The main battle tank "Armata": after the first show

216
The Russian defense industry has kept its promise. A few years ago it was promised to show at the Victory Parade 2015 of the year a number of samples of new military equipment. Indeed, just a few days ago, all those who wished were able to see for the first time in all their glory some of the newest armored vehicles that will enter the army in the foreseeable future. One of the most anticipated models shown in the recent parade was the main battle tank, built on the basis of the unified platform "Armat".



It is worth noting that the first images tanks “Armata” from the first batch designed and built by Uralvagonzavod Corporation appeared in the public domain quite a long time ago, a few weeks before the parade. Published photos and videos were not of high quality, but still made a splash. The excitement among experts and the general public was not prevented even by the fact that the towers of the new tanks were covered with canvas covers. In the future, new photographs of promising tanks repeatedly appeared. The number of such shots was constantly increasing.

With the beginning of the parade rehearsals in Alabino near Moscow, the number of photos and videos on new combat vehicles increased significantly. At the end of April, the Ministry of Defense joined various private individuals publishing pictures and recordings. Finally, about a week before the parade on Red Square, the crews of the Armata tanks received orders to remove covers from the towers. This event was the impetus for a new wave of discussions, which touched upon the most exciting issues. As a result, a few days before the Victory Parade, everyone had the opportunity to consider a promising domestic tank in all details.

For understandable and obvious reasons, most of the information about the prospective OBT “Armata” is still classified. The public and professionals have to be content with the few stories of officials, as well as the mass of new photos and videos. Naturally, the “premiere show” of the tank and the preparation for it were the reason for the appearance of a huge number of opinions. Prospective combat vehicles as awarded great praise, and are extremely harshly criticized. Let us try once again to collect all the available information about the newest Russian tank, and also to draw some assumptions and conclusions based on them.

A few years ago, it was announced that some features will allow the new tank "Armata" to become a real revolution in the world tank building. The main innovations were to be a special crew armored capsule and an uninhabited fighting compartment. In order to increase the level of protection, it was proposed to place all crew members in a single volume inside the armored hull. Due to this, it was planned to reduce all possible risks and increase the likelihood of tank crew survival even in the event of a tank defeat.



The removal of all crew members outside the combat compartment led to the need to create a complex of automatic systems serving the gun. A few years ago it became known that the tank "Armata" will have a uninhabited automated combat compartment, separated from the crew. In addition to increasing the level of crew protection, such a combat compartment made it possible to gain some other advantages. In particular, it was possible to reduce the size of the tower and, as a result, the likelihood of enemy projectiles from attacking from the front angles.

It should be recognized that the projects of tanks with similar technical solutions were previously developed in our country and abroad. However, so far not a single main tank with a common crew capsule and an uninhabited fighting compartment has reached mass production and operation in the troops. Thus, the newest tank "Armata" in the coming years can become the world's first serial tank with an uninhabited turret and crew accommodation in the hull.

Display of new armored vehicles confirmed the correctness of the information that became known earlier. In addition, the opportunity to learn more about some features of the project. Naturally, for the time being all conclusions can be based only on photographs and video recordings, since other information still remains inaccessible to persons without appropriate access. However, in this case, we can draw some conclusions.

One of the main unique features of the tank "Armat" is its layout. In fact, for the first time in domestic practice, the main tank can be adopted for armament, the layout of which differs from the classic one history since the First World War. Fulfilling new requirements, Uralvagonzavod corporation experts resorted to original, bold solutions. As follows from the available materials, the layout of the Armata tanks is significantly different from the general architecture of domestic and foreign cars of this class.

In the frontal part of the body there is a powerful armored obstacle, consisting probably of combined armor and a dynamic protection system. Behind the frontal part is the crew capsule. All three tankers are located in the total volume, which, according to the available data, has additional protection against external threats. Judging by the location of the hull hatches, the driver is located in front and on the left side. To his right is provided the workplace of the commander. Behind the driver is the gunner. In view of the use of the uninhabited fighting compartment, it should be expected that the crew’s workplaces have all the necessary instruments and controls for working with the power plant, armament complex and other systems.

Immediately behind the crew’s armored capsule is the fighting compartment. As repeatedly stated earlier, all units of the fighting compartment are automatic and therefore can operate without direct interaction with the crew. All tool maintenance processes are performed automatically.

The hull feed traditionally for domestic tank building is given under the engine compartment. Earlier there were rumors about the possibility of building a tank with a front engine, but later it became clear that the engineers of Uralvagonzavod did not complicate the project with another bold decision.

To protect the new tank from attacks from all angles should a set of different means. So, on the front sheet of the hull and side screens are clearly visible blocks of dynamic protection. The sides of the hull are equipped with lattice screens that provide additional protection, but do not interfere with the cooling of the logistic equipment. There is also information about the use of the Afganit active protection complex, which blocks are installed on the tower.

The chassis of the new unified armor platform “Armata” is equipped with seven road wheels on board. Due to the rear location of the engine, the drive wheels of the tracked propulsion unit are located in the rear of the hull. Guides - in the front. On a relatively old photo of cars without side screens, one could see a set of supporting rollers, on which the upper branch of the caterpillar is lying.



Perhaps the most interesting element of a promising tank on the basis of the Armata platform is a new uninhabited tower. Domestic designers have already been able to design such combat units. Moreover, some such developments reached the stage of testing. A new combat compartment was developed for the new tank, which in itself is of great interest. Already the first demonstration of the tower without a canvas cover was the reason for new disputes and discussions.

The turret of the Armata, according to various estimates, has approximately the same dimensions as the towers of existing domestic tanks. Nevertheless, it has a lot of serious differences. First of all, it is an unusual form, formed by a large number of straight-line panels. In addition, in the left cheekbone of the tower there is a characteristic recess, in which, apparently, some equipment is located. Similar smaller notches are also present in other panels of the tower. It is also necessary to note the presence of the aft niche of the tower. The purpose of this unit is still unknown. It is possible that this niche is used to store part of the ammunition or to accommodate other units.

The basic one weapons The new tank, according to available data, is the 2A82 caliber gun 125 mm. This gun is installed in an uninhabited tower and is equipped with a set of necessary automation, which is responsible for various preparation processes for firing. Automated as the guidance of the gun, and the supply and discharging of ammunition. Due to this, the Armata tank should retain all the positive qualities inherent in the fighting compartments of existing tanks. A curious feature of the 2А82 cannon is the absence of an ejector. This device is used to purge the bore of the powder gases to reduce gas pollution fighting compartment. The absence of the crew in the tower made it possible not to complicate the design of the instrument, since automation, unlike people, retains its performance even in a gassed volume.



A remotely controlled combat module with a PKT machine gun is provided on the roof of the turret. This device is designed to defend a tank from enemy personnel at relatively short distances. Probably, the Armata tank also carries a machine gun paired with a gun, but the available photos do not allow to unambiguously determine its presence and location. There is a set of smoke grenade launchers.

Perspective OBT "Armata" carries the most modern fire control system (LMS). It includes a panoramic commander's sight mounted on the turret, and a set of other equipment. Domestic media mention the presence of a special radar station on the tank with a phased antenna array. It is argued that such equipment should be used to study the battlefield and search for targets with their further attack. For obvious reasons, the composition of the MSA of the prospective tank is still one of the main secrets of the project.

A curious dispute is connected with the construction of the tower of the Armata tank. Soon after the first appearance of armored vehicles without covers, technology lovers noticed that, at least, some of the plates that make up the outer surface of the tower are of a small thickness. This was supported by the particular shape of the tower, as well as some openings in which certain equipment is placed. This feature seriously distinguishes the tank "Armata" from other existing armored vehicles of this class.

Such unusual features of the tower tank "Armata" became a cause for controversy. In addition, some people who were not seen in special respect for the Russian industry and the army began to produce monotonous and unfunny jokes about the "cardboard tower" or even the "cardboard tank" with the concomitant mention of an extremely low level of protection. However, reality can upset such pranksters.

Domestic and foreign tank builders over the past few decades have managed to create a number of projects of promising tanks with an uninhabited fighting compartment. For example, Soviet designers created the 299 Object, 327 Object, 450 Object and others. US engineers have previously worked on the M1 Abrams Block III project, etc. All these developments clearly demonstrated the fundamental possibility of creating a fully automated combat compartment. In addition, they helped to find the optimal layout of such a fighting compartment. It turned out that the vast majority of components and assemblies can be placed inside the tank hull. Above the tower chase can be located only the supporting platform, the gun and some units of the automatic loader. In this case, all units outside the armored hull can be closed with a relatively small armor cover.



There is no reason to believe that other solutions were used in the Armata project. Moreover, the left side hatch of the tower (presumably intended for ejection of pallets of sleeves) rather transparently hints that the second building is located under the external panels of the tower. It is the inner hull of the turret of the Armata that is supposed to protect the cannon and its associated automation from enemy weapons. The outer “shell” is an additional cover on which various units are mounted, including a machine gun combat module, a panoramic commanding scope, and other equipment.

It’s too early to talk about the characteristics of the newest Russian tank. Various representatives of the defense industry have already mentioned that the Armata tank will surpass all existing domestic and foreign tanks in its characteristics. At the same time, however, while officials do without specifics. Even the exact dimensions and combat mass of the new tank are unknown. On the other characteristics, including fighting qualities, can not speak.

At the moment, specialists and the general public have to rely only on photographs and videos with a new domestic tank, built on the basis of the unified platform "Armata". It remains to hope that in the future, the Ministry of Defense and the corporation Uralvagonzavod will disclose some of the details of the new project, which are still under secrecy. In addition, I would like the developers and future operators at least from time to time to report on the testing process and the process of preparing for full-scale mass production of new equipment.


On the materials of the sites:
http://tass.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://vz.ru/
http://lenta.ru/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
Our news channels

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

216 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +56
    13 May 2015 06: 44
    Morning respect to Kirill - an excellent article, "Vzglyad" had a decent description of the armata, but Kirill cut out unnecessary and added analytics from other sources. Based on the above, the author would like to note only one thing. We have once again become the legislator of something breakthrough in the world of weapons and, in particular, tank building. Now it is necessary to bring Armata and saturate her troops in the required volume. This is the most important task. And to have such a miracle weapon in the amount of 10 copies is simply impossible. The potential of the new platform must be fully unleashed.
    1. +13
      13 May 2015 07: 07
      Kirill had a photo of the T-14 from above, but he was too lazy to take a ruler and measure the dimensions of the armored capsule, and figure out where the third member of the tank's crew actually hid. The location of the crew of the Armata tank was repeatedly mentioned long before its alleged participation in the future Victory Parade was first announced. The hatches on the tower were far from being visible either. There are at least three of them: above, on the left and behind the tower.

