Military Review

"Abramscaput" can share his gun with "Armata"

103
The elder brother of the Russian Armaty is an 195 object (t-95), which received the nickname Abramskaput. The object is still of interest to military specialists with its powerful 152-mm tool 2А83, writes Messenger of Mordovia.


"Abramscaput" can share his gun with "Armata"


This gun surpasses everything that is available or will be created in the near future in foreign armies. By the way, the tank got its nickname because of the gun.

“In fact, in the case of tank dueling not only an American tank, but also any other Western machine, after getting into it a unique armor-piercing-projectile projectile, it was guaranteed to turn into scrap metal. In addition, the ammunition also includes guided missiles and high-explosive shells that have no analogues, ”says Lev Romanov.

At the same time, the target would be amazed even before the enemy approaches a distance from which he can notice the Russian car.

It is not surprising that recently you can still hear the opinion that it is necessary to install an 152-mm cannon on the new modifications of “Armata”. Military experts believe that this is a completely solvable task - that’s why it’s a modular platform.

“With the new sighting system, in which, apparently, it is necessary to enter the radar channel, the tank will be a real horror for any potential aggressors. As a result, the T-14 and its modification with a more powerful tool for decades will form the basis of the Russian armored forces, ”the author concludes.
Photos used:
Brave2004
103 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Herculesic
    Herculesic April 5 2018 15: 00
    +9
    That's what it was necessary to put on the conveyor, back in the 12th year! Now we would really have a car out of competition for the next 30 years for sure! !!
    1. Sauron80
      Sauron80 April 5 2018 15: 03
      +31
      It is only possible without these "having no analogues in the world" - the rumor cuts already.
      1. Herculesic
        Herculesic April 5 2018 15: 13
        +8
        Armata platform is very raw, it will take at least five years to finalize. Having launched the production of T95, in the 12th year, we would have cured all its killer diseases in three to four years! For at least five years, the army will receive an hour per teaspoon of raw equipment on the Armata platform, and only five years later, having refined it, it will be possible to purchase large volumes of equipment if there is funding.
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I April 5 2018 15: 29
          +5
          Quote: Herkulesich
          Having launched the production of T95, in the 12 year, we would have cured all of its killer diseases in three to four years!

          Oh ... if only ....... yes mushrooms grew in your mouth! recourse
          1. Sergej531
            Sergej531 April 5 2018 15: 57
            +1
            The elder brother of the Russian “Almaty” - object 195 (t-95), nicknamed “Abramskaput” ...

            And “Armakaput” was ready in the early 2000s, but Russia rolled out “Armata” only in 2015.



            The Americans did not wait. Here Russia is riveted by at least 1000 “Armat”, then the Americans will reanimate this project.

            Kinetic energy LOSAT at the goal twice as much as muzzle energy of 140 mm OBPS.

            1. Vadivak
              Vadivak April 5 2018 17: 58
              +5
              Quote: Sergej531
              And “Armakaput” was ready in the early 2000s

              Advertising ........ And what is the problem of getting hypersonic missiles into an inconspicuous and highly maneuverable target has already been successfully solved?
              Yes, and one hit of a fragment is guaranteed to bury the device itself and everything that surrounds it within a radius of 30 meters
            2. Geisenberg
              Geisenberg April 5 2018 23: 16
              +4
              Quote: Sergej531
              The Americans did not wait. Here Russia is riveted by at least 1000 “Armat”, then the Americans will reanimate this project.


