Roll on 152. What backlog left the Soviet designers for "Almaty"

80
There is information in the press that UralVagonZavod (UVZ) decided to continue research in the field of implementation tank with a smoothbore gun of caliber 152 mm. The basis for this kind of research is still the Soviet tank project "Object 195", aka "Improvement 88", aka T-95. The main military department ceased financing of further work in this direction, but, according to some sources, UVZ decided to continue the research in the order of "bare enthusiasm", according to others, public investment still did not run out completely.

Because of the veil of secrecy, for obvious reasons, there is no comprehensive information about the research, but the fact remains: the main direction of research in this area is related to how expedient it is to give the Armata T-14 the 152 mm gun, thanks to which opportunities could be seriously enhanced.



Roll on 152. What backlog left the Soviet designers for "Almaty"


By and large, that version of the T-14 “Armata” tank, which is in operational combat operation practically in single copies, is in many ways a development of the very “195 Object” with an uninhabited tower and a fighting vehicle isolated in a special armored capsule .

Experts note that by implementing the T-14 "Armata" with the 125-mm gun, the plant may well create an 152-mm modification. Here we consider the prototype "Object 292" with a gun LP-83 caliber 152 mm. This is the brainchild of the Kirov Plant (Leningrad, USSR) and the Transmash Research Institute. As a base, they then decided to use the modification T-80BV. Why didn't the tank go into the series? Everything is trite - the beginning of 90-x, an acute shortage of funds not only for defense, the collapse of the Soviet Union, the thesis "We have no enemies, there are friends all around."

However, an experimental machine was created, the technology has not been lost, but whether sufficient amounts of funds will be sought this time is an open question, especially in connection with a certain reduction in the defense budget recently.

It is noted that the implementation of the T-14 “Armata” modification project with an 152-mm gun will ultimately lead to the actualization of the use of modernized versions of the Krasnopol adjustable ammunition of the corresponding caliber.
  • Wikipedia
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

80 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    13 July 2018 13: 43
    A prototype Object 292 with an LP-83 cannon of 152 mm caliber is considered here.
    The developer of the ballistics of the gun is the Central Research Institute “Petrel”. In terms of ballistic characteristics, the new smooth-bore 152-mm tank gun significantly exceeded the 125-mm gun, and the new gun was made in dimensions slightly larger than the standard one.
    A new turret with a 80-mm cannon was installed on the slightly modified chassis of the T-152U tank. The new MZ was developed and was in the manufacturing stage (they did not manage to install it on the experimental tank). In September 1990, a prototype tank was ready, with the exception of the MOH. It was decided to conduct fire tests of an experimental tank. In 1991, at the Rzhev training range, firing tests of the tank without MH began. The tests were carried out first without a crew, then with a crew. During testing, charging was carried out manually. soldier
    1. +3
      13 July 2018 14: 00
      The article correctly noted about the new high-precision ammunition, so the 152mm gun-howitzer fits perfectly into the crew-free future glad base of Almaty. The T-14 tank, as the first crew version on the new platform, further in development to expand a number of products with different purposes and in a crewless version .....
      1. +7
        13 July 2018 14: 03
        Quote: Vladimir 5
        ... so the 152mm howitzer gun fits into the crewless future row.

        Based on the test results, positive conclusions of the Polygon were obtained. However, due to a reduction in development funding in the early 90s. and the collapse of the USSR, work was never completed. The T-80 tank with a new six-inch rifled gun, caliber 152,4 mm, developed by TsNII “Burevestnik” never appeared.
        The prototype tank "Object 292" is now in Kubinka.
    2. +3
      13 July 2018 14: 15
      hurt this, t14 should be more than 12.
  2. +6
    13 July 2018 13: 49
    Hospada, they would do right away for a perspective of 240mm.
    1. +9
      13 July 2018 13: 55
      not at all. "Caliber" immediately put. to unify with the fleet
      1. 0
        13 July 2018 13: 59
        Why not? Experts shut up for the prospect of 50 years, and then offer all kinds of new crap.
        1. +12
          13 July 2018 14: 05
          Putting 152 is a flower. Problems will begin when the berries come out. The development and delivery of ammunition, a powerful return that not only knocks down all the electronics, but also the crew is not sweet. And manual stuffing of the ammunition crew is generally a fairy tale! Although it will be much less than standard calibres. Yes, and no one has exploited such a caliber on tanks, so that all sorts of sick diseases will come out
          1. +1
            13 July 2018 14: 28
            Military experts know better!
          2. +9
            13 July 2018 15: 46
            Yes, and no one has exploited such a caliber on tanks

            Well hello, but what about the KV-2?
            1. +1
              13 July 2018 16: 29
              But was the KV-2 MBT? And had so many electronics ?! Here one adjustment of the gun is worth it, not to mention that then everyone did not give a damn about the crew. So your example is incorrect in my opinion hi
              1. +6
                13 July 2018 16: 31
                But was the KV-2 MBT?