      The crew of the combat vehicle:
      1. +9
        13 May 2015 07: 48
        Cyril had a photo of the T-14 on top, but he was too lazy to take a ruler and measure the dimensions of the armored capsule
        Duc in Paralai, okuda and your picture has long been drawn up all the schemes and sizes, do not sleep for days)) and on courage broke so many copies that Comrade. Fofanova banomet on the handle was sharpened))) and what they just don’t lay out, even there is one))) like stolen, like with a secret, like KB wassat
        1. +3
          13 May 2015 08: 26
          Quote: Imperial
          Duc in Paralai, okuda and your picture has long been drawn up all the schemes and sizes, do not sleep for days)) and on courage broke so many copies that Comrade. Fofanova banomet on the handle was sharpened))) and what they just don’t lay out, even there is one))) like stolen, like with a secret, like KB wassat


          While they did not sleep on Courage, Cyril slept laughing And after all, the article is on VO, and not on some Ehi's website. The layout of the crew in the "Armata" tank is already more than a year, if not two, as announced. And having a photo of the tank from above and from the side, knowing the approximate thickness of the frontal armor, armor from above and below, it is easy to estimate that when people are placed in an armored capsule one after another, reclining, the total length of the armored capsule, together with the thickness of the armor, will approach 4 meters, if not will exceed this length.

          There were already Soviet BMP-2s, where the commander was sitting behind the driver’s armor, with cardboard armor and a seated position, there were more dimensions there than the T-14 armored capsule.

          Will the gnomes be recruited into the army? wink
          1. +4
            13 May 2015 19: 31
            Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
            when placing people in an armored capsule one by one, reclining,

            The tank crew, indeed, in battle sits shoulder-to-shoulder. But not reclining, but sitting straight. Because of this, the hull is much higher than previous tanks. The internal volume of the armored capsule (free) approximately corresponds to the KAMAZ cabin (without a sleeping bag).
            It is extremely difficult to get out of the "reclining" position after a long march, given the monitors hanging over you.
            If you look at the view of the tank from above, the commander sits under the hatch, hikes on the seat of the chair, the gunner sits in the center of the tank, his periscope is directly under the cannon, the driver hikes, as in the picture, and moves back and down in battle (left row periscopes).
            1. 0
              13 May 2015 23: 01
              A man’s shoulders are the widest part of the body. The shoulder width of a healthy man is 55-60 cm. Therefore, the shoulders can be specially slightly in different positions for different crew members to ensure comfortable work with a minimum internal capsule volume. And about sitting or reclining - this is still the secret of the company. I took high-quality photos of the T-14 from the network, the line and measured everything of interest to me. The fact that three in a row was confirmed to the nearest millimeter, and the rest of the nuances - at the level of speculation. In Abrams, the mechanical driver generally lies and does not care how he will get out after the march if he grows his abdomen and stops doing exercises.
              1. Rex
                0
                14 May 2015 11: 10
                Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
                shoulders can be specially slightly in different positions at different crew members to ensure comfortable work

                In addition, the chances of survival will be slightly increased.
                1. +3
                  15 May 2015 21: 27
                  That's why I do not like articles such ... and kamenty after)))))
        2. 0
          14 May 2015 21: 06
          Quote: Imperial
          Cyril had a photo of the T-14 on top, but he was too lazy to take a ruler and measure the dimensions of the armored capsule
          Duc in Paralai, okuda and your picture has long been drawn up all the schemes and sizes, do not sleep for days)) and on courage broke so many copies that Comrade. Fofanova banomet on the handle was sharpened))) and what they just don’t lay out, even there is one))) like stolen, like with a secret, like KB wassat


          Nothing special. The insides are not visible in the drawings.
      2. +3
        13 May 2015 08: 58
        There are at least three of them: top, left and behind the tower.
        Fig yourself!
        belay
        Could you circle-highlight in the photo?
        1. +2
          13 May 2015 12: 12
          Quote: abrakadabre
          There are at least three of them: top, left and behind the tower.
          Fig yourself!
          belay
          Could you circle-highlight in the photo?


          Behind the tower, in the center, at the base there is a round hatch with a hinged lid just the size of the pallet. Photos are online. I don’t have a computer to show right now.
          1. +2
            13 May 2015 13: 55
            there was information that through the epaulette (just your hatch) they would charge. And pallets should fly out, like, on the left.
            1. +3
              13 May 2015 14: 50
              Quote: sania1304
              there was information that through the epaulette (just your hatch) they would charge. And pallets should fly out, like, on the left.


              People do not know at all that there is a hatch under the aft niche of the T-14 tower. Charging through it is only possible if you turn the tower left or right 90 °. Therefore, I will refrain from commenting on this subject.
          2. +2
            14 May 2015 11: 14
            Ahhh ... So the conversation is about crew hatches, not holes in the armor at all, including technological ones.
      3. +29
        13 May 2015 09: 11
        The location of the crew of the Armata tank was repeatedly spoken about long before its alleged participation in the future Victory Parade was first announced.

        And estimate if there will be a surprise that the crew consists of two people? Driver and commander. It’s hard to believe, of course, but if automation was installed there, where the commander simply brings up a cross on the target, and the machine does the rest ... It will be a bomb worse than an atomic one.
        As a second option - the gunner sits almost under the tower.
        1. +11
          13 May 2015 10: 44
          And estimate if there will be a surprise that the crew consists of two people?
          That would be really cool.
          1. +6
            14 May 2015 11: 48
            Quote: abrakadabre
            That would be really cool.

            But only when servicing the tank, a crew of two will cry a lot. And also with other trifles
            1. 0
              14 May 2015 14: 43
              those. do you need a folding slave for maintenance?
              and if you use exoskeletons?
              1. +3
                14 May 2015 17: 07
                Here, after all, even the exoskeleton does not need autonomy - put it on, connected it with a cable to the tank and pull the broken psaltery. Interesting idea.
                1. +1
                  15 May 2015 21: 38
                  And get into a tank in an exoskeleton?))) Or drag it on a cable from behind? laughing
        2. +6
          13 May 2015 11: 58
          To his right is the commander’s workstation. Behind the driver is a gunner.

          Quote: Wedmak
          As a second option - the gunner sits almost under the tower.

          The gunner sits in the center, between the driver mechanic and the commander. There his sight device sticks out. The driver is sitting in front of his sightseeing devices (as at the 187 facility)
          1. +4
            13 May 2015 16: 41
            Quote: Bad_gr
            To his right is the commander’s workstation. Behind the driver is a gunner.

            Quote: Wedmak
            As a second option - the gunner sits almost under the tower.

            The gunner sits in the center, between the driver mechanic and the commander. There his sight device sticks out. The driver is sitting in front of his sightseeing devices (as at the 187 facility)

            The same thoughts, there he belongs.
            And then the poor fellow gunner, will soon be placed in a barrel with a solarium)))
            And hatches, by the way, are not sickly in size - it will be easier to pop out.

            Glad to hear Volodya.
            hi
            1. +6
              13 May 2015 19: 08
              Quote: Aleks tv
              The same thoughts, there he belongs.
              And then the poor fellow gunner, will soon be placed in a barrel with a solarium)))
              And hatches, by the way, are not sickly in size - it will be easier to pop out.

              Alex, good afternoon!
              In my opinion, an ideal tank appeared (it remains to file a bit). Now a man with a grenade launcher will be faced with the choice of where to shoot: either try to disable the armament of the tank, or try to hit the people who control this weapon. And the goals are in different places. Moreover, the crew from the front and from the rear of the grenade launcher is practically not available, from the sides, judging by the thickness of the bulwarks, there are also doubts from above - again, the thickness of the hatch suggests thoughts of a strong defense.
              And I, as a mechanic driver, really like the 4th triplex for mech-water good
              1. +10
                13 May 2015 20: 32
                Quote: Bad_gr
                In my opinion, an ideal tank appeared (it remains to file a bit).

                That's it, a file would be him ...)))
                State tests, yes "run" in climatic zones, and military tests ...
                And again with a file))).
                Still, the ATC would complete the new assembly line ...
                A year or two later, and in a series - in linear parts.

                I’m writing with caution - just not to jinx it ...
                If only they TELL THE MIND and the SERIES car.
                laughing
                Good luck to the peasants.
                drinks
                1. +3
                  13 May 2015 21: 18
                  Quote: Aleks tv
                  Still, the ATC would complete the new assembly line ...

                  At least a year ago I heard that it was under him that the equipment was purchased. Is the line not yet assembled?
                  1. +1
                    13 May 2015 21: 29
                    Quote: Bad_gr
                    Quote: Aleks tv
                    Still, the ATC would complete the new assembly line ...

                    At least a year ago I heard that it was under him that the equipment was purchased. Is the line not yet assembled?

                    It was bought. Are available.
                    Everything, as it were ...
                    But the line itself has not yet been completed, something with funding or ... xs.
                    Like secrets did not give out)))

                    Volodya, this is offhand. I just talked with the men when I was visiting Tagil.
                    If I made a mistake, I think those who know (here, on the site) will correct me.
                    1. +3
                      13 May 2015 21: 47
                      Let's hope that after the parade and Putin’s speech on the introduction of the shown new technology in the troops, things will go.
                      On the tank.
                      In my opinion, at least one more barrel is not enough. At facility 195, for example, there was also a 30mm 2A42 gun.
                      Here it is, I would like to.

                      If the tank is in position, there are 3 pairs of eyes, and each has its own trunk. the beauty smile
                      1. wk
                        +3
                        14 May 2015 16: 21
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        In my opinion, at least one more barrel is missing

                        .... drew his sword, sawn-off shotgun, gun ...
                      2. 0
                        14 May 2015 17: 12
                        It’s not very good, since they are all looking in the same direction.
                      3. 0
                        15 May 2015 18: 01
                        Quote: Nova
                        It’s not very good, since they are all looking in the same direction.

                        The main weapon cannot be pulled up high, and there can be threats from above (mountainous terrain or city). And for most of them, a 30mm caliber is enough for the eyes. The entire crew may be engaged in the search for the target, and the grenade launcher-machine guns will work out for these goals in the order they were received or depending on the danger presented.
                      4. 0
                        15 May 2015 19: 15
                        T-35 21 centuries ...
                2. +2
                  13 May 2015 22: 26
                  They will bring it, even with a file, even with a sledgehammer, even with the help of different controllers, the main result is the most positive result. Our sworn friends are already boiling water from this machine.
                3. Rex
                  0
                  14 May 2015 11: 14
                  Quote: Aleks tv
                  A year or two later, and in a series - in linear parts. Already I write with caution - just not to jinx it ...

                  Perhaps a couple of years may go away, but I would like in a year ..
                4. -3
                  14 May 2015 17: 52
                  Here, here, here ... About the second line in more detail, please. And then I got the impression that the tank is made of plywood., Tk. the first line was launched in the 50s shaggy, even photos on the website of the letter of the working GDP are posted. So, we’ll do tanks either on a knee or a little thing a year. And also Jews from Alfa Bank.
          2. +1
            16 May 2015 20: 48
            There are 6 ice rinks in the photo, and Almaty has 7 ice rinks.
            This is not Armata
        3. +5
          13 May 2015 12: 06
          Quote: Wedmak
          It will be a bomb worse than an atomic one.

          what is the "bomb"? And even worse than atomic ...
          Combat charter / 1. RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONAL CREW COMPOSITION
          In battle, the tank commander must:

          complete the task; keep their place in battle order;
          apply to terrain using closures for firing and for maneuvering;
          continuously monitor the battlefield, search for targets and destroy them with fire;
          monitor the exact execution of signals and commands by the crew;
          observe the actions of neighboring tanks, especially the tank of the platoon commander, its signals and signs;
          maintain continuous communication with the platoon commander;
          upon detection of toxic substances (OM), order the crew of the tank to wear gas masks;
          keep records of ammunition consumption, inform the platoon commander about the expenditure of half and three quarters of the ammunition;
          in case of failure of other platoon tanks, join another company platoon and continue the battle;
          at an emergency stop, having organized fire cover, take measures to restore the tank and informed the platoon commander of this;
          if it is impossible to withdraw the emergency tank from the battlefield by the crew, resort to the help of infantry or other tanks;
          if there is a threat of capture of the tank by the enemy, fire up to the last cartridge and only if it is completely impossible to save the tank, withdraw the crew with machine guns from it and bring the tank and the gun into complete disrepair.