              You only know how to raise the dead from the grave and turn it into zombies. And as it comes down to it, only your back is visible.
          2. Per se.
            Per se. April 5 2018 16: 39
            +6
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            Oh, yes ... if only ....
            Mushrooms are not mushrooms ... Here, to think about an interview with Colonel-General Sergey Mayev (From 1996 to 2003, he served as Chief of the Main Automobile and Armored Directorate of the Russian Defense Ministry and led the development of the T-95 tank (OKR "Perfection-88")) to the editor-in-chief of Rosinformbyuro, Vyacheslav Prunov.
            - It was planned, in 2005, to complete state tests and to put her (the car) in the series. In the first year they had to make 100 machines, then 300 machines. This is ahead of the development of the world tank building years on 15. Two years ago, at an exhibition in Paris, I saw the layout of the Leopard, in which German designers tried to somehow replicate the T-95 to accommodate the crew, ammunition and the gun and the elements of technical vision. But it was just a layout.
            - And we already had a new generation car in the metal.
            - And we have two samples of T-95 already departed 15 thousand. Km. And the gun has already made 287 shots. The tank was ready. It was necessary to create a third option, conduct a full-scale revision, based on the first and second samples, and on the third option, conduct state tests, make some changes and launch the series. And we would have the best tank in the world.
            - But what happened? Why abandoned the finished T-95 and opened a new work on "Armata"?
            - What happened is difficult to explain. I was at one of the meetings of the military-industrial commission, when the customers spoke, and Nikolay Yershov was the head of the Main Automobile and Armored Directorate, I told them that in order to finish this car, one more tank had to be made, to spend about 500 mln. rubles,
            - Well, this is not fantastic money.
            - Yes, they remained, the money. The creation of T-95 was not allocated a lot, total 2.2 billion rubles. And when I left, we had 700 million left. 400 million to make a third car and 300- for state tests.
            But, I was objected that the machine is structurally too complicated and it will not be mastered and will be very expensive. And I said: “Yes, it is expensive and complicated, but now you will not spend 700 millions of rubles, but much more, simplify the specifications and make the car. Which class will be lower. " So I said: "You will do ... ka (ya-lu-ka)."
            - So, creating “Armata”, did the designers take a step back?
            - Creating T-95, we went to a new class of car. Unfortunately, it is lost. The paradox is that “Armata” will need to be dragged by characteristics to the level of “Improvement-88”. But the enemy is not in place.
            - Do you think “Armat” will be worse than T-95?
            - Well, of course, it will be worse than "Improvement-88". I think so. But the new just does not come. It was necessary to squeeze all the will into a fist and bring the T-95 to mind. In the 2005 year, we could actually begin to release a new tank. Now is 2013 year (at the time of the interview). Eight years have passed!
            “And yet, why didn't the T-95 be adopted?” Why put an end to the already finished best tank in the world? Why undertook a new, dubious development work? Could it be money? After all, KB lives by development?
            - Forgive me, Lord! It seems to me that there are only personal motives. I wanted Ershov to become an outstanding tanker. I warned him: "You will be kicked out in a year!" And so it happened.
            1. Piramidon
              Piramidon April 5 2018 17: 02
              +6
              Quote: Per se.
              Mushrooms are not mushrooms ...

              As you know, history has no subjunctive mood. As the song says; "The forcemeat cannot be turned back and meat from cutlets cannot be restored." Now you can only pull the feathers out of your ass, resent and hope that the errors will be taken into account.
            2. ARES623
              ARES623 April 5 2018 17: 19
              +5
              Quote: Per se.
              Interview with Colonel General Sergey Mayev

              General Mamaev, no doubt, is an authoritative person. But for the sake of objectivity, I would like to hear the other side. Even ingenious people sometimes allow themselves to allow undeserved humiliation of opponents. Look at the aerospace industry, for example, as the general designers who bow to the gods rinse each other. I think here is not so straightforward. History shows that any grandiose product is born difficult and painful.
              1. Per se.
                Per se. April 5 2018 19: 13
                +10
                Quote: ARES623
                But for the sake of objectivity, I would like to hear the other side.
                Other side? It was 7 on April 2010 of the year, on this day Mr. Popovkin, who was then the deputy of Anatoly Serdyukov and the chief of armaments, announced the termination of financing the development of the T-95 tank (195 object) and the closure of the project. According to him, the project of the machine is "morally obsolete." In addition, the tank was called too expensive and difficult for "conscripts" ... The other side, this is PR of the Armata platform, where, according to Vladimir Putin, 64 was spent a billion rubles on OKRy and R & D. The super tank T-95 was called “expensive and difficult for conscripts,” and the platform on the “gold base” (“Armata”) was already made “cheap” ... Moreover, the T-14 was definitely not for conscripts, and, if The initial price of the T-95 was estimated at 450 million rubles, then the T-14 fell to 400 million, lost most of the titanium armor and the 152 mm gun, for which the project was originally started, everything was done for a new weapon. They plundered the “platform”, as if, before this, nothing of the kind had been done on the well-proven base of the same T-72 / T-90 (from SAU, TOC, SEM, to BMO-T and BMPT). 2015 Victory Parade of the year of raw equipment, "platforms", spent hundreds of millions ... Generally, the platform becomes a time-tested, technologically advanced, well-established base, mastered by industry, and relatively cheap. Assign a "platform" to spend money on the development of other equipment on a raw base, which has not yet proved itself, stupidity, if not a crime. If there is a priority in the saturation of the troops with a new tank, then the tank should be a concentration of all forces, both in development and fine-tuning, and in production, with a load on production capacity, and not parallel “dampness” and dispersion of forces with ACS, BMPT, SEM on an expensive and complicated base. I hope that we will return to the idea of ​​a heavy tank with 152 mm gun, and they will revive the original idea of ​​a super tank, and the SAU, SEM or BMPT will be made on the successful and well-developed T-72 / T-90 base, both as new cars and using for rework stocks T-72.
                1. ARES623
                  ARES623 April 5 2018 20: 15
                  +5
                  Quote: Per se.
                  It was April 7, 2010, on that day, Mr. Popovkin, being then deputy Anatoly Serdyukov and chief of armaments, announced the cessation of funding for the development of the T-95 tank (object 195)