                Have you written about MBT somewhere? And someone other than the heirs of the USSR generally exploits MBT?
                1. +11
                  13 July 2018 18: 14
                  If he worries about the crew during the shot, then they did not seem to complain about the ISU-152 ...
          3. +7
            13 July 2018 16: 48
            Yes, and no one has exploited such a caliber on tanks, so that all sorts of sick diseases will come out

            How would SU-152 and ISU-152 hint to you that it was exploited. Not a tank though, self-propelled guns, nevertheless technology stepped far forward and it became possible to install the 152 mm gun in the tower. And no one quickly got rid of childhood diseases.
            Here the biggest problem is the goals for such machines, where to get them?
          4. +9
            13 July 2018 16: 49
            Quote: Magic Archer
            Putting 152 is a flower. Problems will begin when the berries come out. The development and delivery of ammunition, a powerful return that not only knocks down all the electronics, but also the crew is not sweet. And manual stuffing of the ammunition crew is generally a fairy tale! Although it will be much less than standard calibres. Yes, and no one has exploited such a caliber on tanks, so that all sorts of sick diseases will come out

            Much has been run in on the "object 195" - and 152 mm iron in the automatic turret with automatic loading, and the capsule of the crew, and the chassis, which holds recoil and much more. Of the problems you identified, there was only one - the presence of new shells and their release, but there was one more than that — the barrel itself — it wore out quickly — the first samples vomited after about a hundred shots, how much later they advanced in this aspect - it’s not clear .
            On the other hand, for a new 125 mm gun of the same T-14, it will still have to produce new shells, which will be a maximum length of as much as 900 mm versus 700 mm for our current tank shells. so in the future. if the 2A83 gun is brought to mind, then 152 mm on the armature may well appear - the main thing is to make sense.
        2. +9
          13 July 2018 15: 19
          Quote: Smoked
          Experts shut up

          Experts will never shut up. Now every janitor thinks he is an expert
          1. +4
            13 July 2018 15: 22
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            .Now every janitor considers himself an expert

            Alexander Romanov is an expert.
            Comments are superfluous.
            Sometimes, regardless of desire, give yourself out with your head.
            1. +2
              13 July 2018 15: 24
              Quote: The Swordsman
              Alexander Romanov expert

              Already funny
              Quote: The Swordsman
              Sometimes, regardless of desire, betray yourself with your head

              Your opinion and nothing more. The word expert makes me sick
              1. +3
                13 July 2018 15: 50
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Already funny

                Oh, that’s funny.
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                The word expert makes me sick

                And how sick we are ...
                They will put 152 mm. What will you write about then?
                And why it’s not worth it now is very clearly stated here.
                http://txapela.ru/blogs/retex/otechestvennye-proe
                kty-tankovyh-pushek-kalibra-152-mm /
                1. +1
                  13 July 2018 15: 56
                  Quote: The Swordsman
                  They will put 152 mm. What will you write about then?

                  Do not put !!! Nobody will throw millions of dollars to the wind, to your imagination
                  1. +5
                    13 July 2018 15: 59
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    Do not put !!! Nobody will throw millions of dollars to the wind, to your imagination

                    I’m not interested in your fantasies, Mr. expert on the sale of used auto trash.
                    Enlighten yourself.
                    http://army-news.ru/2016/10/152-mm-pushka-dlya-ta
                    nka-t-14-aktualnost-i-perspektivy /
                    1. +4
                      13 July 2018 16: 57
                      You know, I would definitely not recommend enlightening with what is written on your link, here are a couple of quotes:
                      "152-mm gun 2A83, on "Object 195" "Black Eagle"."
                      и
                      "For "Object 195" "Black Eagle" at the Yekaterinburg plant "

                      That is, the author did not even bother to clarify what a "black eagle" or "object 640" is and what (no) relation it has to "object 195".

                      Further, the author provides data on the guns and for 2A83 gives the barrel resource parameter in "280 shots" and indicates this as one of the shortcomings! That is, a person has not figured out that this is a barrel resource of an unfinished product!
                      Nothing more to add ...
                      1. 0
                        16 July 2018 09: 10
                        Quote: Albert1988
                        Nothing more to add ...

                        Do not add.
                        The pre-production prototype, shown to the public in 1999, was armed with a smooth-bore 125-mm gun, a 7,62-mm machine gun and a Kord remotely controlled anti-aircraft machine gun (12,7 mm). However, the plans were to install 135, 140, and even 152 mm caliber guns on the tank. When installing a 152-mm gun on a tank, the machine was able to fire at a distance of ten kilometers and use anti-tank guided missiles for firing.

