two wings can destroy an entire armored spearhead without rearming. Also, I'd like to direct you to the P-51D. It is incapable of firing a maverick.
[QUOTE=TestECull;47663177]But you can't say that anything with two wings can destroy an entire armored spearhead without rearming. Also, I'd like to direct you to the P-51D. It is incapable of firing a maverick.[/QUOTE] The A-10 can carry a loadout of 16,000lbs external weapons, a F-16 can carry 17,000. Not really all that different, considering they can load almost all of the same weaponry. The benefit of the A-10 is not it's carry capacity, it is the fact that it has light armor on it which protects it from small arms fire and light anti-air to allow it to fly at lower altitudes more safely, and it's design is meant to be used at low speeds as well to provide better cas.
[QUOTE=NeverGoWest;47660224]Those tanks look pretty futuristic. Wonder how they would stand against an A-10[/QUOTE] The A-10 has been pretty worthless against MBTs for some time now, assuming you mean the GAU-8
[QUOTE=angelangel;47662983]Question; is sloped armour even relevant nowadays?[/QUOTE] tanks are still used for COIN, so probably
Somebody better get started on getting these into Gmod.
[QUOTE=angelangel;47662983]Question; is sloped armour even relevant nowadays?[/QUOTE] Its better than vertical boxes, and is probably done just to avoid bullet traps on the hull more than added protection
[url]http://sputniknews.com/military/20150505/1021737323.html#ixzz3ZH3xqQq4[/url] holy shit lmao [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/MYzLtts.png[/IMG] "Most readers were awe-struck, amazed by Russia's new tank, admitting it has no equals among other tank models around the world." and this is legit official russian news outlet managed by the Russian goverment
[QUOTE=Turing;47666236][url]http://sputniknews.com/military/20150505/1021737323.html#ixzz3ZH3xqQq4[/url] holy shit lmao [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/MYzLtts.png[/IMG] "Most readers were awe-struck, amazed by Russia's new tank, admitting it has no equals among other tank models around the world." and this is legit official russian news outlet managed by the Russian goverment[/QUOTE] Soo what? Are you surprised? Or ya just came to thread show off a headline? Goverment media being a goverment media, why would you expect less emotional aproach form them?
[QUOTE=Van-man;47660363]Ain't that the purpose of a tank? To be a mobile & armored small artillery?[/QUOTE] Not quite. Tanks maneuver against and engage visible targets with accurate, direct weapons fire. The main gun of a tank fires high-velocity rounds at a fairly flat trajectory, with a typical effective range of 2-3 km. Artillery, self-propelled and otherwise, engages targets beyond visual range with area bombardment, directed by a unit in contact with the target or a designated Forward Observer. They fire at a high trajectory, and have a typical effective range of around 20-25 km.
Now Let's talk the logistical issue. As before, it's very probable that the Russian industry won't be able to deliver all the required tanks. As with so many other systems, by the time they were all delivered they became obsolete and the required upgrade systems suffered from the same fate. And fuck, can you imagine that thing in a urban scenario? Mincemeat. If the Abrams had trouble with its cannon length, this will have triple the trouble.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47666728]And fuck, can you imagine that thing in a urban scenario? Mincemeat. If the Abrams had trouble with its cannon length, this will have triple the trouble.[/QUOTE] Post-Chechnya, Russia doesn't believe in urban combat for IFVs. Expect any urban center to be demolished into the ground, first.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47666728]Now Let's talk the logistical issue. As before, it's very probable that the Russian industry won't be able to deliver all the required tanks. As with so many other systems, by the time they were all delivered they became obsolete and the required upgrade systems suffered from the same fate. And fuck, can you imagine that thing in a urban scenario? Mincemeat. If the Abrams had trouble with its cannon length, this will have triple the trouble.[/QUOTE] Talking "logistics" Russia never had real problem with delivery of tanks, there are 1000+ T90, 3000 T-80 and fuckton of T-72's. If you expect tanks to simply "replace" older version everywhere, you are thinking of RTS upgrade button, not real life. Nor do we need 10 000 of outdated tanks(Abrams wink wink) in modern world, few newer thousands is enough. Since t-72, t-80 t-90 production is being shut [B]COMPLETELY[/B] i expect all factories being repurposed for armata platform only.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47666728]Now Let's talk the logistical issue. As before, it's very probable that the Russian industry won't be able to deliver all the required tanks. As with so many other systems, by the time they were all delivered they became obsolete and the required upgrade systems suffered from the same fate. And fuck, can you imagine that thing in a urban scenario? Mincemeat. If the Abrams had trouble with its cannon length, this will have triple the trouble.[/QUOTE] Nobody smart would send a tank in an urban area anyway