          This is only in battle!
          And there is also:
          + On the march
          + Before the fight
          + After the battle (march)
          You want to "hang" on it:
          + Radio operator
          + Tank gunner (TV)
          The actions of the gunner’s guns are associated with significant energy, dynamic and static loads, and are conducted at a fast pace imposed by the conditions of the combat situation. The amount of information processed is average. Activities - mainly performing. Business contacts with tank crew members are frequent, carried out both directly and using technical devices.

          - The commander of the tower (loader), maybe there is a AZ
          / RKKA heavy tank /

          + Communication + OMS + contacts with "superiors" and in the group
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. gjv
          +4
          13 May 2015 13: 37
          Quote: Wedmak
          As a second option - the gunner sits almost under the tower.

          Sorry, there is a sweeping contour AZ. Otherwise, it is necessary to "plant" the loader in the hatch behind the tower. It seems that Vladimir is rather right.
          Quote: Bad_gr
          The gunner sits in the center, between the driver mechanic and the commander. There his sight device sticks out. The driver is sitting in front of his sightseeing devices (as at the 187 facility)
      4. +1
        13 May 2015 21: 39
        Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
        The crew of the combat vehicle:

        Everything, of course, is wonderful, but it only seems that with all the solidity of such statements, I personally get the impression that most have forgotten about another version of the innovation - to reduce the number of crew members. With sufficient saturation of the tank with automation, it becomes possible to reduce the crew to the gunner and combine the functions of commander and gunner. Of course, I am not a tanker, but such a decision would be truly revolutionary, at the level of exclusion of the loader from the crew after installing the automatic loader. The possibility of this is indirectly confirmed by the absence of a separate hatch for the third crew member. If you recall all the domestic armored vehicles - everyone has a hatch for each crew member.
        1. +4
          13 May 2015 22: 02
          Quote: SPLV
          With sufficient saturation of the tank with automation, it becomes possible to reduce the crew to the gunner and combine the functions of commander and gunner ....

          The gunner is focused on shooting. The driver is busy driving. Both of them are coordinated by the commander according to the task. He has a connection with the unit commander, maps and the best overview.
          In my opinion, if you remove a person, and combine his duties with the duties of another crew member - all this will lead to a decrease in the effectiveness of the tank as a combat unit.
          1. +1
            15 May 2015 19: 28
            It was on the T-30-T-70 (from the time of V.O.V.), which led to the creation of the T-80 with a crew of 3 people ...
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. gjv
          +1
          14 May 2015 11: 19
          Quote: SPLV
          If you recall all the domestic armored vehicles - everyone has a hatch for each crew member.

          just do not put in the oven, if you still remember all the domestic armored vehicles - Not everyone there is a hatch for each crew member. hi
        4. 0
          15 May 2015 19: 23
          The T-34 did not (did not have) a radio operator's hatch. The T-34_76 of the first series had one hatch ON "turret crew" (turret-"pie")
        5. 0
          15 May 2015 23: 41
          No, the Sau of the flower series is one hatch for the commander and gunner. For three loaders in wartime, one hatch on the right side of the tower In acacia-2C3. Tankers each have their own hatch
    2. +20
      13 May 2015 07: 58
      To do new is work! And to bring new to perfection is hellish work !!! Success in achieving the intended !!!!
    3. +14
      13 May 2015 09: 11
      The article is long, but contains absolutely nothing new. And analytics is more like the reasoning of a journalist. A lot of "probably", "most likely", etc.
      The photographs show without a doubt that the outer shell of the tank is made of thin sheets. It is clear that they play the role of screens, and the inner tower has completely different dimensions and dimensions. It is clear that the main tower has a solid defense. But regarding "probably", it is likely that elements of dynamic protection will be mounted on the outer shell of the tower.

      About the ejector. During the report, it was announced that the possibility of manual charging is preserved. Although I do not understand how, but most likely by muscular scrolling of the machine in turret space. But it will zazovazyvatsya strongly. Therefore, I think the tank applied blowing the barrel with compressed air. This system was distributed in the 60 years no less than the ejector, but was more expensive and more complex, albeit more efficient. In addition, it was not used on domestic tanks due to the fact that they saved internal volume. In Armata, the internal space is much larger, so they could be used.
      1. UFO
        -5
        13 May 2015 09: 51
        Quote: qwert
        From the photographs without somngenia it can be seen that the outer shell of the tank is made of thin sheets. It is clear that they play the role of screens, and the inner tower has completely different dimensions and dimensions. It is clear that the main tower has a solid defense.

        Obviously so, but whatever you want, comrades, I don't like the tower at all: isn't it great for a crewless one? Plus height like "Uncle Stepa", and the shape like the T-4 "Tiger" (crumpled TV box) is not impressive request Futurism is clearly not enough, i.e. on XX1 does not pull. Perhaps the same Finns or Japanese would "lick" this tower to acceptable conditions, and pensioners from Uralvagonzavod want everything to look like "from under an ax."
        P.S. AGS is still not enough! negative
        1. +11
          13 May 2015 12: 43
          Quote: UFO
          Obviously so, but whatever you want, comrades, I don't like the tower at all: isn't it great for a crewless one? Plus height like "Uncle Stepa", and the shape like the T-4 "Tiger" (crumpled TV box) is not impressive request Futurism is clearly not enough, i.e. on XX1 does not pull. Perhaps the same Finns or Japanese would "lick" this tower to acceptable conditions, and pensioners from Uralvagonzavod want everything to look like "from under an ax."
          P.S. AGS is still not enough! negative


          It is good that the military, when accepting new equipment, is guided by the principle of the effectiveness of military equipment, not "futurism." And then, the Israeli carrot 4 with the KAZ "Trophy" on the tower compared to the Lamborghini passenger car - well, a typical "freak", and the military are happy laughing
          1. UFO
            +1
            13 May 2015 15: 14
            Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
            It is good that the military, when accepting new equipment, is guided by the principle of the effectiveness of military equipment, not "futurism." And then, the Israeli carrot 4 with the KAZ "Trophy" on the tower compared to the Lamborghini passenger car - well, a typical "freak", and the military are happy

            Do you have a car? If so, tell me the brand, model, year? Yes
            1. +13
              13 May 2015 15: 22
              Why are you demonstrating your nervous reaction to me? I already realized that you compare tanks with cars in appearance. Regardless of which car I have or yours, the tower of the T-14 will have a tower that better meets the conditions of those. tasks.
              1. UFO
                -1
                13 May 2015 17: 39
                Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
                Why are you demonstrating your nervous reaction to me?

                belay recourse fool
              2. UFO
                -1
                13 May 2015 17: 40
                Quote: Mayor_Vikhr
                I already realized

                Yah No.
        2. +7
          13 May 2015 13: 08
          Futurism is clearly not enough


          Any "radio invisible object" looks exactly like
          Quote: UFO
          (crumpled box from the TV)
          wink
          1. UFO
            -1
            13 May 2015 15: 16
            Quote: Arkon
            Any "radio invisible object" looks exactly like

            Being "radio invisible" is not the task of the T-14, wink
            Although b, the upper front part of the turret can be "tilted" to the upper level of the gun mask, reducing the frontal projection. hi
            1. +5
              13 May 2015 18: 14
              Being "radio invisible" is not the task of the T-14,


              But attack aircraft and helicopters are not taken into account?

              "Although b, the upper front part of the tower can be" tilted "to the upper level of the cannon mask, reducing the frontal projection."


              So, how do you know what projection is on the armored part of the tower? You don’t see her. wink
              1. UFO
                +2
                13 May 2015 19: 53
                Quote: Arkon
                Being "radio invisible" is not the task of the T-14,

                But attack aircraft and helicopters are not taken into account?

                Accept drinks But a tank will not make one tower radio-obscure, and there are other ways to detect a target.
                Quote: Arkon
                So, how do you know what projection is on the armored part of the tower? You don’t see her.

                Actually, I try to explain my (deceived) ideas about "Armata".
                How did it happen that the "crewless" T-14 turret was larger and "uglier" than the CREW! T-90 turret? (I can't help feeling that the spare crew is sitting in the Armata turret sad )
                In general: put next to "Armata" and T-90 (especially performed by "Armexpo" in Nizhny Tagil in a sandy color, when they were shown together with BMPT "Terminator"), and if the chassis "Armata" even wins, then on the towers. ... what is called - "feel the difference"! hi
                1. +9
                  13 May 2015 20: 13
                  then on the towers .... what is called - "feel the difference"!


                  Check out the detailed photo:

                  Can't you see that what you call the "tower" are hinged panels on cotter pins?
                  What are you talking about?
                  1. +6
                    13 May 2015 22: 33
                    It also seems to me that the tower under the bulwarks is hidden. In fact, it is different.
                    1. +1
                      15 May 2015 19: 44
                      but the "shining" will not be the tower, but the screens (including bolts, cotter pins, etc.)
                2. +8
                  13 May 2015 20: 21
                  Yes there are other ways to detect the target.


                  Thermal visibility, too, by the way, is reduced, as evidenced by the hidden exhaust. Hopefully without a drop in power.

                  So, the T-14 is the first "stealth" tank. And if it has some other electronic warfare system on it, then it's generally cool.
            2. 0
              15 May 2015 23: 50
              Have you seen a real projection - a "hard" body? The exterior is light composite, like plywood. Everything else is at the level of assumptions.
          2. +1
            15 May 2015 19: 40
            HE LOOKS DONE NOT SO THAT SO A radar reflector looks ...
        3. +9
          13 May 2015 16: 15
          It is necessary not so much to care about the appearance as about efficiency ... people were not stupid created this miracle of technology, relied on rich experience, both domestic and foreign ... and so the article is good and more or less objective, but "maybe" with secrecy and it is still impossible to say anything for sure ..... we are waiting for official data ...
        4. +2
          13 May 2015 20: 21
          Futurism is clearly not enough, i.e. on XX1 does not pull
          That is request In my opinion, futurism is off the charts ... And about the big tower is small, I don’t know the exact numbers, but the vertical aiming angles are simply unprecedented (compared to the entire line of post-war Soviet tanks)
        5. +3
          14 May 2015 19: 38
          Quote: UFO
          and the shape of the T-4 "Tiger" (wrinkled TV box) is not impressive

          And for me, the Tiger was a beautiful car. Like the T-34-85, only the style is different. The real squalor is Sherman.
          And in general, about criticism:
        6. +1
          15 May 2015 19: 33
          I am also for AGS (especially on BMP ...) But "TIGER" -T-6
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. gjv
        +5
        13 May 2015 13: 59
        Quote: qwert
        During the report, it was announced that the possibility of manual charging was saved.