                        The tank was supposed to be equipped with a new gas turbine engine (GTE) with a capacity of at least 1500 liters. with. With a tank weight of 48 tons, this provided the machine with a record specific power of more than 30 liters. with. per ton. And, as a result, excellent dynamic characteristics - most western third-generation combat vehicles have a specific power of no more than 25 liters. s / ton. The cruising range of the tank (with hanging tanks) was 1 thousand km. Https: //militaryarms.ru/voennaya-texnika/tanki
                        / cherniy-orel /
      2. +3
        13 July 2018 16: 51
        Quote: novel xnumx
        not at all. "Caliber" immediately put. to unify with the fleet

        Something like this has been done before. It didn’t take off.
  3. +4
    13 July 2018 13: 57
    Worse from raising the caliber to 152 mm, the armature will not be accurate. In the end, who immediately prevents both of them from doing both?
    1. +7
      13 July 2018 14: 00
      not economically feasible
    2. +3
      13 July 2018 14: 02
      all over the world, tank manufacturers tried to put 152 mm or so, as a result, everyone, independently of each other, came to the same conclusion - there are more minuses than pluses, so the main direction here is to increase the power of ammunition while remaining in this caliber
      1. +10
        13 July 2018 14: 15
        came to one conclusion - there are more minuses than pluses

        but we have a tower that is uninhabited, and the caliber in 152-mm will reduce to “0” all promising Western inventions, but there are no developments (!)
        1. +6
          13 July 2018 15: 57
          Definitely. Scrap 152mm razop will nullify all developments on dynamic protection for NATO tanks. Plus, from the 152mm barrel, you can completely beat Konet.
          1. +1
            13 July 2018 21: 12
            And special warheads for sure, too
      2. 0
        13 July 2018 15: 56
        How? Until the charge is 125mm in length with a meter 2?
        1. +6
          13 July 2018 16: 18
          The increase in the effectiveness of gunpowder, the hardness of crowbars (depleted uranium), and, yes, modern shells are getting longer, including ours (and they don’t fit in automatic loaders that were designed for old Soviet shells, so we still have the main scrap - Mango, which is completely useless against all modern tanks in the frontal projection, otherwise you need to make new AZs for all old tanks)
          1. +1
            13 July 2018 23: 33
            hardness of scrap (depleted uranium)

            beryllium scrap more relevant, Mohs hardness 9,5 (tungsten 9, diamond 10)
            and do not fit in automatic loaders

            Self-propelled guns Msta-S excellent AZ, with the ability to bookmark a different number of charges relative to the firing range
            1. +1
              13 July 2018 23: 50
              Self-propelled guns Msta-S excellent AZ
              so talk about tanks
              1. +2
                13 July 2018 23: 52
                so AZ single
                and depleted uranium (8 hardness), the United States uses because tungsten (9) doesn’t have much of its own.
                and we have Beryllium (9,5) full
                1. +1
                  14 July 2018 00: 11
                  and that’s why we still have the main bop in the Mango troops with an average armor penetration of about 500 mm normal, if that is necessary, then it will be necessary as in the Great Patriotic War 34 until they go into the side they can’t pierce anyone
                  1. +2
                    14 July 2018 08: 23
                    125-mm BOPS 3БМ44М "Pattern" armor penetration 700 mm
                    125-mm armor-piercing cumulative projectile 3БК31 "Start-2" - a triple cumulative charge. penetration up to 660 mm of armor for integrated dynamic protection or 680 mm for mounted
                    * BOPS Mango is the main export weapon
                    1. +1
                      14 July 2018 12: 39
                      125-mm BOPS 3БМ44М "Pattern" armor penetration 700 mm

                      OBPS "Lekalo" (A.ch. 3BM-42M ?; projectile 3BM-44M?) (P / v 1991)
                      The subject of research is "Lead-1." A projectile of increased power with an ultra-high elongation tungsten core and sub-caliber stabilizers using a four-section composite WU with two contact zones. The projectile has a length of 740 mm and cannot be placed in AZ T-72.
                      125-mm armor-piercing cumulative projectile 3BK31 "Start-2"

                      3BK31 "Start-2" old cumulative projectile, penetration up to 660 mm. completely insufficient to defeat the main NATO tanks in the frontal projection.
                      The maximum that breaks into the AZ T-72 is “Lead” (A.Ch. 3BM-46; projectile 3BM-48) (p / in 1991), the average armor penetration on a homogeneous steel plate along the normal is 650 mm, it is also small, Abrams in the forehead will not pierce in any way.
                      The main ammunition for the 120mm M256 cannon of the M1A2 tank is the 120mm B829F M2A700. The shell has a depleted uranium core and a detachable sump. Penetration of about 2000mm from a distance of 72m, which theoretically ensures the defeat of the T-829B anywhere. And then there is the M3A770, armor penetration of about 2000mm from a distance of XNUMXm.
                      1. +2
                        14 July 2018 19: 43
                        and cannot be placed in AZ T-72