Soo according ot wiki there is expected 500 each year to cover 2300+ by 2020. Again, with cease of production and shipment of previous t-90 and analogues, this is more than affordable. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armata_Universal_Combat_Platform[/url] [quote]The Armata combat platform has been under design and development since 2009 by Uralvagonzavod headquartered in Nizhny Tagil.[9] Prototypes of heavy armored vehicles based on the Armata combat platform were presented at the defense exhibition Russian Arms Expo in Nizhny Tagil in September 2013.[13] In November 2014 trials of the 152mm 2S35 self-propelled gun variant were under way.[5] The first 24 vehicles of two different types are expected to be shown to the public in the 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade[13][14][15] with a batch of 32 to be delivered to the Russian Land Forces during the same year.[16] State testing is scheduled to begin in 2016 and go on until the end of that year.[15] Russian media has previously stated that mass delivery will start in 2015[13] or 2016.[17] A total of 2,300 MBTs are expected to be supplied by 2020,[13][18] modernizing 70 percent of the Russian tank fleet.[13][19] The Uralvagonzavod plant is expected to roll out around 500 T-14 Armata tanks per year.[20] At a 2015 Moscow Victory Day Parade practice drill run on the Alabino training grounds several types of armored vehicles described as various Armata models appeared with their turrets covered[/quote]
[QUOTE]Nobody smart would send a tank in an urban area anyway [/QUOTE] Eh, asks the Syrians. There are a lot of dudes approving the insertion of tanks into urban territory nowadays...and with that profile and length....damn [QUOTE=gufu;47666830]Post-Chechnya, Russia doesn't believe in urban combat for IFVs. Expect any urban center to be demolished into the ground, first.[/QUOTE] True? If so, Russians would be exaggerating things. Chechnya was a special case due to the Soviet architecture enabling insurgents to mass-fire RPG from basements, first floors and rooftop. Plus their coordination and direction was horrible. No thing in earth can stand that amount of simultaneous hits from an RPG. Even if it's the RPG 7. [QUOTE=karimatrix;47666856]Talking "logistics" Russia never had real problem with delivery of tanks, there are 1000+ T90, 3000 T-80 and fuckton of T-72's. If you expect tanks to simply "replace" older version everywhere, you are thinking of RTS upgrade button, not real life. Nor do we need 10 000 of outdated tanks(Abrams wink wink) in modern world, few newer thousands is enough. Since t-72, t-80 t-90 production is being shut [B]COMPLETELY[/B] i expect all factories being repurposed for armata platform only.[/QUOTE] Look.... Saying T80 T72 T90 Means nothing. As you might not know, a couple of letters come afterwards the names you mentioned. Such as: T72A T80U T72B1 And you know why? Because the BASE models, T80-T72-T90 became, as I said before, [B]obsolete[/B]. As time advances, newer developments pop up and things have to be changed. Suspension, night vision equipment, IR equipment, ECM equipment, Launching missiles -yes, Russians can fire missiles from their tanks like a normal round-, etc etc. You can't expect to develop a new tank, pass the prototype stage, manufacture and then call it a day for fucking 5 years. There are a "fuckton" of Russians tanks because the soviets couldn't keep up with the delivery of upgraded models and had to keep the older models in order to comply with their rush through fulda gap doctrine. What, they were going to face the whole NATO tank fleet with only their last gen tanks? Would get blown to smithereens. Hell, if Russia is so onto manufacturing last gen in massive numbers, then why do they have a tiny float of last gen fighters?
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47667189] Hell, if Russia is so onto manufacturing last gen in massive numbers, then why do they have a tiny float of last gen fighters?[/QUOTE] Well, probably MOD is just waiting for pak fa to leave prototype stage and finally get into production. I mean, it makes little sense to order tons of 4++ gen planes when you have a 5th gen plane project entering its final phase.