        If the report, which is inserted at the end of the article, then there is nothing to hear about manual loading. Apparently you mean some other report. Give me a link please.
        Quote: qwert
        The article is large, but contains absolutely nothing new.

        The article contains errors.
        A remotely controlled combat module with a PKT machine gun is provided on the roof of the turret. This device is designed to defend a tank from enemy personnel at relatively short distances. Probably, the Armata tank also carries a machine gun paired with a gun, but the available photos do not allow to unambiguously determine its presence and location. There is a set of smoke grenade launchers.

        The remotely controlled combat module is clearly not installed PKT, rather it Cord or similar 12,7 mm caliber. Its main purpose is anti-aircraft for helicopters and in the city on the upper floors. A paired PKTM in a gun mask, bottom left. "Grenade launchers" are not smoke, but aerosol. This is part of KAZ. The sprayed aerosol should "confuse" the enemy's laser and IR ammunition.
        1. +7
          13 May 2015 18: 39
          The secret of the "too large for an uninhabited" tower has been discovered: a radar station with AFAR is a very large thing in itself. But in addition to it, powerful recoil devices and a massive cannon bolt also nest in the tower. And the actuators that turn the fluff this way and that on orders from the case are also not at all a perfume bottle in size.
        2. 0
          15 May 2015 19: 53
          I think the coaxial machine gun is superfluous. - put the combat module on the stopper -. And solve all the problems (but if the weapon is controlled according to the principle "everyone" - "everyone" then what else is needed, but AGS (for the module?) - for self-defense - is necessary ...
      4. 0
        15 May 2015 19: 31
        blowing the barrel with compressed air was already on the T-5 "PANTHER"
    4. +1
      13 May 2015 18: 05
      It is hoped that in the future the Ministry of Defense and the Uralvagonzavod Corporation will reveal some details of the new project, while remaining under the stamp of secrecy.
      maybe you and the key to the apartment .. ??? wassat
    5. -1
      15 May 2015 14: 42
      Give Armata to Tank Biathlon!
      1. 0
        16 May 2015 02: 14
        I suppose this is the circled red locator in the stowed position. In the raised position, it will worsen the view of the commander’s panoramic sight, but in fog and dust, aiming at the locator will obviously be more convenient.

        But what is 6-sided pyramid ? laser radiation sensors collected in one place? (on t-90 they are spaced at the corners of the tower)
        On the 195th, the locator did not clean and looked like this
  2. +15
    13 May 2015 06: 59
    Now ukrokarateli know how to draw "Armata")))) otherwise they sculpt excuses "the battery in the phone has run out")))) according to the article itself, I really hope that this tank will be a breakthrough one, and will not become another victim of "optimization" in order to reduce the cost sample, because all the systems described are the guarantee of life in battle for both the vehicle and the crew.
  3. +4
    13 May 2015 06: 59
    I wonder how many such toys will enter the troops ...
    1. +6
      13 May 2015 07: 42
      Quote: VostSib
      I wonder how many such toys will enter the troops ...

      min of defense is still voicing the number in 2400 pieces. At the same time, it is said that as the mass production of the tank is adjusted, its price will drop significantly. hi
      1. +6
        13 May 2015 10: 33
        Quote: NEXUS
        At the same time, it is said that with the establishment of mass production of the tank, its price will drop significantly.

        There is such a thing. For example, an unforgettable HF. For the first cars, the plant asked for 1 million rubles (yes, Zaltsman had a lip not a fool). After long and lengthy discussions, the price was dropped to 843 thousand. In 1942, the Chelyabinsk Shipyard cost 345 thousand.
        1. +11
          13 May 2015 13: 36
          found something to compare. You can’t argue with Stalin and haven’t fucked him.
        2. +8
          13 May 2015 14: 44
          During the production of the KV (like the T-34), many parts processing operations were canceled, the production technologies for various parts and assemblies were changed. Do not forget that the price of the final product includes not only the cost of the product itself, but also the costs of R&D, as well as the manufacture of technological equipment for its production. That is why, in the production of a large series, the costs are "smeared" on all products in the series and, as a result, the final cost is lower.
        3. 0
          15 May 2015 19: 59
          but it was so worthwhile under SUCH simplification of technology ... AS and the Stalingrad T-34 (with locomotive rollers) that after the war it was necessary to modernize all tanks of the war era (UKN)
      2. -7
        13 May 2015 12: 37
        Quote: NEXUS
        min defense while voicing the figure of 2400 pieces.

        This is not realyes pr price of 100 000 000 rub / piece (which is not achievable:In 2010 year, the purchase price of T-90 under the supply contracts to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation amounted to 70 million rubles)
        budget 240 rubles
        =========================================
        1. Rex
          +14
          13 May 2015 13: 15
          Quote: opus
          This is not real, but with a price of 100 000 000 rub / piece (which is not achievable

          Quote: opus
          budget 240 rubles

          Federal budget revenues for 2015 - 15 trillion rubles. Defense spending - 3 trillion.
          Take the worst price of T-144 at 400 million. Then, for the total amount of the defense budget, you can buy 7500 tanks, for the federal one - 37500 units.
          Of course, no one will spend the entire budget on armored vehicles (and will not be able), but in the reserve funds there are still about 18-20 trillion.
          There are also plans for their spending, but this is a matter of priority in spending money.
          If they want to buy weapons, they will buy.
          1. 0
            14 May 2015 00: 19
            Quote: Rex
            . Then, for the total amount of the defense budget, you can buy 7500 tanks, for the federal - 37500 units.

            What an entertaining fantasy.
            and for the entire budget of all countries of the world, you can build 75000 "artam" or more.
            But:
            1. Who will agree to live like this (spending the entire budget of the country, or MO) on the "armata".
            Submariners, Air Force, housing, retirees, etc.
            2. There is simply not enough resources. Money is not everything.
            3.20% of the maximum MO budget of the country's budget. Otherwise, the DPRK
            1. Rex
              +3
              14 May 2015 11: 22
              Quote: opus
              What an entertaining fantasy.

              This is fantastic about one particular post.
              They flooded the Internet with crying "there is no money and there will be no money" - they say the Russian Federation can never buy T-14, T-50, etc.
              And my essence was reduced to a simple infe - the Russian Federation will be able to find $ 10 billion a year for the purchase of equipment. Without transition to martial law and without militarization as the DPRK.
              If the leadership wants.
              1. 0
                14 May 2015 14: 52
                Quote: Rex
                Russia will be able to find $ 10 billion a year for the purchase of equipment.

                Can not.
                besides "find" money (you can print)
                need to:
                specialists
                workshop
                -resources (from metal to the components of the OMS). So for reference, the plate 150 PPM radar AFAR (and on the T-14 cut-off radar from the T-50) is made from 6 weeks
                -Have crews train crews
                -Produce BK and Z / parts
                - places of storage, maintenance, technical map
                and so on. All this will result in a good amount
                And the question is why 7500 MBT?
                1. Rex
                  +4
                  14 May 2015 15: 31
                  Quote: opus
                  Can not.

                  Personal opinions are personal opinions.
                  Mine is based on the highest economic, 20 years of experience and position of director of LLC
                  Quote: opus
                  And the question is why 7500 MBT?

                  For the slow-witted, he already noted that this was a primitive example in response to a specific post that rejected the possibility of purchasing 2400 pieces.
                  1. -3
                    14 May 2015 17: 59
                    Quote: Rex
                    Mine is based on the highest economic, 20 years of experience and position of director of LLC

                    Found than to surprise.
                    / No worse. /
                    Show your opinion to any economist (at least on an urban scale, not LLC, he will laugh for a long time
                    Quote: Rex
                    For the slow-witted -

                    For the "teachable" and 2400 will not be
                    1. Rex
                      +1
                      15 May 2015 08: 20
                      Quote: opus
                      For the "teachable" and 2400 will not

                      We will see. Five years is not a long time.
                2. 0
                  16 May 2015 00: 06
                  In this figure is the T-15, heavy equipment tow trucks, the entire lineup planned by the Ministry of Defense. I see so.
          2. 0
            14 May 2015 14: 47
            Armata - in fact, not MBT, but a heavy tank. They don’t need very much, they just need to be properly provided: with shells, fuel, sane command and crews, reconnaissance, maintenance, etc.
            1. 0
              15 May 2015 20: 06
              We have no "Heavy Tanks" in our country, there is an "ARMATA" MBT - not even an MBT, but a PLATFORM ...
          3. 0
            16 May 2015 00: 02
            consider another article-t-90 for sale. Budget revenues for the defense industry-in net
        2. +11
          13 May 2015 13: 18
          Quote: opus
          It's not real

          Come on ! it's all about political will (eggs of steel), the unit price is approximately $ 10 million, a total of 1 billion 100 or 24 billion 2400 pieces. This is very little money in the current situation. If you shake each governor is enough for 10 thousand units, and if you squeeze the thieving oligarchs, shake them out of the "partners" and stop toying with foolishness, there will be enough money for the death star .. But in this case, you will have to change the name of the leader to Stalin. Although Putin is slowly coping with it, given that the standard of living is now very high and citizens did not dream about under Comrade Stalin .. Do not we all want to sacrifice our well-fed prosperity for the sake of the country's power and this is reality ..
          1. +3
            13 May 2015 18: 41
            If you shake every governor, then this will be a completely different country. Not Russia ...
          2. 0
            14 May 2015 00: 27
            Quote: max702
            This is in the current situation very little money.

            Let me remind you, if you forgot.
            2015 budget with DEFICIENCY

            (at fantastic $ rates and the cost of a barrel is also fantastic)
            Quote: max702
            and if you squeeze the thieving oligarchs, shake them out of the "partners" and stop toying with the foolishness of money will be enough

            -hold it down

            -shake out
            One of the main problems for Russia is participation in international sanctions against a number of developing countries that are our traditional trading partners and debtors. Losses from this participation reach $ 30 billion
            What's the matter then?
            Serdyukov drives around on Mersey, Chubais-Rosnanopravit and is preparing for an IPO (in his pocket).
            Quote: max702
            But in this case, the name of the leader will have to be changed to Stalin.

            Yeah ....
            Only still people (in the country) need 1930
            Quote: max702
            given that the standard of living is now very high and did not dream of citizens under Comrade Stalin ..