                        we have T-72, T-72А are stored and are gradually being upgraded in Omsk to the level of T-72Б3 at ~ 79 million rubles. per tank
                        the troops have:
                        1100 T-72Б (BA) gun 125-mm 2А46М
                        1150 T-72Б3 gun 125-mm 2А46М-5 - the ability to use the new "elongated" BOPS Lead-1 / 2
                        Abrams will not hit in the forehead in any way

                        Abrams M1A1NA / NA / ON +
                        - equivalent thickness of the forehead of the body, 650 mm
                        - the equivalent thickness of the forehead of the tower, 850 mm - it may not penetrate, but the loader will receive a concussion for sure (!).
                        * You don’t know which bell in the tank when the crowbar flies into it at 2 km / s.
                        The main ammunition for the 120mm M256 gun of the M12 tank is the 120mm BOPS M829A2

                        T-72Б3 the forehead of the hull has a built-in remote control from the tandem warheads and has resistance from the BPS: armor 570 mm + DZ 200 mm = 770 mm
                        * And there is also M829A3, the angle ± 10 ° from 90 ° - and did not break. still as an option, the baffle panels DZ scrap BPS earlier break
                        The turret at heading angles ± 35 ° has resistance from BPS: armor 600 mm + DZ 200 mm = 800 mm.
            2. +1
              14 July 2018 01: 22
              I know that the addition of beryllium to bronze, made it possible to make springs without magnetic properties, because of the hardness on the slide bushings it was not suitable. I have not heard about alloying steel alloys with beryllium. Those who worked with boring alloys were given milk and an increase in sick leave. On warehouse invoices, bronze with beryllium was much more expensive than usual (at Soviet prices). The people made rings and rings out of it, differed in a reddish-golden color, but faded like ordinary bronze.
            3. +1
              14 July 2018 20: 09
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              hardness of scrap (depleted uranium)

              beryllium scrap more relevant, Mohs hardness 9,5 (tungsten 9, diamond 10)
              and do not fit in automatic loaders

              Self-propelled guns Msta-S excellent AZ, with the ability to bookmark a different number of charges relative to the firing range

              Where did the firewood come from? The hardness of beryllium is almost on par with glass. 5,5 according to Mohs.

              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_химических_э
              hardness elements


              Uranium is much softer than tungsten, (see ibid.), But its density is higher, which makes a shell with the same dimensions heavier and more energy-intensive in kinetics.
            4. 0
              16 July 2018 09: 40
              Quote: Romario_Argo

              beryllium scrap more relevant, Mohs hardness 9,5 (tungsten 9, diamond 10)

              Well this aphid, what is the cost of such a projectile?
              Quote: Romario_Argo
              Self-propelled guns Msta-S excellent AZ, with the ability to bookmark a different number of charges relative to the firing range

              There, with the speed of the carousel, not everything is rosy. Again, MSTA pounds mainly with HE HEs. Tank carousel implies the presence in it of both landmines and crowbars and missiles.
          2. 0
            16 July 2018 09: 38
            That's why they made a new T14 tank. It seems to me that the shoulder strap is specifically more than on the T72 and T90. It’s also not clear what’s in the aft below the tower at T14. Yet again. the increased shoulder strap of the T14 turret unambiguously alludes to the large turret, which in turn will make it possible to put a 152 mm gun.
      3. +2
        13 July 2018 16: 02
        all over the world tank manufacturers tried to supply 152 mm