                  Today I would not take sides, but I note that the rationale for adopting the type of machine is a long, detailed, multi-aspect business. here as in court - who was more convincing, he won. So, something for the T-95 supporters was not enough. I hope that this summer the new “Kursk Bulge” will not happen, and therefore we do not need a 100500 T-14 yet. One must still be realistic, breaking spears with our knowledge of the subject is very stupid and unproductive.
            3. Nikolaevich I
              Nikolaevich I April 6 2018 00: 12
              +5
              Quote: Per se.
              Interview with Colonel General Sergey Mayev

              And I was upset when the T-95 was abandoned! And they did not hide that the T-95 is more perfect than the so-called Armata! You see, the T-95 is more expensive ... Oh, how many times have we heard this phrase! "This is better, more perfect ... but more expensive ... and that means we will not produce, adopt it!" Well, sometimes, it becomes from our "poverty"! Is it really so real? For some reason, embezzler-corruption officials "constantly" manage to find, "unaccounted for" billions! And in the current situation we have to "rejoice" that at least "crayfish by 3 ruble" are given to us! For by 5 r.-Already eaten! (You can’t enter the same river twice!)
            4. medvedron
              medvedron April 6 2018 20: 58
              +1
              The story is similar to the production of the AN-94 assault rifle which in its performance characteristics was superior to the AK-74. Yes, it was more expensive than Kalash but it was much better. And although it’s not customary to talk about the deceased poorly, it was the designer Kalashnikov who did everything so that the so-called Abakan did not become a mass machine gun. I think that with Armata there will be something similar, of course it will not be worse than the T-95, but the main thing is that time is lost.
        2. cariperpaint
          cariperpaint April 5 2018 15: 38
          +2
          nonsense. if at 12 that barn would have taken them at that time 10 pieces would still stick out in parts without any hint of success.
        3. cast iron
          cast iron April 5 2018 15: 52
          +1
          Yah? T-64 childhood diseases have not been cured so far))))
        4. Ascetic
          Ascetic April 5 2018 15: 53
          +6
          Quote: Herkulesich
          Armata platform is very raw, it will take at least five years to finalize. XNUMX

          It's not about the platform at all. Serial production is delayed due to unavailability of regular ammunition
          MOSCOW, February 8 - RIA News. The standard ammunition for the newest Armata T-14 tank has not yet been created, but there are positive results in its development, said Alexander Potapov, Director General of Uralvagonzavod Corporation, to RIA Novosti

          Oleg Sienko, who previously held the post of general director of UVZ, told the Russian media that the state corporation Rosatom was engaged in the creation of ammunition for Armata. According to him, the decision to entrust the development of shells to Rosatom is related to the specific requirements of the customer for these munitions

          RIA Novosti https://ria.ru/arms/20180208/1514192449.html
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 April 5 2018 16: 59
            0
            Serial production is delayed due to unavailability of regular ammunition

            the ammunition is the same as on the rest of the tanks. Let the cars go out, then bring new shells.
        5. Alekseev
          Alekseev April 5 2018 17: 23
          +2
          Quote: Herkulesich
          Armata platform is very crude

          How much do you know !? laughing
          This is not a matter of "dampness." in addition to Armata, there is still much to spend money: Sarmat, you know, a Dagger, a vigorous rocket, etc., etc. This explains the leisurely adoption of this machine for service.
          But strive for this. Separate battalions of heavy Armat, in the image and likeness of the heavy tank regiments of the WWII, at least a dozen, would be very useful. Banderlogs are outraging, who knows what is on their minds and their owners?
          In addition, the T-90 for export is good, but you need to be prepared sometime and replace this machine ..
          Therefore, Armata and other projects of the new BTT will be in demand, although not as quickly and massively as we would like.
        6. Voyager
          Voyager April 5 2018 21: 04
          +1
          Armata is not only a tank, but also dozens of other cars. Are you sure that the platform for the T-95 would cope with these tasks?
      2. rocket757
        rocket757 April 5 2018 15: 19
        +3
        It has analogs, the French of a similar mastadont also advertised! And why? clicked the killer of Almaty!
      3. cariperpaint
        cariperpaint April 5 2018 15: 36
        +2
        and someone has a 152 cannon with such an ammunition?
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 April 5 2018 15: 46
          +3
          Leclerc 140 mm and how many caliber yo-yo!
          1. cariperpaint
            cariperpaint April 5 2018 16: 09
            +2
            the question was clear about 152. they also have no analogues, since we don’t have such a gun. everything is clearly and correctly said
          2. Vadivak
            Vadivak April 5 2018 17: 34
            +2
            Quote: rocket757
            Leclerc 140 mm and how many caliber yo-yo!