            People didn’t live so well, as with GDP, incl. Urya-approvals do not get to the newspaper instead of toilet paper and the line for the car at 10 years old, went against and bought
            1. Rex
              +2
              14 May 2015 11: 39
              Quote: opus
              Let me remind you, if you forgot. The budget for 2015 with a DEFICIENCY

              With a deficit, and not the first time in the history of Russia.
              Moreover, there is also a shortage in many regions and municipalities.
              Federal budget revenues of the order of $ 200 billion, i.e. an additional $ 10 billion per year increases the deficit by 5%, and the military already by 16% (compared to 2015),.
              This is not fatal for the country. He can live for five years.
              In addition, many, when they talk about military spending, mean that this money is simply thrown into the trash. However, it is not.
              The price of the same T-14 includes salaries of workers, and contributions to the FIU, the budget.
              Those. of the conditional maximum $ 10 million per tank (and any other equipment), a significant part of the money will be returned to the country's trade turnover and budgets.
          3. 0
            15 May 2015 20: 10
            LET'S BEGIN to shake the "governors" - finish with the cleaners (but I agree to observe the presumption of innocence and legality (inevitability of punishment).
        3. gjv
          +4
          13 May 2015 14: 09
          Quote: opus
          This is not realistic, but at a price of 100 rubles / unit (which is not achievable: In 000, the purchase price of T-000 under contracts for the supply to the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation amounted to 2010 million rubles) budget of 90 rubles

          Sorry, Anton, your calculator must be some sort of "American". Three "whining" superfluous shows.
          In domestic and you get 240 rubles. hi
          1. 0
            13 May 2015 16: 20
            Quote: gjv
            some kind of "American"

            Well, without PODE *** then how can you?
            Why not Japanese, or EEC?
            "Kick your own, strangers will be obsessed"? "who does not jump ..." well, etc.?
            PS: the calculator "is falling apart, he noticed a mistake, he (K), by the way, is Japanese.
            ---------------
            For cons in the back "thank you"
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. gjv
              +3
              13 May 2015 17: 44
              Quote: opus
              For cons in the back "thank you"

              Yes, always please, Anton. However, VE ... to you without minuses.
              Quote: opus
              Why not Japanese, or EEC?

              We have traditionally in Russia: billion - 9 nОlei, trillion - 12 nОlei. But the Americans have a confusion between a billion and a billion, and between a trillion and a billion. It is this "ihiy" billion that introduces ... 000. Because he wrote -
              some kind of "American"
              .
              Quote: opus
              "Kick your, strangers will live "?"..."
              1. -1
                14 May 2015 18: 02
                Quote: gjv
                However

                the element of herdness: "I ran past, I see a minus, and I didn’t know it for him," / without even reading
                Quote: gjv
                But the Americans have a confusion between a billion and a billion,

                No. A billion is a billion.
                And I have not seen American calculators since 1989.
                Quote: gjv
                This "ihiy" billion

                I’m not stupidly mistaken. The calculator is this: the battery drops out.
                in general, uje is not needed. It was necessary at Exel
        4. +2
          13 May 2015 22: 00
          Quote: opus
          Yes, at a price in 100 000 000r / piece (which is not achievable

          Not about tanks, of course, but ... I had a chance to somehow talk with a worker at a car factory. According to him, last year, with the retail price of their product starting from 500 or 550 thousand rubles, the cost was a little more than 100 thousand. I still wonder: either the comrade is not completely honest, or someone else has us ...
          1. 0
            14 May 2015 00: 16
            Quote: SPLV
            whether the comrade is not entirely honest,

            Not fair.
            For Mercedes Ag I know: "earnings" in the region of 13-17%
            The rest (the lion's) is obtained on spare parts.
            simple example: from AvtoVAZ to Bugatti:
            1. Asks for the cost of a car (in any configuration)
            2. Ask for spare parts (all) for cars under No. 1, look at the result ...
            "And Schaub I lived like that"
            1. 0
              14 May 2015 00: 48
              For machines, spare parts are the cheapest to buy in producer countries 2 to 3 times cheaper than they sell in our stores.
              1. Rex
                +1
                14 May 2015 11: 51
                Quote: Vadim237
                2 - 3 times cheaper than what we sell in stores.

                Our store s / h has a standard mark-up of 40%. and we still have at least a couple of intermediaries.
              2. +1
                14 May 2015 14: 47
                Quote: Vadim237
                For machines, spare parts are the cheapest to buy in manufacturing countries in 2 - 3

                1. I speak from my own experience: Mercedes, BMW, Audi, VW-EVERYTHING IN THE COUNTRIES OF MANUFACTURERS.
                A car "assembled" from spare parts will be 3-4 times more expensive than purchased from the manufacturer.
                Even in spite of my discount up to 20% ...
                That is what it is about.
                The manufacturer "earns" not on the machine, but on spare parts and service
                Quote: opus
                The rest (the lion's) is obtained on spare parts.


                2. For Porsche AG Russia is somewhat different. Not the fact that we will be more expensive
                1. Rex
                  0
                  14 May 2015 15: 33
                  Quote: opus
                  A car "assembled" from spare parts will be 3-4 times more expensive than purchased from the manufacturer.

                  I agree. And not only the car - the same computer, for example.
                  Quote: opus
                  The manufacturer "earns" not on the machine, but on spare parts and service

                  With the reservation that a significant part of the spare part is produced by third-party manufacturers. Sometimes without a license.
                  1. 0
                    14 May 2015 18: 04
                    Quote: Rex
                    that a significant part of the spare part is produced by third-party manufacturers

                    No, well, we are talking about "normal" cars and specific spare parts (body, bumpers, internal combustion engine and gearbox elements, etc.).
                    It is clear that Mercedes does not produce shock absorbers and candles with oil filters for their cars

                    Quote: Rex
                    Sometimes without a license.

                    China.
                    But the preform for a body element or interior ... is more expensive.
          2. Rex
            0
            14 May 2015 11: 49
            Quote: SPLV
            the retail price of their product starting from 500 or 550 thousand rubles, the cost was a little more than 100 thousand.

            As for car factories, I can't say, but for electronics and spare parts, the retail margin is 30-50%, sometimes even higher (more often on "small things").
            Here is an example from our store
            Cable kiaksidalny, RG-6 UREXANT 75 Ohms. - purchase price of 8,8 rubles / mp, selling price - 15 rubles. i.e. our margin for this product under 60%.
            This is not net profit, because there are transport and other expenses.
            I have met more than once situations where the final price for the buyer is three times the selling price of the manufacturer.
            1. 0
              16 May 2015 00: 24
              Well, at least competently call the cable-COAXIAL. The wholesale price of COX RG-6 is 6,9. Then it’s a small wholesale. Then the contractor mounts the network in the apartment. Now it’s no longer relevant, the telly and the Internet can be transmitted inside the apartment by electric wires, if in apartment is one phase.
        5. 0
          14 May 2015 10: 16
          Immediately back to first grade!

          An error in arithmetic in 1000 times is strong!
          1. 0
            14 May 2015 14: 48
            Quote: Tommygun
            Immediately back to first grade!

            late, the youngest already at 4m, senior magistracy. I do not want a third (late)
            Quote: Tommygun
            An error in arithmetic in 1000 times is strong!

            calculator. I already explained. Specifically, bit depth
  4. +5
    13 May 2015 07: 01
    I bet now there will be a new range of weapons to deal with such a tank, a very interesting engineering task, I think it will be a gun barrel, it’s difficult, but why not
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. gjv
      +2
      13 May 2015 14: 36
      Quote: saag
      I think it will be a gun barrel

      request gun barrel - how is it?
  5. +14
    13 May 2015 07: 04
    Too many praises. We do not know the performance characteristics, through the sentence "probably" and "most likely". The fact that he has an uninhabited tower and an armored capsule does not make him the best tank in the world. Maybe this tower flies off on the first hit, and the armored capsule is stitched once or twice? The question is what will go to the troops and in what quantity. Our MO constantly squeezes money. Even the T-90 with a normal body kit (CM) cannot be purchased, the Lite modification is preferred.
    1. +10
      13 May 2015 07: 42
      And yet this is a new generation of tanks. It's always hard to be the first. The main thing is that the national school of tank building again became the first. Time will show what will be the "exit" (after state tests).
      It is easy to criticize and look for flaws, but as history shows, not a single brand-new machine can do without it.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. gjv
        +4
        13 May 2015 18: 07
        Quote: bolat19640303
        Time will show what will be the "exit" (after state tests). It is easy to criticize, to look for flaws, but as history shows, no fundamentally new car can do without it.

        According to the information resource "Ura.ru", the T-14 tank ("object 148") on the Armata platform produced by Uralvagonzavod will be tested outside the Central Military District. The information that the novelties of armored vehicles, demonstrated at the military parade in honor of the 70th anniversary of the Victory, will be sent from Nizhny Tagil to the border military districts, "URA.Ru" was confirmed by the official representative of the Central Military District, Yaroslav Roshchupkin. According to him, the Central Military District is an internal district and, if we compare the pace of rearmament, then the small Southern Military District has already received a lot of new equipment. “We will be rearmed last,” Roshchupkin summed up.
        Where exactly the new tanks will be delivered, the Secretary of State, Deputy General Director of Uralvagonzavod Corporation Alexei Zharich, also found it difficult to tell. “With this issue, please contact the military,” he explained.
        Interest in the new tank is shown not only by journalists. As noted by the federal media, interest was also shown by representatives of foreign intelligence, legally working in the diplomatic departments. According to the sources of "URA.Ru", they are not interested in weapons, which are not particularly hidden and its performance characteristics are not hidden. However, the subject of interest may be the design of the armored capsule in which the crew is located, as well as the interface of the video surveillance system and monitoring the battlefield.
    2. +4
      13 May 2015 17: 03
      Why buy a T-90СМ if money is needed for a new tank, and not for recycling the old?
    3. 0
      16 May 2015 00: 37
      And here, the financial aspect in the first place, we will roll back the microseries at the landfills. Only then we will draw conclusions about the effectiveness. Launching a large series in production requires appropriate investments. Small-scale basic equipment for production, a series for production of equipment. Small series of MAIN PRODUCTS-polygon tests, adjustment-industrial series. Correction after testing of individual products of the series for failure, shooting at the range for defeat-KAZ. Mine fields. Turntables and guided bombs in the upper sphere. It is necessary to work
  6. +6
    13 May 2015 07: 19
    Presumptive view of T-14 without "screens", from the side (1)
  7. +5
    13 May 2015 07: 19
    Presumptive view of T-14 without "screens", from the forehead (2)
    1. 0
      13 May 2015 19: 57
      Quote: KGB WATCH YOU
      Presumptive view of T-14 without "screens", from the forehead (2)

      This is a real photo ...
      1. +3
        13 May 2015 22: 46
        Quote: uwzek
        This is a real photo ...

        no, alas, this is photoshop - take a look - some elements are literally painted (gunner’s sight to the left of the gun, blocks with equipment for detecting KAZ targets) - we’ll probably see his real picture without this casing soon ...
  8. +8
    13 May 2015 07: 20
    I wonder how the third crewman lands? Judging by the picture from above, right behind the hatch of the driver, the second hatch. But it is partially blocked by a tower and a gun mask. And if, in the event of a tank’s defeat, the driver can crawl under the barrel in the tower position for 5 hours (looking at the photo), how will the one sitting behind leave the car? A high-speed alarm landing also raises questions.
    Another consideration based on the photo: judging by the close proximity of the two hatches one after the other, taking into account the semi-reclining landing and the depreciation course of the lodgements, the third crew member sits / lies with legs wide apart, actually hugging the driver.

    About the tower: large niche-funnels on the left side of the tower - what will happen if an armor-piercing shell hits it? As far as I remember, the most frequently affected area of ​​the projection of the tank: it just includes this part of the tank. Active defense will repulse the first shells, but what will happen after the exhaustion of charges in this system?
    1. +12
      13 May 2015 07: 56
      Quote: abrakadabre
      I wonder how the third crewman lands? Judging by the picture from above, right behind the hatch of the driver, the second hatch. But it is partially blocked by a tower and a gun mask. And if, in the event of a tank’s defeat, the driver can crawl under the barrel in the tower position for 5 hours (looking at the photo), how will the one sitting behind leave the car? A high-speed alarm landing also raises questions.