        No way
        or so

        there are 130 mm and 140 mm prototypes that are being worked out right now by the first by the second Americans by the Germans.
        1. +2
          13 July 2018 16: 23
          No way
          back in Soviet times, there were attempts both by us and by the Americans and the Germans, but so far no one came to the series
  4. +2
    13 July 2018 14: 01
    But what about the “new physical principles”? laughing come on, the uralvagon already has a tank with a blaster for us right away, we want to see it at the parade, and then saw further T72 to B6, B7 ... B100 modifications
    1. +1
      13 July 2018 23: 36
      this is from the topic why so few Su-57.
      because the capacity for the production of piezoelectric elements (for radar sheathing) is limited, they work out the technology. BTW, which no one else has (!)
  5. +9
    13 July 2018 14: 02
    However, God forbid they will build our 152 mm smoothbore. This is death for the Abrams and German cats when falling into any projection. But the truth is problematic to shoot on the move, the recoil is strong, it can break the transmission. But this product makes people smarter here communicating. Provide a nuance.
    1. 0
      14 July 2018 01: 30
      Everyone fears recoil, as if fluff is stiff on the tower. Rollback systems are not just for moving the shutter. On a show with a shot in a jump, something over 40 tons does not stop in the air.
  6. +2
    13 July 2018 14: 03
    It was made for the Hammer, the boxer and others like them! I mean a gun! A factory was already ready for a tank in Kharkov. But when non-fallow cut and sawn. T-14, an attempt to recreate what was lost.
  7. +5
    13 July 2018 14: 12
    By and large, that version of the T-14 “Armata” tank, which is in operational combat operation practically in single copies, is in many ways a development of the very “195 Object” with an uninhabited tower and a fighting vehicle isolated in a special armored capsule .
    So, then for the sake of a vegetable garden, they lost time, and on Armata, only ROC and R & D spent about 64 billion rubles. On the 195 object, there is an interesting interview (2013 year), where the future T-14 (Armata platform), is called “barking”, that is, unblooded, flawed ...
    A special role in the creation of the tank of the future was played by the Chairman of the Central Council of ROSTO (DOSAAF), Colonel-General Sergei Mayev. From 1996 to 2003 for the year, he served as Chief of the Main Automobile and Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and led the development of the T-95 tank (OCR "Perfection-88"). The editor-in-chief of Rosinformbyuro, Vyacheslav Prunov, managed to talk with the patriarch of the Russian tank construction industry.
    Sergey Maev: “Armat” will need to pull up to the level of T-95
    - It was planned, in 2005, to complete state tests and to launch it (car, T-95) 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 (Ubudka)."
    - 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. It is now -2013 year. 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.
    Thank you for at least upgrading the production at UVZ, yes, you see, return to the super tank, the reinforcement tank, and they will not ruin the country with a complex and golden "platform".
    1. +4
      13 July 2018 14: 39
      Sergey, with all due respect to you, you are wrong.
      You give the opinion of a person. His own. With all due respect to his regalia, if it was true, then it was relevant for 2013. It is naive to believe that since then nothing has changed and has not stepped forward.
      Let me give you an example of a counter-argument from the fleet. The pinnacle of the development of battleships was Yamato. Nobody installed more powerful guns on the battleship, and despite the fact that the main purpose of the battleship is to be a floating battery, the main caliber for it is the basis. But technology has stepped forward, and all projects with a 506 mm main gun remained on paper (Yamato has 457 mm, if I remember correctly). Aircraft carriers came to the fore, after they were already supplemented by destroyers, not battleships.
      The same thing happens in tank building. a promising platform with powerful modernization potential strategically wins. With all due respect to the T-72, T-80, T-90 and their modifications, they are becoming obsolete, their modernization stock is running out. I admit that the T-95 could be the top, I admit that the T-95 in 2013 was better than the T-14. But after conquering the summit, the path remains one. Armata, on the other hand, has just appeared, and even its chief designers now do not yet know all its potential capabilities. This is a new chapter in tank building, discovered by Russian designers.
      And for those who are afraid that there is nothing to fight, I recall that the Russian Federation is the leader in the number of tanks in service. There are about 15 of them, which is comparable to all of NATO combined. The comparison, of course, is lame, and it’s unlikely that it will be possible to learn the accuracy of up to 000 pieces, but against the background of such numbers, we can more than afford the myriad of various experimental promising tank projects of the future without any damage to our own fighting efficiency.
      1. +3
        13 July 2018 15: 06
        What kind of nonsense? What does Yamato have to do with it? The fact that the T-14 stupidly finished boxer or hammer does not cause any doubt! the fact that the T-95 was really a breakthrough development Omichi also! What rested on the T-14? Well so tagil :). They got more money and sold it. The fact that the T-14 will bring more over how many years? So nobody shakes anyone.
        1. +3
          13 July 2018 15: 10
          Dear Dogni,
          Having carefully and several times read your comment, I understand that it is easiest to agree with you immediately and in everything, recognizing your unquestioned authority and absolute competence.
        2. +3
          13 July 2018 15: 14
          Quote: dgonni
          What kind of nonsense? What does Yamato have to do with it? The fact that the T-14 stupidly finished boxer or hammer does not cause any doubt! the fact that the T-95 was really a breakthrough development Omichi also! What rested on the T-14? Well so tagil :). They got more money and sold it. The fact that the T-14 will bring more over how many years? So nobody shakes anyone.
          Finished ... laughing , and what is common in T-14 with other tanks, well, except that it is a tank, by the way, a tank that has no analogues .... Yes
        3. +4
          13 July 2018 16: 34
          Quote: dgonni
          T-95, was really a breakthrough development of Omsk also
          You are mistaken, in Omsk they created the Black Eagle tank, this is a further development from the T-80, or rather, practically a new tank, where not the crew carried the capsule, but the automatic loader with part of the ammunition kit (in the diagram from the patent). But T-95 (object 195) with a gun 2А83.
        4. +5
          13 July 2018 17: 01
          Quote: dgonni
          What kind of nonsense? What does Yamato have to do with it? The fact that the T-14 stupidly finished boxer or hammer does not cause any doubt! the fact that the T-95 was really a breakthrough development Omichi also! What rested on the T-14? Well so tagil :). They got more money and sold it. The fact that the T-14 will bring more over how many years? So nobody shakes anyone.