[QUOTE=Turing;47666236][url]http://sputniknews.com/military/20150505/1021737323.html#ixzz3ZH3xqQq4[/url] holy shit lmao [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/MYzLtts.png[/IMG] "Most readers were awe-struck, amazed by Russia's new tank, admitting it has no equals among other tank models around the world." and this is legit official russian news outlet managed by the Russian goverment[/QUOTE] What can we say? you built a nice box.
[QUOTE=antianan;47667311]Well, probably MOD is just waiting for pak fa to leave prototype stage and finally get into production. I mean, it makes little sense to order tons of 4++ gen planes when you have a 5th gen plane project entering its final phase.[/QUOTE] Ya, but PAK Fa hasn't been around in the air since the nineties!!
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47667481]Ya, but PAK Fa hasn't been around in the air since the nineties!![/QUOTE] The first flight of the T-50, the designation for the aircraft from the Sukhoi PAKFA program took it's first flight in 2010. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA[/url]
[QUOTE=purvisdavid1;47667542]The first flight of the T-50, the designation for the aircraft from the Sukhoi PAKFA program took it's first flight in 2010. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA[/url][/QUOTE] I know I know But check out the dates for the preceding aircraft: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_currently_active_Russian_military_aircraft[/url] Produced Su-27M: 1988–95 Su-35S: 2007–present Number built Su-27M: 15 Su-35S: 34 Russian Air Force has 14 Su-30M2 and 34 Su-30SM fighters as of December 2014.[47] It ordered 16 Su-30M2 fighters in December 2013,[48] following a previous order for 4 aircraft of that type.[20] A total of 65 Su-30SMs was on order in February 2014, with deliveries to be completed by 2016.[4] Russian Naval Aviation - 12 Su-30SMs on order, 50 planned. First 3 aircraft were delivered in July 2014.[49][50][51]
[QUOTE=Van-man;47660363]Ain't that the purpose of a tank? To be a mobile & armored small artillery?[/QUOTE] Take out treads, they become artillery. Take out main gun, they become pillbox. Take out coaxial, they become bunker. Take out armor, they become heroes. [QUOTE=StrykerE;47661780]There is such a system and it is also made by the Russians. The RPG-30 [pic] Designed specifically to defeat systems like the Trophy APS used by Israel. And then now the Israelis are developing a new defense system (or update to the Trophy? Not sure on the details) called "trench coat" that uses a 360 degree radar and can defeat simultaneous threats by launching 17 projectiles at them like a shotgun. System was made because they were worried that Hezbollah might have gotten their hands on some RPG-30s.[/QUOTE] IIRC, the Panzerfaust 3 and MILAN have similar methods, with warheads that have a small pole on the tip with a small charge to trigger reactive armor, leaving an open spot for the actual warhead to penetrate.
[QUOTE=Cutthecrap;47667577]I know I know But check out the dates for the preceding aircraft: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_currently_active_Russian_military_aircraft[/url] Produced Su-27M: 1988–95 Su-35S: 2007–present Number built Su-27M: 15 Su-35S: 34 Russian Air Force has 14 Su-30M2 and 34 Su-30SM fighters as of December 2014.[47] It ordered 16 Su-30M2 fighters in December 2013,[48] following a previous order for 4 aircraft of that type.[20] A total of 65 Su-30SMs was on order in February 2014, with deliveries to be completed by 2016.[4] Russian Naval Aviation - 12 Su-30SMs on order, 50 planned. First 3 aircraft were delivered in July 2014.[49][50][51][/QUOTE] This can hardy be a surprise. In the '90s and early '00s, with all the mess that had been happening with the country, the government didn't even have money to fuel planes, not to mention to buy advanced fighters. And when they finally started to spend money on bying stuff for the army, the pak fa project was almost halway where it is now. Essentially like 90% of all sophisticated weapons russian army owns has been ordered during the last half-decade or so. I'm not saying spending shittones of money on weapons is a good thing, especially considering the level of life in Russia, but for like 5-7 years they did a pretty good job on upgrading some branches of the army.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.