      Another consideration based on the photo: judging by the close proximity of the two hatches one after the other, taking into account the semi-reclining landing and the depreciation course of the lodgements, the third crew member sits / lies with legs wide apart, actually hugging the driver.


      There is most likely no third hatch - behind the hatch of the driver, there are triplexes and most likely the driver for driving in combat is probably in the reclining position. The gunner is likely in the middle, where there is one surveillance device. For emergency leaving the car, if the gun is located above the m / in hatch in the T-64 tanks (72,80,90), the m / in has an emergency turn button for the cap, which will allow him to exit the car. Perhaps here it is similar. The exit through one hatch of two crew members is quite likely (as on the T-55,62). Although it is possible, if the body kits are removed from the cheekbones of the tower, the gunner’s hatch will be revealed.
      In extreme cases, there is always a spare hatch in the bottom. And when you get into the car, you are right - it’s difficult.
      1. +3
        13 May 2015 09: 19
        With such a height of the hull, why bending position ???? It is extremely disadvantageous in terms of ergonomics. Yes, this is a western trend, but it is not from their good life, and was generally forced. Why do we do worse than it was ???
      2. 0
        13 May 2015 22: 44
        About a difficult landing. I think there is a method that will minimize this drawback.
    2. +5
      13 May 2015 09: 17
      Niche-funnels made of thin sheets. They will break through, and not play the role of "lurers". Their task is to provoke earlier triggering of commutative projectiles, as well as to provide bulletproof protection of the elements of the removed equipment, and to cover from precipitation. Most likely they will be equipped with dynamic protection units.

      In general, I would like an article at the level of the journal "Technics and Armaments", but for now the level of a glossy magazine for men. Those. for people not particularly familiar with BTT. Let's wait for a serious article. And I hope to see her on this site.
    3. +2
      13 May 2015 11: 15
      I wonder if this tank has a bottom hatch for evacuating the crew.
      1. Rex
        +3
        13 May 2015 11: 59
        Quote: Vadim237
        I wonder if this tank has a hatch in the bottom for evacuating the Eki.

        There is so much interesting about this tank that we will bite our elbows for another 5 years smile
      2. 0
        13 May 2015 17: 05
        Apparently not - a weakened zone for a land mine.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. gjv
      +6
      13 May 2015 14: 24
      Quote: abrakadabre
      I wonder how the third crewman lands? Judging by the picture from above, right behind the hatch of the driver, the second hatch. But it is partially blocked by a tower and a gun mask. And if, in the event of a tank’s defeat, the driver can crawl under the barrel in the tower position for 5 hours (looking at the photo), how will the one sitting behind leave the car? A high-speed alarm landing also raises questions.

      On the T-55 in the tower was 3 person: commander, gunner, loader. A hatch - two! Not interested in a high-speed landing?
      1. 0
        14 May 2015 10: 09
        Quote: gjv
        There were 55 people on the T-3 in the tower: commander, gunner, loader. A hatch - two! Not interested in a high-speed landing?

        Another example from the "free and civilized world" - such a publicized M1A1 aka Abrams all of himself at every corner - there are 3 people in the tower ... and there are also 2 hatches ...
    6. +3
      13 May 2015 15: 59
      Quote: abrakadabre
      Active defense will repulse the first shells, but what will happen after the exhaustion of charges in this system?

      when the active defense shoots all the shells, there will be nobody to shoot at the armature laughing
      I heard that it was either in Chechnya or in Georgia (they are shorter than rumors and rumors in Africa) that it seems that the T-90 and the Arena were abandoned. so until she fired back, they could not destroy the tank. apparently insured, for sure. Of course, the version is dubious, but everything can be.
      1. +1
        13 May 2015 20: 34
        I didn’t hear about the T-90, but I read about the T-55 with KAZ Drozd in Nagorno-Karabakh - I shot down 2 or 3 grenades on the approach.
  9. +7
    13 May 2015 07: 20
    Presumptive view of the T-14 tower without "screens", rear view (3)
    1. anakonda
      +1
      13 May 2015 11: 33
      If the tower is not inhabited, then why is it so large?
      1. +6
        13 May 2015 11: 57
        Quote: anakonda
        If the tower is not inhabited, then why is it so large?

        It seems to me that the uninhabitable tower can be large only because of the significant thickness of the armor it is hung on, by the way, the height can also be largely due to the large thickness of the reservation of the tower roof, and plus dynamic protection, which can be located under the casing; at least this option seems logical to me
      2. gjv
        +6
        13 May 2015 14: 33
        Quote: anakonda
        If the tower is not inhabited, then why is it so large?

        Have you ever been inside the inhabited tower? Or imagine a hefty "Negro" (Ambala any nationality). Automatic loader no less!
      3. +2
        13 May 2015 20: 08
        Quote: anakonda
        If the tower is not inhabited, then why is it so large?

        And how do you want to clean weapons and replenish the supply of shells? In the style of installing batteries in existing tanks? And the angle of descent for the gun (the body is higher and longer than the existing ones)? The tower is higher and much more real.
  10. +8
    13 May 2015 07: 30
    it is interesting to watch the video of this "dragon" from the test site
  11. kin
    +6
    13 May 2015 07: 36
    Is the armor strong and our tanks fast?
    In 1941, it turned out that people were still fighting. Poor provision, training. The result is a mass of abandoned equipment.
    A new tank needs a new service infrastructure. Is she ready?
  12. ent
    +12
    13 May 2015 07: 44
    You only mentioned in passing one of the tank’s defense systems: KAZ. But it provides active protection not only at heading angles (tubes under the turret’s protective casing - Afganit), but also from mantle-blowers (mortars pointing upward with interference charges).





  13. +12
    13 May 2015 07: 48
    Fresh video
  14. +12
    13 May 2015 07: 53
    Hello to everyone involved. thanks for the review. For a whole year those who follow the military theme received interesting information. The leaders told very interesting information. They often talked about launching the products of their productions with the latest unparalleled products. But you can’t see them inside other products. So the chain made it clear that we are on the threshold of a completely different military technology which is much higher. All this is simply imperceptible. It is simply a routine and simply mass launch of new electronic equipment and it is already starting to be installed on military vehicles. Simple and routine imperceptibly. And then the Parade struck with a capital letter, everyone saw what was created but we only saw the appearance of our technology. And there, inside walking along the cobblestones and flying in the sky, samples hide what puts this technique not just in the best line. But this word is not fashionable. Now it’s fashionable that it’s unparalleled. It is of concern to all our enemies. And the most interesting even the word modernization that often sounded at the Parade suggests that it is something else more formidable and powerful that makes our friends scream heartbrokenly. Glory to our scientists and designers. They were able to create products that cool very hot heads. And the main commandment of ANOTHER'S WE DO NOT NEED BUT WE WILL NOT GIVE YOURSELF very much. Good luck to everyone in their affairs and, as they say, clear skies. And this Parade demonstrated !!!
  15. +1
    13 May 2015 08: 11
    There are many corners and protrusions, which will complicate which will complicate processing after passing through the focus of chemical or radiation infection.
    The tank was not in battle. Maybe at least a duel with blanks?
    1. +10
      13 May 2015 08: 36
      for processing there are special machines with a gas turbine engine blowing them all the same how many niches and angles.
      most likely, special tests are carried out to confirm the durability of the reservation, but who will put them in the public domain ??? laughing
      1. 0
        13 May 2015 22: 52
        I heard a topic (at the rumor level) that during the tests before him (the tank) more than one shell never reached. Well, if you just cover it with a volley of tornado batteries, then yes ... although if there are electronic warfare elements or they will be covered with electronic warfare ...
  16. +9
    13 May 2015 08: 13
    Well, 5 cents for fun.

    Now I know what the 12 level in World of Tanks will be!

    11 level promised by T-90 and here is the twelfth :)
    1. gjv
      +5
      13 May 2015 14: 45
      Quote: Oladushkin
      Well, 5 kopecks for fun. Now I know what level 12 will be in World of Tanks!

      And it’s not bad that they left from 1 penny level.
      1. +1
        13 May 2015 22: 38
        In VOT, we went from that to that and clicked .. At the 1st level everyone pierces everyone everywhere, and now there is no armor at 10m .. even from lt6-7 .. They killed the game, made an arcade.
  17. +9
    13 May 2015 08: 28
    True, the alpha-bank began to run into UVZ. I should let him know by a call from the prosecutor's office. Otherwise, bankers and a controlling stake may be lost.
    1. +8
      13 May 2015 08: 54
      After the parade, it was necessary to adjust a couple of t-14 to the central office of Alfa Bank, it’s so easy to stand for a couple of hours, then you don’t have to call laughing
    2. +9
      13 May 2015 09: 35
      True, the alpha-bank began to run into UVZ. I should let him know by a call from the prosecutor's office. Otherwise, bankers and a controlling stake may be lost.

      In fact, you need to repay debts. The question is different: why the state is in no hurry to allocate money to a strategic enterprise for settlement with debtors. I get the impression that there is a usual redistribution of property, concerted actions by officials and people who have views on this asset.
      1. +3
        13 May 2015 22: 43
        Quote: GOgaRu
        True, the alpha-bank began to run into UVZ. I should let him know by a call from the prosecutor's office. Otherwise, bankers and a controlling stake may be lost.

        In fact, you need to repay debts. The question is different: why the state is in no hurry to allocate money to a strategic enterprise for settlement with debtors. I get the impression that there is a usual redistribution of property, concerted actions by officials and people who have views on this asset.

        First, about inaccuracies in your comment. The strategic enterprise is 100% owned by the state, as well as the costs and profits of this enterprise (including the costs of servicing loans). Well, money is returned not to debtors, but to creditors ...
        Further, everything is correct - it is necessary to repay debts.
        Try to believe that the bulk of the attacks on UVZ are not related to the production of tanks. The question is precisely the existence of carriage production.
        Over eighty years of railcar production, UVZ has accumulated tremendous technological and design experience in rolling stock production, which has turned the plant into an unconditional monopolist due to the incomparable quality of its products.
        In the last seven to eight years, a number of car assembly plants have been built in the country on an import basis. Loans for their construction were allocated by the leading banks of the country (it is clear that alpha), because the owners of future enterprises were not the very last people in the state. But these enterprises could not stand the market struggle with UVZ due to the non-competitiveness of products. No one returned loans to banks.
        The scam, initially based on the calculation of connecting administrative resources, burst silently enough for society, but left a wild hatred of UVZ in the circles of "innocently affected" bankers and some high officials.
        How many attempts were to redeem the production of cars from UVZ, stumbling on the impossibility of separating tank and car production? Harvesting and energy workshops are common.
        The current financial ass found UVZ at the peak of its costs. I no longer remember how the dying joints were hung on the enterprise, the developments of which we are now discussing with admiration (and what would have happened to the dying research institutes and design bureaus if the plant had not fed them for ten years?). But now on the balance sheet of UVZ are gigantic superstructured buildings of the new car-assembly and foundries, buildings in which they planned to mass-produce "armats", millions of tons of equipment purchased, supplied and rotting in warehouses. Moreover, the construction and purchase of equipment UVZ (at the expense of loans) provided only 40% - the rest directly came from the federal budget. The amount of wasted funds (and in some development options - and irretrievably lost) is simply amazing.
        Decide for yourself what forces lie behind the morell alpha bank with its ridiculous claims, compared to the trillion possible losses of the state. After all, the bank does not manage this! Did they perform vyser much more arrogant than Khodorkovsky’s, allegedly not afraid of the consequences?
        How serious everything is, it will become clear tomorrow - on the 15th, our salary will be transferred ... Personally, I will endure the delay in money, but there are twenty thousand carriages sitting on forced leaves for six months, currently receiving pennies and many members of their families. This bank will be smashed without any of our "armatures" ...
    3. +5
      13 May 2015 11: 33
      Quote: vkl-47
      True, the alpha-bank began to run into UVZ. I should let him know by a call from the prosecutor's office. Otherwise, bankers and a controlling stake may be lost.