          You need to write smartly even stupid things.
          Count the number of names of fighters in the army, standing to this day. Go to the armored industry. Count, do not be shy. Try to count the names of spare parts for repair, supply of troops. shift to the complexity of production in wartime and destroyed production and communications. Determine the size of the warehouses, the staff of near-war loafers hiding in this economy.
          The sense of the supertank, which will be thrown like thousands of tanks on the battlefield, is mainly due to minor breakdowns ON THE MARCH ..... 1941. Thousands of tanks abandoned before reaching the front. Thousands of tanks, destroyed due to the stupidity of the command, transferred the remnants of tank corps to infantry divisions and even regiments. It is due to the lack of repair capabilities. From here- thrown out in droves due to lack of need, but a very small part. Combustibles and lubricants.

          T-14 Armata is a completely new word in tank building. And not so military properties that will inevitably be achieved and multiplied by potential opponents. This is a unified platform that reduces the range of parts for a dozen machines made on its basis. Reduction of the names of spare parts. Simplification of work in the middle rear repair. Dozens of times increased serial production of parts going to many different machines, which leads to lower production costs. Simplification of logistics supply in wartime. And in peace too, by the way. Developing a main tank is expensive. But a unified series of just a dozen cars is the aerobatics of design thought. I answer you as a designer with a quarter-century experience.
        5. +3
          13 July 2018 17: 16
          Quote: dgonni
          What kind of nonsense? What does Yamato have to do with it? .....


          I will continue. Can you tell me why the Europeans can’t create a single German-French-English tank?
          CONTRADICTIONS.
          The development of a unified series of products is also a contradiction. We managed to overcome, they are not.
          Evaluate at least this fact. If you can.
      2. +2
        13 July 2018 15: 09
        Quote: Faceless
        The same thing happens in tank building. a promising platform with powerful modernization potential strategically wins. With all due respect to the T-72, T-80, T-90 and their modifications, they are becoming obsolete, their modernization stock is running out. I admit that the T-95 could be the top, I admit that the T-95 in 2013 was better than the T-14. But after conquering the summit, the path remains one. Armata, on the other hand, has just appeared, and even its chief designers now do not yet know all its potential capabilities. This is a new chapter in tank building, discovered by Russian designers.