            Where is he lit up, except for 1 instance?
            1. rocket757
              rocket757 April 5 2018 20: 11
              +3
              Not in battle, of course, but in one copy it was lit up! Our object is also an experiment, nothing more.
      4. RASKAT
        RASKAT April 5 2018 16: 37
        +4
        I am also quite skeptical of the 152 mm on the tank. Well, firstly, it’s a little incomprehensible to me for what? 125 mm seems to be coping so far in my opinion, while the opponents have no tanks heavier than 65 tons even in development.
        152 mm much more gunpowder recoil will be that one, especially when shooting a full charge with a sub-caliber for example. Also, it’s not yet clear to me how the issue of loading will be solved. If the drum is like on today's tanks, then you have to squash the shells right up to the roof of the tower, as in the same Armata. I want to remind you that the shells are not light and weigh under 50 kg. What ammunition will be in the drum at the current dimensions of the tower shoulder strap? 12 shells? Not enough?
        1. Beltasir matyagu
          Beltasir matyagu April 5 2018 23: 35
          0
          Imagine a land mine
        2. zoolu350
          zoolu350 April 6 2018 09: 14
          0
          152 mm - this is the minimum caliber for the nuclear weapons, things are extremely necessary and useful. Land mine and TOUR are also more powerful.
      5. Mih1974
        Mih1974 April 6 2018 15: 15
        0
        Ok - bring at least a test analog not with us tongue tongue . The only ones who have done anything (show at the level of the exhibition) are Germans, and even they didn’t even stutter that this is a working model and not just a 140 mm “pipe”. negative tongue
    2. Dam
      Dam April 5 2018 15: 12
      +1
      Not sure about the need for this device. Tank duels ended on Kursk. It is most likely possible to modify the Armata for the 152 mm gun. The question is the feasibility of this event.
      1. Lesorub
        Lesorub April 5 2018 15: 30
        +3
        Quote: Damm
        Not sure about the need for this device. Tank duels ended on Kursk. It is most likely possible to modify the Armata for the 152 mm gun. The question is the feasibility of this event.

        The installation of a 152 mm gun is vital, (and most likely this modernization has been incorporated into Armata), to ensure sure defeat of NATO tanks in the frontal projection at ranges of 2000 m or more.
        1. Dam
          Dam April 5 2018 15: 32
          +1
          There is no need for this to lead a tank duel. At 2 km there are more efficient methods for this.
          1. Lesorub
            Lesorub April 5 2018 15: 42
            +4
            Quote: Damm
            There is no need for this to lead a tank duel. At 2 km there are more efficient methods for this.

            Do you think that tanks in future battles and wars will no longer meet on the battlefield! ?? This is at least strange.
        2. albert
          albert April 5 2018 19: 35
          +1
          In addition, the caliber of 152 mm., Will provide the tank the ability to fire tactical YaBCh.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 April 5 2018 22: 18
            +3
            Tank, this is a forward movement, an offensive! What a vigorous weapon in the offensive ???
            1. zoolu350
              zoolu350 April 6 2018 09: 17
              +2
              Normal TNW on the offensive. SBP with a capacity of 1 kiloton on the ROP and forward to stripping.
          2. al.schenaev
            al.schenaev April 6 2018 15: 49
            +1
            I don’t remember exactly, I won’t lie, the ZVO magazine was printing a picture in some worn-out year: an American 152 mm self-propelled gun with nuclear ammunition (we had something similar too).
            152 mm is a cruising caliber, and it seems that there are not very many guns with such a caliber on land.
      2. Hammerlock
        Hammerlock April 5 2018 17: 13
        +1
        but I have this question: How competent is the Mordovian Bulletin? request
        1. Vadivak
          Vadivak April 5 2018 17: 43
          +1
          only one thing pleases that the founder is not an offshore office but Vitaly Ivanovich Moiseev
      3. tomket
        tomket April 5 2018 18: 29
        +1
        Quote: Damm
        Not sure about the need for this device. Tank duels ended on Kursk. It is most likely possible to modify the Armata for the 152 mm gun. The question is the feasibility of this event.

        About the Arab-Israeli tank duel you never heard of ????
    3. vorobey
      vorobey April 5 2018 15: 17
      +4
      Quote: Herkulesich
      That's what it was necessary to put on the conveyor, back in the 12th year! Now we would really have a car out of competition for the next 30 years for sure! !!


      You have a real car for the next 10 years - T72 B3 ... the rest is still dust .. even T14.
      1. Herculesic
        Herculesic April 5 2018 15: 30
        +6
        I would have made the creators of this shame for the T72B3 create a normal car from scratch in terms of booking! Even the name unofficial "budget tank" should absolutely not apply to any version of a modernized tank! It would be better if the T72 “Slingshot” was made the main upgrade option, but the T72B3 wasn’t done at all!
      2. Kars
        Kars April 5 2018 15: 50
        +5
        And what about the modernization t80 not satisfied?
        1. vorobey
          vorobey April 5 2018 15: 53
          +4
          Quote: Kars
          And what about the modernization t80 not satisfied?


          And how many of them we have ... to carry out a separate modernization program. Hi Andrey ... The T80 is itself a self-sufficient machine, and in terms of durability it exceeded 72 .. in the first Chechnya. RPG held three hits .. this is from the first hand of the person who survived this .. and after the capital, probably just due to special stages they bring the level close to T90
          1. Kars
            Kars April 5 2018 18: 03
            +3
            So it seems that even this year, the upgraded m-80 should go to the troops. At first glance, they seem to me more promising:
        2. stalkerwalker
          stalkerwalker April 5 2018 16: 02
          +2
          Quote: Kars
          And what about the modernization t80 not satisfied?