      Article on this subject: http://warfiles.ru/show-87933-oligarhi-nacelilis-na-voynu-protiv-armaty.html
  18. +5
    13 May 2015 08: 50
    Armata - waited. Now it remains to wait for the results of military operation and refinement on them ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +8
      13 May 2015 09: 35
      I agree! Still changing - even the appearance, and several options for the tower.
  19. +5
    13 May 2015 09: 00
    We have "weak contact" with the tanks by the nature of our activity!
    But the tank "ARMATA" and everyone on the platform "Armata" AMAZED, by God!
    We would be such a "beter" on the "Armata platform"!
    How? Maybe "applicable" ?! The answer is that the "Armata - BTR" will not be "captured"!
    But "kipish" will be! Just a "joke", comrades! What did you think ?!
    But we still sleep! Till!
  20. +10
    13 May 2015 09: 25
    In fact, it’s normal that the performance characteristics are not disclosed. In Soviet times, too, did not indulge in data on new cars. Have you seen the tank? Are you glad? Here. What else do you need? The rest are experts. And military secrets should be kept. Over the past 25 years, and so many secrets have flowed to the West and East, as well as the South. Stop surrendering ourselves. It comes to the point - everyone will see what a new car is and who could not escape from it.
  21. +5
    13 May 2015 09: 33
    Hello everyone. hi
    Imagine an "Armata" without tracks and on an air cushion feel - it will be a great attack aircraft fellow
    1. +7
      13 May 2015 10: 49
      Imagine an "Armata" without tracks and on an air cushion
      This is possible even at the current level of development. BUT! With its mass and projection area on the ground, fuel, this pillow will be consumed by rail tanks. And even under the slightest bias fun to slide.
      1. 0
        14 May 2015 13: 36
        Yeah .. and reverse gear can not be used .. Shot and change of position .. 500 meters back ..
  22. +6
    13 May 2015 09: 35
    they’ll bring the car to mind, launch it into the series, enter the army, and then we will find out what it costs from those who will be able to serve on it, we have to wait, it’s a little
  23. +5
    13 May 2015 09: 38
    All this is great !!!!! Only you need to do at least something for the impending war in LARGE quantities, but about the performance characteristics - you can argue. The main thing is that something is generally done in our conditions is a feat. Will have something to fight --- we will win! And if this "" than "" will be with powerful performance characteristics --- just super !!!!
  24. +3
    13 May 2015 09: 46
    The tower would also be covered with dynamic protection, no matter how as the main weapon.
    1. +4
      13 May 2015 17: 52
      So she’s under the screens. Now DZ is trying to close it with armor so that it is not damaged by machine guns.
  25. +6
    13 May 2015 09: 59
    Uninhabited tower, the next step, as I understand it, an uninhabited tank. Russian answer to Google :-) and let the whole world wait. I am not kidding.
    1. +3
      13 May 2015 12: 26
      BelAZ unmanned control program wink

      The beginning of the cycle.
      1. Make sure that there are no other BelAZs on the road and intersecting courses
      2. Continue to the end point of the route
      End of cycle.
  26. +4
    13 May 2015 10: 13
    I wonder how to load shells in the AZ?

    Is it possible to shoot unitary
    long obps like on western tanks?
    1. +3
      13 May 2015 12: 02
      Quote: voyaka uh
      I wonder how to load shells in the AZ?

      Look at the photos of the car from above - there are several distinct yuks that can be used including to load shells in the AZ
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Is it possible to shoot unitary
      long obps like on western tanks?

      About unitary is not known, although most likely they will still be separate, but there was already infa that a line of longer ammunition was developed for armata, which means with better characteristics.
    2. 035 RTB
      +4
      13 May 2015 12: 05
      There is an assumption that the carousel-type ammunition shell with charges and shells is located on the floor of the fighting compartment, like on t72,90, but elongated BOPs are located in the aft niche of the tower, there is still an option that only shells will be in the hull in the base, and the charges will be in the aft niche towers, this option is more preferable to mine, and what will actually be, we will see
      1. +4
        13 May 2015 12: 17
        for 035 rtb:
        The second option (OBPSy in the stern of the tower)
        more logical in that it does not limit the increase
        the length of the "scrap" as it is improved.
        But there is some danger: Abrams has shells in the basket
        stored backwards and in case of detonation they won’t hit their own tower -
        they are then turned over by a 180-degree loader, and in AZ this is done
        structurally very difficult.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. gjv
          +4
          13 May 2015 14: 53
          Quote: voyaka uh
          at Abrams, the shells in the basket are stored with their heads back and in the event of detonation they will not hit their own turret - they are then turned over by a 180-degree loader, and in AZ it is structurally very difficult to accomplish this.

          IMHO through a turn down is pretty easy.
  27. LMaksim
    +4
    13 May 2015 10: 24
    I definitely liked the tank. This is really a novelty of the domestic defense industry. The complex shape of the tower raises some concerns. Will all this crack over time due to metal fatigue?
    1. +7
      13 May 2015 12: 18
      Quote: LMaksim
      Will all this crack over time due to metal fatigue?

      1. On the tower, what kind of "fatigue"?
      2. "Fatigue" here


      And then "does not crack" for 20 years, or even 30 ...
  28. +11
    13 May 2015 10: 33
    Where is our Israeli "comrade"? The phrase "has no analogues in the world" sounded and there is no gin !? I can't wait for his comments. Straight boredom ... :)
    1. +1
      13 May 2015 10: 50
      Straight fromкsome kind of decree ... :)
      Without the letter "k"
      wassat
  29. +3
    13 May 2015 10: 46
    I don’t know why, but I have a strong feeling that the serial armored tower will be different, more squat, chtoli. Not all secrets seem to be revealed so far.
    1. +2
      13 May 2015 11: 00
      Yes, I'm more than sure that the tower will be different. It is worth taking a look at the history of tank building. Several towers rode on the same chassis. Well, nothing God does, everything is for the best.
  30. +5
    13 May 2015 11: 07
    Looking at the photos of the T-14, I understood where it came from "they are cardboard"
    in comparison with the "highly detailed" t-72 and t-90 Armata is smooth, especially from a distance. Like a clumsy third-grader hack compared to models from some thread Tamiya or Italeri

    but in the vicinity ... mmmm, and on the side and top mmmm !!!
    Beautiful vesch
  31. 0
    13 May 2015 11: 15
    Earlier rumors circulated about the possibility of building a tank with a front engine, but later it became clear that the engineers of Uralvagonzavod did not complicate the project with another bold decision.


    And in vain ... There is nothing particularly complicated here. BMP and self-propelled guns with a front engine. And the engine as a barrier to the crew would be useful. Also, war veterans said that it was good when a shell hit the engine. "Khan's car, and the whole crew ..." I hope everyone remembers the film.
    1. +2
      14 May 2015 00: 19
      Quote: rennim
      Infantry fighting vehicles and self-propelled guns with a front engine, and the engine as a barrier to the crew would be useful. Also, war veterans said that it was good when a shell hit the engine. "To the khan's car, but the whole crew ..."

      at the front of the MTO, the weight distribution suffers very much. It’s possible to move the turret back on the BMP (for balance, it’s pecking), for a tank the turret is best to be in the geometric center of the hull, this is optimal for the FCS and for stabilizers and drives.
      Behind the MTO, ahead is a heavy reservation, and the tower in the center is an ideal and time-tested solution.
  32. +3
    13 May 2015 11: 25
    I saw an interview with one of the developers. He assured that he would not glow in the IR spectrum, and this is already very good. not bad. Also, in his words, the shape of the tower is due to technologies such as "stealth". It was on the first channel.
    1. 0
      13 May 2015 22: 57
      Plus, he shoots farther and a half times farther than his potential rivals.
  33. +6
    13 May 2015 12: 38
    "In addition, there is a distinctive notch in the left cheekbone of the tower that appears to house some equipment."

    ... moreover, there is a certain gun, which, apparently, shoots shells, as well as a characteristic hatch from which the head sticks out, apparently of a certain tanker ...

    Ehhhh ... Analysts. One very interesting LJ user under the nickname Kenigtieger wrote correctly:

    "It is interesting, at least one of the numerous DOWN tank experts who are now talking about the prospects of the" Armata ", about what it is like, what is right and what is wrong, understands how strongly, if not absolutely, not only the future depends now" Armata ", but also the future of all Russian tank building in general, and of all Russia in general, from the old T-64 armies of the DPR and LPR."
  34. +2
    13 May 2015 13: 03
    If you have already drawn the drawings, I am sure that models for assembly will appear soon, Chinese friends will probably already pour molds!
  35. +7
    13 May 2015 13: 25
    I read the comments of local experts and understand that no one sees the forest because of the trees. The value of the heavy platform "Armata" as well as other platforms. Not about where which hatch is and which screw is, but about the fact that these are universal platforms on which uninhabited modules are installed. Moreover, these modules are quick-detachable, which can be changed in the field. For the same heavy Armata platform, combat modules are at different stages of development: a heavy module with a 152 mm tank cannon, a light module like the one on a fire support combat vehicle. They already know about the art module Coalition-SV intended for the Armata platform. In addition to combat modules, special modules are being developed that make it possible to transform the heavy Armata platform into a tractor, a recovery vehicle, an engineering barrage vehicle, etc. The same is true for other platforms based on "Boomerang" and "Kurganets-25", for them art, special and combat modules are also being developed in addition to the existing ones. This increases flexibility and maneuverability. There is no need to drag a bunch of diverse, but necessary equipment across the vastness of our vast country, but a smaller number of universal platforms and different modules for them are enough.
    1. +1
      13 May 2015 18: 26
      Quote: Mit_off
      The value of the heavy platform "Armata" as well as other platforms. Not about where which hatch is and which screw is, but about the fact that these are universal platforms on which uninhabited modules are installed. Moreover, these modules are quick-detachable, which can be changed in the field.