        It’s absolutely true, I’ll just add that the T-14 was developed with a basic bias to protect the crew, the rest was also not the latest, armor, a universal platform, a gun, electronics, camouflage ...
        ps. Abandoned developments of other series of tanks, will still do good service to new ideas!
      3. +3
        13 July 2018 16: 23
        Quote: Faceless
        Auger happens in tank building. promising platform with powerful modernization potential strategically wins
        Here, let me disagree with you. Firstly, the example "from the fleet" is not correct, but the Yamato battleship is not doubly correct, if the battleships remained in force, their caliber growth would have continued anyway, for example, the Germans planned 44 8 guns for the battleships of the H-508 series mm caliber. Secondly, to make a “platform” based on a tank costing 400-450 million rubles, well, excuse me, this is the same thing as on the basis of “Bentley” or “Lexus” vparivat “loaves” and “boots” for wide consumption. It will be a “golden fish” that will ruin the budget, especially since the very same Coalition or BMPT self-propelled guns can be perfectly done on the T-72 / T-90 chassis, no worse, cheaper, and, most importantly, time-tested, technological, reliable base, well mastered by industry. Guessing "platforms" on a raw and untapped base is a costly and risky pleasure, to everything, diverting forces from saturating the troops with the new tank itself. Now, about 152 mm, why experts came to him as part of the “195 object”, they managed to solve the most serious problem of modern tank building, due to the fact that the power reserves of the existing 125 mm caliber guns (in Russia) and 120 mm (in the West) ) were practically exhausted, and do not provide guaranteed destruction of new means of protection, especially promising ones. The object 195, it was the "Russian Tiger", "Abrams Kaput", which is guaranteed to hit any targets from a distance of more than 5 kilometers.
        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 speed 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 rounds per minute;
        • Muzzle energy shot - 20-25 MJ;
        • Armor penetration:
        - BPS - mm 1024;
        - ATGM - 1200 – 1400 m;
        • Resource gun barrel - 280 shots;
        • Ammunition - 40 shells;
        • Automatic loader - 24 rounds.
        1. +1
          16 July 2018 09: 14
          About battleships (why Yamato is the top). Remember how he died and answer the question of who became the "master of the seas" as a type of weapon. After that, many who planned and many that the Germans in particular planned, only no one really built anything (except that the Americans were building up what they had laid earlier, and then, with reservations).
          Regarding the time-tested platform: no one has come up with anything easier, cheaper and more reliable than horse-drawn traction. let's put a new gun on it, and we won’t bother. Why challenge time-tested solutions?
          1. 0
            16 July 2018 12: 39
            Quote: Faceless
            Regarding the time-tested platform: no one has yet invented anything simpler, cheaper and more reliable than the drawn traction. let's put a new weapon on it, and let's not bother.
            I repeat, for you again, the technique is not born as a platform, the technique becomes a platform. Only adopted for service, time-tested, well-proven, technologically advanced, mastered by industry. Thus, the base T-72 / T-90 has become a platform for a huge family of vehicles, BREM, bridge-laying machines, self-propelled guns, TOS, BMO-T, BMPT, and was used in foreign armies, like countries of the former Warsaw Pact, and a country like France (155 mm SAU) and South Africa (30 mm anti-aircraft system). Spending money on the development of various equipment in a still raw "platform", and even on the basis of a tank worth 400-450 million rubles, is, to put it mildly, stupidity, if not sabotage. If you do not want this or cannot understand, distorting to the "horse-drawn traction" ... Well, we will assume that you have the right to your opinion, and thank you for your attention.
    2. +4
      13 July 2018 15: 29
      In principle, he could not say anything else. He was engaged in the creation of a competing machine and was absolutely sure that his approach was the only correct one. But the conviction of even such a person does not mean that a competing machine is worse. And this has happened more than once in the history of the creation of military equipment. Rather, it happens all the time. Recently, there was just a series of articles about the creation of the T-64/72/80. And in the aircraft industry the same story, many cars remain prototypes without being able to surpass the competing development. For example, there is a famous Su-15 interceptor, but few people know about the existence of the Yak-28-64. Or, from two almost identical machines, in the end, they choose the one whose creators have more influence on decision-makers.
    3. +2
      13 July 2018 16: 00
      Then. What Machine is needed now. But there are no aiming systems for 152mm guns yet. Also not unimportant is the fact that ammunition is needed for this gun.
  8. +2
    13 July 2018 16: 31
    Change the 125mm gun to 152mm with modern technology, the problem to be solved. Moreover, the gun has a good backlog from the product 195. At the same time, the layout of the fighting compartment is likely to undergo minimal changes. Changed the trunks, and then what? The gun is smooth-bore, and there is no ammunition for it, nor is it a general purpose unit, and especially an OBPS. And to develop a new ammunition, with serial technology, the task is no less difficult and more costly, including and in time than the development of a new tool.
  9. +2
    13 July 2018 16: 40
    Like a conventional tank platoon or mouth reinforcement machine - why not? Just imagine: an 3-4 tank with 125 mm guns and one with 152 mm, guarding the BMPT steam. Yes, the delivery of ammunition, repair and general logistics are somewhat more complicated, but such an enhanced detachment will be able to do such business ... and in a minimum of time.
    1. RL
      -2
      13 July 2018 19: 59
      It is not that simple. Try now for a ride in Europe. Especially on the plains, fields and swamps of Poland, where under each bush there is a fighter with anti-aircraft weapons.
      152 mm on the tank? For what purpose? Cities crumble? There are MSTA and others, smaller. And as a PT, 100 mm is enough. Just need other gunpowder and a barrel for more gas pressure and increase the initial velocity of the projectile. At an initial speed of about 1300 m / second, the tungsten core will break through everything at a distance of 4000 meters to an unknown mother and through active protection
      1. +4
        13 July 2018 20: 35
        For what purpose?

        The question is of course interesting. But I think when storming fortified positions and in cities it can come in handy.
        There are MSTA and others, smaller

        There is .. only their reservation is bulletproof and you allocated their size? Only the lazy will not get into the MCTA tower. Therefore, it does not belong to her in the forefront.
        At an initial speed of the order of 1300 m / second, the tungsten core will penetrate everything at a distance of 4000 meters to an unknown mother and through active protection

        Yes, only you forget that this core is just scrap. And makes this scrap one neat hole. For a fortified bunker or building, this is zilch. And by the way, active defense is now quite capable of breaking this crowbar on approach.
        And the 152 shell at a distance of 5-7 km will demolish the towers of the tanks, tear the BMP to shreds, destroy pillboxes, fortified points, and more. And all this is in the relative safety of the crew, under the protection of heavy armor.
        Of course, today for such a gun, goals are not enough, and therefore they think to set, not set, but enemies do not stand still.
      2. +4
        13 July 2018 20: 55
        Yes, destroy cities, bunkers, other tanks and use the UBC, after which in Poland a fighter under each bush with anti-aircraft weapons will not live long.
  10. 0
    13 July 2018 17: 40
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Quote: The Swordsman
    They will put 152 mm. What will you write about then?