          Andrew, hello!
          hi
          So it really seems to me that the topic of modernization of the T-80 is stuffing, dust in the eyes ....
          We have hundreds of T-72 in parts and warehouses, which in Syria, with appropriate modernization, have shown themselves well.
          And resources and money are not endless.
          The same song with the 152-mm gun for Almaty - but why? And the creation of a line of new 152-mm shells that meet modern requirements, if not a problem, then obviously can not be solved promptly.
          1. Kars
            Kars April 5 2018 18: 02
            +2
            I hope for the best. All the same, a couple of thousand t80 would not be wanted to be melted down.
        3. Vadivak
          Vadivak April 5 2018 17: 44
          +1
          Hi Andrey smile hi I'm glad to see you
          1. Kars
            Kars April 5 2018 18: 01
            +2
            Hello))))
    4. Maz
      Maz April 5 2018 17: 40
      0
      “As a result, the T-14 and its modification with a more powerful weapon will scare NATO tanks for decades and form the basis of Russian tank forces,” - this is how the author should conclude at the end.
    5. Moon reflection
      Moon reflection April 6 2018 06: 26
      0
      It looks like tank developers are also listening to bloggers filming a video about the game warthunder. Here is his video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sNsqQQ2RAA&t
      = 80s
  2. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi April 5 2018 15: 02
    +6
    I’m not a tanker, but the installation of a new turret, and it just won’t go into the old one, will require very serious revision. Does it make sense if in Western Europe today there are thousands of battle-worthy tanks from Poland to Spain from the strength of 1500. Could it be easier to increase the number of heavy ATGMs, and use a tank as the main means of supporting infantry?
    1. figwam
      figwam April 5 2018 15: 08
      +13
      Aaron Zawi

      On "Armata" the tower is uninhabited and the installation of this gun was provided during the development of the tank.
    2. kot28.ru
      kot28.ru April 5 2018 15: 09
      +3
      You can increase the number of carriers of nuclear weapons, warning the "partners" about jumping on the spot and shooting
      then they’ll think whether it’s worth it to jump! hi
    3. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 April 5 2018 15: 09
      +3
      if the new tank is modular, then making the towers of two samples easier .....
    4. Fedor egoist
      Fedor egoist April 5 2018 15: 14
      +2
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      the installation of a new tower, but it simply won’t go into the old one, will require a very serious revision. Does that make sense

      As far as I know, the "Almaty" tower provides for the installation of 152mm guns. This feature was provided at the design stage. So I don’t see any particular difficulties. Another thing is that this day is uncritical, the available capabilities are quite enough.
    5. bouncyhunter
      bouncyhunter April 5 2018 15: 14
      +3
      Aaron hi
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      I’m not a tanker, but the installation of a new turret, and it just won’t go into the old one, will require very serious revision.

      This does not stop the Germans at all: they won a new 130-mm gun from Rheinmetal into the new tower and put it on the Leopard chassis.
      1. figwam
        figwam April 5 2018 15: 20
        +1
        Quote: bouncyhunter
        This does not stop the Germans at all: they won a new 130-mm gun from Rheinmetal into the new tower and put it on the Leopard chassis.

        They also designed a 140 mm cannon for a new turret and automatic loader.
        1. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter April 5 2018 15: 23
          +2
          Read . But it’s not the caliber of the gun that matters, but the fact that work is underway to increase the caliber and power of the tank guns.
          1. Svarog51
            Svarog51 April 6 2018 08: 21
            +2
            Pasha, hi hi But what was he thinking about - if they put 152mm on the tank, then the self-propelled guns will need to increase the caliber.
            1. bouncyhunter
              bouncyhunter April 6 2018 08: 23
              +2
              Hello Seryoga! hi Quite possible . But do not forget that tanks and self-propelled guns have different tasks.
              1. Svarog51
                Svarog51 April 6 2018 08: 26
                +1
                So I'm talking about the same thing. Even during the Second World War they came to the conclusion that self-propelled guns on a caliber are larger than tanks. Of course, I understand that the self-propelled guns are equipped with a howitzer and it has other tasks.
                1. bouncyhunter
                  bouncyhunter April 6 2018 08: 29
                  +2
                  I think that there is a development on this topic. And if they give the go-ahead - there will be a finished product in a short time.
                  1. Svarog51
                    Svarog51 April 6 2018 08: 31
                    +1
                    Quite possible. There were at one time Peony and Hyacinth. Eight inches.
                    1. bouncyhunter
                      bouncyhunter April 6 2018 08: 34
                      +2
                      Peony - yes, 203 mm. Isn't Hyacinth 152 mm? what
                      1. Svarog51
                        Svarog51 April 6 2018 08: 41
                        +1
                        Oh sure! Hyacinth and Acacia six-inch. recourse
        2. al.schenaev
          al.schenaev April 6 2018 15: 54
          +1
          And why wouldn’t the Germans deliver more than 400mm guns from the old battleships, which, as they say with .. crumple, 480 is so 480.
    6. Maz
      Maz April 5 2018 17: 48
      0
      I’m not a tanker either, but I’ll notice what’s behind the tank, and under it, it’s very convenient to hide sniper calculations on the border with Gaza. And under the fire of a coaxial machine gun, mask the shot of a well-aimed gunner due to the armor of the car. KAZ will provide not only the safety of tankers, but also a sniper pair from ATGMs, RPGs and other anti-tank weapons. Palestinians from Israel to Egypt do not have a single tank. So it may be easier to make a separate tower on a sniper merkava and put the glorious Robin Hoods there. But you can safely use the tank to support anti-terrorist units. During the march of anger.

      But seriously - does she need such a gun there? And right now? Are we fighting against fronts with the massive use of armored vehicles? Everything is developed, tested, prepared and left for a special period.
  3. svp67
    svp67 April 5 2018 15: 02
    +2
    It is not surprising that lately everyone can hear opinions that a new 152-mm cannon needs to be installed on new versions of "Almaty". Military experts believe that this is a completely solvable task - for that it is also a modular platform.
    I think it's too early for the troops. For the development of enough and 125-mm guns. But the tests need to be carried out, as well as the release of 152 mm guns and an ammunition stockpile for them
    1. cast iron
      cast iron April 5 2018 15: 56
      +3
      It’s time to unify the ammunition between the tanks and self-propelled guns. 152mm - one at all. The dream of logisticians.
    2. Per se.
      Per se. April 5 2018 17: 11
      +1
      Performance characteristics of 125-mm gun 2А82-1М:
      • Type of gun - smooth-bore with a chrome-plated barrel;
      • Weight - 2700 kg;
      • Barrel length - 7000 mm;
      • The initial velocity of the projectile - 2050 m / s;
      • Effective shot range:
      - shells - 4700 m;
      - guided missile (URS) 3UBK21 "Sprinter" - 8000 m;
      - anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) "Reflex-M" - 5500 m;
      • Rate of fire - 10 – 12 shots per minute;
      • Muzzle shot energy - 15 – 24 MJ;
      • Armor Penetration:
      - armor-piercing piercing shells (BPS) - 850 – 1000 mm;
      - ATGM - 950 mm;
      • Resource gun barrel - 800 – 900 shots;
      • Ammunition - 45 shells;
      • Automatic loader - 32 projectile.

      Performance characteristics of 152-mm gun 2А83:
      • Type of gun - smooth-bore with a chrome-plated barrel;
      • Weight - more than 5000 kg;
      • Barrel length - 7200 mm;
      • The initial velocity of the projectile - 1980 m / s;
      • Effective shot range:
      - shells - 5100 m;
      - URS Krasnopol 2K25 - 20 000 m;
      - URS Krasnopol ZOF38 - 12 000 m;
      • Rate of fire - 10 – 15 shots per minute;
      • Muzzle shot energy - 20 – 25 MJ;
      • Armor Penetration:
      - BPS - mm 1024;
      - ATGM - 1200 – 1400 m;
      • Resource gun barrel - 280 shots;
      • Ammunition - 40 shells;
      • Automatic loader - 24 projectile.
      1. Maz
        Maz April 5 2018 17: 54
        +1
        Well - less ammunition, more weight. use it only in the "tank" four - BMPT, two conventional tanks and this huge. As a high-precision sniper squad. Well, the infantry platoon - cover
        1. Per se.
          Per se. April 5 2018 19: 40
          +1
          Quote: Maz
          Well - less ammunition
          On the other hand, 152 mm projectile is enough to guarantee the destruction of any target with one shot, moreover, and from a range not accessible to the enemy’s response.
  4. Thunderbolt
    Thunderbolt April 5 2018 15: 15
    +1
    The assault gun needs to be done, the new platform will allow it, and the infantry will not be happy then how it will be good with such power in the city.
  5. COJIDAT
    COJIDAT April 5 2018 15: 20
    +1
    Isn’t it easier to make a separate modification (Fri SAU) to support tanks, which with BMPT will give a more universal BT fist.
    1. al.schenaev
      al.schenaev April 6 2018 16: 01
      +2
      it’s easier not to play tanks: what is the abbreviation “Fri Sau” - polutank? There are SU (self-propelled guns) and self-propelled guns (self-propelled artillery guns). Some to suppress engineering structures, and others to support advanced tank units. It has been stretching since the war and it makes no sense to fence a garden; my pocket is not dimensionless. Enough of that is full of projects of new corvettes, but where is the unification?
  6. Romanenko
    Romanenko April 5 2018 15: 37
    0
    It would be nice just like that, for "partners" you always need to keep a good club in your hand, they love this attitude, and appreciate it.
  7. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I April 5 2018 15: 43
    +2
    The armament of the T-95 is a mystery! Everyone says that for the T-95 the 152-mm gun was conceived, but I recall one of the first articles "about the T-95": it mentioned the main weapon of the 135-mm gun .. I even remember the phrase from the description: the 135-mm tank gun is inferior in power to the 140-mm NATO gun, but surpasses the 120-mm NATO tank gun. And now try to find this article!? ... If you think about it, then the 135 mm would be useful if Germany would start pushing its 130 mm tank gun ...
    1. cast iron
      cast iron April 5 2018 15: 57
      +2
      The article was written by semi-literate journalists with one twist.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I April 6 2018 00: 20
        +2
        Quote: cast iron
        The article was written by semi-literate journalists with one twist