    Do not put !!! Nobody will throw millions of dollars to the wind, to your imagination


    Put it put, there is no doubt, the designers have such a job, so it’s only a matter of time. Another question is whether they will be adopted. On the one hand, of course, it’s beautiful to have a tank with Akacia’s power in tank battalions. brigades and so there are artillery divisions and batteries of this caliber. So if he has prospects, then only on a limited scale, maybe a maximum of 2-3 battalions can do. 125 mm more suits the military. Enough ammunition, a large selection of ammunition s, the smaller the mass of the tank, respectively, less stress on the chassis, the speed, agility and prohodimost.U 152 mm, respectively, all naoborot.Esli find ways to reduce the weight and in parallel will develop new ammunition, the project will have the right to life.
  11. RL
    -1
    13 July 2018 20: 32
    Also, screw the Tsar Cannon onto the T-34 shoulder strap and there will generally be a nightingale all over the west.
  12. 0
    13 July 2018 21: 02
    Quote: Magic Archer
    ammunition ... Although it will be much smaller than standard calibers

    and accordingly the question will arise of the most accurate aiming at the target of the given ammunition. Unless you use nuclear warheads.
  13. +1
    14 July 2018 05: 01
    Don’t quarrel, boys! Add thread to the compress: neither yours, nor ours! ..... Add 125 and 152 .... divide by 2 ... plus or minus ... back and forth ... bitty .... we take 135 MILIMETERS! At the extreme, 130 ..... after all, such weapons were already put on tanks ... winked
  14. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      16 July 2018 12: 23
      Quote: LomKuvaldych
      Putin and his gang do not need all this.

      You, like Belinsky, yourself didn’t write a damn thing, but the critic, be healthy! Apparently, brains forgot to invest in a sledgehammer. For writing, they are not, but for the bark, quite .....
      1. -1
        17 July 2018 00: 23
        You definitely don’t need brains to kiss the master’s ass.
        1. 0
          17 July 2018 12: 15
          Quote: LomKuvaldych
          You definitely don’t need brains to kiss the master’s ass.

          F.M. Dostoevsky. Exactly for you. PATRIOT, DEMOCRAT AND LIBERAL
          “In this fact, the whole essence of Russian liberalism of the kind that I am talking about is expressed. First, what is liberalism, if we speak at all, if not an attack (rational or erroneous, this is another question) on the existing order of things? Well, so my fact is that Russian liberalism is not an attack on the existing order of things, but an attack on the very essence of our things, on things themselves, and not on order alone, not on Russian orders, but on the very Russia. My liberal has come to the point that he denies Russia itself, that is, hate walks and beats his mother. Every unfortunate and unsuccessful Russian fact excites laughter and almost delight in him. He hates folk customs, Russian history, everything. If there is an excuse for him, except that he does not understand what he is doing, and he takes his hatred of Russia for the most fruitful liberalism (oh, you often meet with us a liberal who is applauded by the rest, and who, in essence, is the most ridiculous, most stupid and dangerous conservative, himself does not know that!). This hatred of Russia, not so long ago, was taken by other liberals almost as a true love of our country and boasted that they saw better than others what it should consist of; but now they have become more frank and even the words "love of the fatherland" have begun to be ashamed, even the concept has been expelled and eliminated as harmful and insignificant. "
  15. +1
    14 July 2018 05: 31
    The need for such a caliber on a tank is doubtful. Self-propelled guns are enough. If only this is not an attempt to create something universal (self-propelled tank).
    1. 0
      16 July 2018 12: 28
      Quote: spectr
      The need for such a caliber on a tank is doubtful. Self-propelled guns are enough. If only this is not an attempt to create something universal (self-propelled tank).

      There are enough missile shells flying for a dozen kilometers and having homing ability. No abrams can resist them. More relevant is the protection against attack helicopters, the fight against which would now be far from in favor of tanks.
  16. 0
    14 July 2018 11: 26
    You can make a safe fuel system, switch to solid fuel. In order for the fuel blocks to melt like paraffin from an electric heater, then heat up the liquid even more and inject it into the cylinders under pressure.
  17. 0
    16 July 2018 11: 58
    Romario_Argo,
    1150 T-72Б3 gun 125-mm 2А46М-5 - the ability to use the new "elongated" BOPS Lead-1 / 2
    the 2A46M-5 gun allows the use of Lead-1/2, but I wrote about the fact that they do not go through the dimensions in the AZ, I have not seen the information anywhere that the T-72B3 AZ is changing.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"