        It could be so! How many times had to meet articles where journalists managed to distort even the long-known information! Or come up with TTX, which does not exist "in nature"!
    2. al.schenaev
      al.schenaev April 6 2018 16: 05
      +1
      Well said. You can also do this: the 76mm Grabov gun (T-34-76) is inferior to the 85mm anti-aircraft gun (T-34-85), but better than the 57mm anti-tank gun (T-34).
  8. Pacifist
    Pacifist April 5 2018 15: 45
    0
    With the current resource of the barrel 2A83, if I'm not mistaken 280 shots (for 2A46M - 1200) for a real war, this is interesting only as a reserve rate. Although, of course, she has no equal in terms of tank babahalkas.
  9. san4es
    san4es April 5 2018 15: 53
    +3
    The object is still of interest to military experts with its powerful 152 mm 2A83 gun

    The experimental installation of the 152 mm gun 2A83 on the T-72 chassis
    The gun’s body is based on the 2A65 howitzer-gun already mastered in production, which forms the basis of the Msta complex. However, unlike the latter, 2A83 has smooth barrel walls. Moreover, the barrel inside has a chrome coating, which allows to increase the pressure of the powder gases to 7700 atm, while for the current tank guns it does not exceed the three thousandth mark. hi
    For comparison, 152 mm and 125 mm tank BPS
    In addition to the BPS, the 2A83 can fire high-explosive shells, cluster shells with cumulative-fragmentation warheads, and thermobaric bullets of a volumetric explosion. She can shoot and ATGMs. The missile launched from the barrel is similar to the ATGM rocket and can actually burn through a meter of armor soldier
    1. Per se.
      Per se. April 5 2018 16: 41
      +4
      The main armament of the T-95 consisted of 152-mm gun 2А83 (developed by the design bureau of the plant No. XXUMX and VNIITM). The gun had an initial armor-piercing speed of the 9 sneak projectile and the ability to launch a guided missile through the barrel, the direct shot range was 1980 meters, and the BPS armor penetration reached 5100 millimeters of steel homogeneous armor. Ammunition was 1024-36 shots, ammunition types: BPS, OFS, KUV. Characterizing the additional armament, it is necessary to note the 40-30-2 X-mm cannon, which could be used as an alternative to the excessive expenditure of the main ammunition, the gun was mounted in the combat module with the 42-mm gun. At the same time, the automatic gun had its pointing drives, both vertically and partially horizontally, that is, in a certain sector the gun could be used independently. It was also assumed that one (two) 152-mm machine gun (7,62-mm machine gun) and the ATGM were supposed to be machine guns.
      1. Voyager
        Voyager April 5 2018 21: 06
        +2
        but what a cabinet
  10. Kerensky
    Kerensky April 5 2018 15: 59
    +2
    Well two points:
    1. (I can not vouch) The Germans from the captured KV-2 fired on their tanks. Everything would be fine, but they got the captured concrete-piercing shells (Talvisota was still fresh). So the concrete-piercing shell carried the engine of a German tank through the backside. It seems that I saw pictures on the network.
    Well, somewhere I met that the Red Army tankers were forbidden to shoot at full charge.
    2. And what will be the load on the tower shoulder straps when shooting at different angles?
  11. mvg
    mvg April 5 2018 16: 30
    +4
    Yes, no matter what the child prodigy was, it won’t survive; they will crush it from the air or ATGM. Are there many tank duels in the Donbas? And there are dozens of tanks on each side. When was the last time tanks fought against tanks? No, ladies and gentlemen, sofas are all trying to spend the people's money on an aircraft carrier and stick the king-babah in poor Armata.
    1. Fedor egoist
      Fedor egoist April 5 2018 17: 00
      +2
      Quote: mvg
      Yes, no matter what the child prodigy was, it won’t survive; they will crush it from the air or ATGM. When was the last time tanks fought against tanks?

      That's why the tank fleet is being updated not on the "Armata", but on the T-90M. And the "wunder tanks" are planning so far a maximum of one per company, like commander tanks. Or they will equip Armata only with assault formations.
  12. sib.ataman
    sib.ataman April 5 2018 16: 52
    0
    Take the best, connect and give birth to a masterpiece! There is no other way!
  13. Metallurg_2
    Metallurg_2 April 5 2018 19: 36
    0
    It’s just interesting: Armata has been shown completely for a long time, and this tower is still closed for this instance. Apparently not all interesting moments with the T-95 in Armata were realized ...
  14. kupitman
    kupitman April 5 2018 23: 31
    +1
    it seems like plans to put 152 mm were on t14
  15. Beltasir matyagu
    Beltasir matyagu April 5 2018 23: 33
    0
    As far as I remember armata uses many solutions from t95
    But I didn’t know that they put titanium armor there
  16. HMR333
    HMR333 April 6 2018 01: 51
    0
    Well, there’s a twofold situation on the one hand, but ammunition is smaller and harder! and on the other hand, where tanks converge so that they would shoot at such a distance unless the desert is more visible to military experts!
  17. Moon reflection
    Moon reflection April 6 2018 05: 57
    0
    It seems the developers also watch the vidos of Alconafter ...
  18. Engineer
    Engineer April 6 2018 08: 04
    +3
    Military experts believe that this is a completely solvable task - for that it is also a modular platform.

    This is not a solvable task for this pseudo-universal platform. Object 195 was designed for this gun, because the tower shoulder strap, an automatic machine with ammunition, balancing a weight tank, the load on the rollers - everything was laid down in the project. And in Almaty, it was laid under 125mm. Therefore, simply taking and installing a new tower with a new machine gun and ammunition in the old epaulet will not work. And if it works out, then with scanty ammunition, unbalanced balance and increased load on the chassis. Even in those "holy" times, without money, the designers were able to make a revolutionary tank. And now they could only "master" the money of the Moscow Region.

  19. Evil 55
    Evil 55 April 6 2018 09: 21
    0
    "Russian Grizzly", "Royal Umka" .. what else will be called?
  20. Seraphimamur
    Seraphimamur April 6 2018 09: 24
    0
    Putting another gun is not so simple: recoil from 152 mm more. Constructive changes will be needed. The machine for loading is different, the weight of the car, etc. will increase.
  21. Valery Saitov
    Valery Saitov April 6 2018 14: 00
    0
    Nothing and never too late, in 5 years they’ll launch it in a series, and then massively. They will re-equip the army (as well as machine guns) with two calibers (I mean tanks) and it will be ... it’s just like kaput and hend hoch.
  22. Antokha NN
    Antokha NN April 6 2018 14: 49
    0
    Quote: Damm
    Tank duels ended on Kursk.

    Dear, you are wrong. Firstly, as such, there was a massive battle of tanks on the arc, which did not want to interfere with the concept of “duel”. Then there were battles for Kharkov, Kiev, Crimea, forcing large and small rivers, the Balaton operation, and many others relating only to the Great Patriotic War. And after the Second World War there were wars in Korea, Vietnam, Syria, Israel, Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine, Libya, Iraq ... And there were tank battles everywhere. And everywhere the armor fought with the shell, and the shell against the armor. And if you think that our short “nail gun” is able to crack the frontal armor of the “Abrams”, then you are mistaken. But the NATO scraps, if memory does not fail, then the second generation, with armor 72x coped successfully. I think that the fourth generation of scrap from a couple of kilometers will also cope with the frontal armor of the “Almaty”, if DZ does not destroy it. And what does “Armata” oppose to “Abrams”? Guaranteed non-penetration in the forehead from the same distance? I heard that it’s kind of like a shell is being strengthened by our gun, but it has still not been adopted, therefore it has still not been brought to mind.
    As for me, 152mm thing is necessary and extremely necessary! And it makes no sense to put a medium cannon on a powerful tank, as it was in the 43m you mentioned, with the IS-1.
  23. Antokha NN
    Antokha NN April 6 2018 14: 53
    0
    Quote: Seraphimamur
    recoil from 152 mm more

    Tank KV-2, model 1940 suddenly comes to mind ... your CEP bully
  24. 1970mk
    1970mk April 6 2018 15: 07
    0
    "In this case, the target would have been struck even before the enemy came to a distance from which the Russian car could notice." - touched by such statements of specialists)))) How is it? Where is it? Which theater of war? In the desert or what?
  25. Dukat22
    Dukat22 April 7 2018 00: 58
    0
    so Serdyukov was there, and where he is in the army of devastation ........ there is a traitor on a traitor, and Putin suffers., but there are jambs and the t-95.
    there were problems with the gun and shells, and accordingly with the automatic loader ........ the shell fired from the tank was too weak. Yes it is heavy and probably powerful, but for a howitzer. And in the tank there is limited space, there the shell is even smaller ........... can be brought to mind now for the armata, but I doubt it. Walking the path of increasing armor, power and caliber is a long time ago. Why are the T-55s so valued in Syria? ....... there is a 100mm screw cutter, it was stitching everything I saw with a machine gun. If this were at least 125mm, then the howitzer should not be placed on the roof armature. Well this is my opinion.