      fellow the most valuable and sensible thought, among other things, a blizzard! Yes Conception Dmitry. hi
    2. +3
      13 May 2015 23: 50
      Quote: Mit_off
      I read the comments of local experts and I understand that no one sees the forest because of the trees. The value of the heavy platform "Armata" as well as other platforms. Not about where which hatch is and which screw is, but about the fact that these are universal platforms on which uninhabited modules are installed.
      How do you imagine that, - "Moreover, these modules are quick-detachable, which can be changed in the field"So, they removed the turret in the field from the T-14, put an SPG turret instead of a tank turret and that's it? Cool! Simple and ingenious! Maybe it's also easy to turn a tank into a heavy BMP T-15 in the field?" "it appeared in technology thanks to computer scientists, IBM announced a single platform, but" the music played for a short time, the fryer danced for a short time ", everything had to be changed and is changed now often. This concept has also become blurred among automakers. Now they claim that the Armata platform This is something fundamentally different, but in what? Take the T-72, say that this is not a platform? But on it, with all possible unification, was created - the MTU-72 bridgelayer, the TOS-1 "Buratino" flamethrower system, the IMR clearing engineering vehicle -3M, radio and chemical reconnaissance vehicle "Berloga", repair and evacuation vehicle BREM-1, combat vehicle BMR-3M, flamethrower combat vehicle BMO-T, combat vehicle support tanks (BMPT), 152 mm self-propelled guns "Msta-S". In addition, a self-propelled zenith was created in South Africa on the T-72 chassis ka ZSU ZA-35, and the French company GIAT 155 mm self-propelled guns. There is equipment on the BMD platform, the same "Nona", "Sprut", "Shell". One can argue about "chassis" and "platform", but "Armata" is not a LEGO in the field, and "Armata" is only for "Armata", there is no such unification of a transformer for all equipment. If the facilitation of the production of a heavy infantry fighting vehicle and a tank in one hull is considered a platform and superunification, then it is very possible that it can happen here, as with the idea of ​​an aircraft-carrying cruiser, when the cruiser turned out to be not very good, and the aircraft carrier is so-so. Was it worth sacrificing the qualities of a tank for the sake of the dubious mastodon T-15? Was it worth wasting time and money for the sake of saving in the universal "budget" version from the super tank (object 195)? Time will put everything in its place.
      1. +1
        14 May 2015 05: 23
        T-72 is a chassis on which various equipment is mounted. The problem of converting the T-72, like other tanks into different combat and special vehicles, was the presence of a crew in the tank turret. This means that in addition to the "input" devices, there were "output" and control devices in the tank's turret, now on the "Armata" all this has passed into the hull, in the tower there are only "input" devices, electronics and automatic machines. Therefore, there are no fundamental problems with replacing modules of suitable size and weight. You are right about one thing: "Time will put everything in its place"
  36. Rex
    +7
    13 May 2015 13: 59
    Quote: Mit_off
    The value of the heavy platform "Armata" as well as other platforms. Not about where which hatch is and which screw is, but about the fact that these are universal platforms on which uninhabited modules are installed. Moreover, these modules are quick-detachable, which can be changed in the field.

    You interpret the concept of "platform" too broadly.
    In most cases, its essence is to maximize unification and (accordingly) cheaper development and production. 70-80% of unification is already very significant.
    The same current automakers use a small number of base platforms, but this does not mean that it is possible to quickly convert one model to another, even in a car service.
    And even more so to rearrange, for example, the "module" of the Coalition on the T-14 or back in the field.
    1. +2
      13 May 2015 14: 07
      I agree completely. These are not wheels to disassemble. This is not a TV series "Transformers" and not a situation when trousers smoothly turn into elegant shorts, as in one wonderful Gaidai film.
      1. Rex
        +1
        13 May 2015 14: 13
        Quote: noncombant
        This is not a TV show "Transformers" and not a situation where pants smoothly turn into elegant shorts,

        Well, the very idea of ​​easy (with the help of the BREM crane) tank / BMP / self-propelled gun transformation is interesting, but it’s still far from real
        1. 0
          14 May 2015 05: 52
          You can justify why the real implementation of replacing the universal remotely controlled combat module on a particular platform is still far away. What are the fundamental difficulties.
          1. Rex
            +2
            14 May 2015 12: 28
            Quote: Mit_off
            You can justify why the real implementation of replacing the universal remotely controlled combat module on a particular platform is still far away. What are the fundamental difficulties.

            Didn't talk about fundamental difficulties.. I wrote earlier that there are nuances.
            Find the staff of any brigade (ours, amers), count pieces of military equipment and try to describe in detail the process of replacing modules.
            It easily looks in the eyes of people who superficially represent the life of army units.
            At a minimum you need:
            1 Have these modules in stock. Somewhere to store (this requires additional people and finances). At what level (brigade, division, district? In what quantities?
            2. They need to be transported on something in the "field conditions". Some of them can go thousands of kilometers from places of permanent deployment (additional transport, people and finances are required).
            3. Mount something (the number of ARVs is nominally not so large or additional equipment must be introduced)).
            Take, for example, medium-range air defense - for each launcher there is also an infectious one, and here for 2-4 BMPs you need at least one "transport-changing" vehicle.
            Imagine at least the replacement of modules in one motorized infantry battalion.
            Will transport vehicles with a module be dismantled / mounted / transported to each position?
            Right positions (in front of the enemy)?
            Or in the rear? When dozens of pieces of equipment are pulled together in a limited area, where is it necessary to ensure stealth, air defense cover?
            The technical simplicity of replacing a module turns into a military operation, and the army grows by several thousand pieces of equipment and tens of thousands of people.
      2. +3
        13 May 2015 18: 30
        Quote: noncombant
        This is not a TV series "Transformers" and not a situation where pants smoothly turn into elegant shorts, as in one wonderful Gaidai film.

        (not so easy by the way ...))) lol
        1. 0
          13 May 2015 18: 54
          laughing Andrei Yuryevich, to the point! The hero of Mironov did not go according to plan))))
          1. +1
            13 May 2015 18: 56
            Quote: noncombant
            laughing Andrei Yuryevich, to the point! The hero of Mironov did not go according to plan))))

            request what hi
    2. +1
      13 May 2015 16: 28
      Based on your logic, almost all tanks are a platform. Almost all mass-produced tanks were based on self-propelled guns and tractors and other auxiliary equipment. So what is the novelty, why is the Armata a platform, but the T-72 is not? It is you who are mistaken, but I know what I am writing. Look even at the parade "Kurganets-25" had 2 different modules. It's just that other modules are not ready. And what is fundamentally impossible to change an uninhabited module in the field?
      1. Rex
        0
        13 May 2015 17: 17
        Quote: Mit_off
        You are mistaken

        Look at the definition of the word "platform". The concept of "platform" and "chassis" is also separated.
        Quote: Mit_off
        Based on your logic, almost all tanks are a platform. Almost all mass tanks were equipped with self-propelled guns and tractors and other auxiliary equipment.

        This is the case in some cases. Although there are differences in the use of individual units and the concept of "platform".
        Quote: Mit_off
        but I know what I'm writing.
        .
        Are you related to industrial production?
        Quote: Mit_off
        Look even at the parade Kurganets-25 was with 2 different modules.

        Is BTR-80 and BTR-90 a single platform or not? And the T-72 and MLRS based on it?
        Although "modularity" and "platform" overlap, they are not identical.
        Quote: Mit_off
        to change the uninhabited module in the field, what is fundamentally impossible here?

        Fundamental - nothing, but in practice there are many nuances.
        However, in their first post they wrote about the Coalition and Armata, and now they switched to Kurganets, in relation to which it is easier.
        1. +2
          13 May 2015 18: 46

          So I explain that the chassis and the platform are not the same thing.
          BTR-80 and BTR-90 are completely different cars with different chassis and weapons, in my opinion you confused the BTR-90 with the BTR-80A. And here TOS-1 "Pinocchio" based on the T-72 tank, is also not clear.
          What are the many nuances when replacing modules, can you give more details? In the first post I wrote about the Coalition and Armata, because I thought that everyone knew that the Coalition-SV should be on the Armata platform, but the platform was not enough, so the Coalition-SV was delivered for the parade on the T chassis -90. Both modules were installed on Kurganz-25.
          1. Rex
            0
            14 May 2015 12: 38
            Quote: Mit_off
            So I explain that the chassis and the platform are not the same thing.

            Chassis and platform are terms.
            The term implies a summary of the essence of the subject / phenomenon / process.
            In view of brevity, the term does not describe all the details, may have different interpretations and boundaries of application (sometimes disputed). Sometimes different terms also intersect
            Quote: Mit_off
            that the Coalition-SV should be on the Armata platform,

            In the case of Koala and T-14, we are not talking about combat modules, but about uninhabited towers.
            In the case of the T-15, Kurgan, Boomer, the replacement of modules is technically possible, but there is no global reason to introduce this en masse.
            There is probably only one reasonable option - in the field, rearrangement of the "live" module from the "killed" platform to the opposite option.
      2. -1
        13 May 2015 18: 16
        Quote: Mit_off
        Moreover, these modules are quick-detachable, which can be changed in the field. For the same heavy platform "Armata", combat modules are at different stages of development: a heavy module with a 152 mm tank gun, a light module like the one on

        Quote: Mit_off
        You are mistaken, but I know what I am writing. Look even at the Kurganets-25 parade was with 2 different

        Quote: Mit_off
        You are mistaken, but I know what I am writing. Look even at the Kurganets-25 parade was with 2 different

        Isn’t Lego constructor inspired by these conclusions?
  37. +3
    13 May 2015 14: 17
    Well, the fact that she can ride is certainly good. Is there at least one video where the tower rotates? Panorama?
    A tank that has not passed the State Test cannot be considered ready.
    1. wk
      -2
      13 May 2015 15: 22
      generally empty heated discussion of the running model of a certain concept, devoid of technical characteristics, and units .... more or less traced the concept of the chassis and then, without a power unit .... it's empty!
      1. +1
        13 May 2015 15: 48
        This is not a running layout and not a concept, but a real finished machine, which will go to state tests in the next month.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. +4
      13 May 2015 17: 17
      Well, yes, there’s another video where she shoots and how she fires at her hull and turret))) you are naive ... you just removed the cover from the tank, and give it to you right away. Who needs everything to see, know and experience. All Ahead ....
      1. Rex
        -1
        14 May 2015 12: 43
        Quote: Johnny
        Well, yes, another video where she shoots

        Can I (as one friend of mine put it) "joke dirty"? recourse
        Here on the Internet there is neither video nor photo as the president of the Russian Federation poops ..
        Does this mean that he is not pooping? winked
    4. 0
      13 May 2015 18: 37
      Kars, where are you harnessing to? like a man sane, it is not clear that this is a prototype? fellow
    5. +2
      14 May 2015 14: 38
      Quote: Kars
      A tank that has not passed the State Test cannot be considered ready.

      I’ll clarify that it cannot be considered ready for MASS PRODUCTION. Specify what it cannot be considered ready for. Here it is quite ready for trial operation.
  38. +3
    13 May 2015 14: 36
    The newest "Armata" is a huge cobblestone in the anthill of foreign tank experts. A properly promoted PR company gave this project extra points fellow Let them now fear the increased armored power of Russia am
  39. +2
    13 May 2015 15: 35
    about the engine in front (like on Merkava) I read that there are two serious shortcomings in this.
    The survivability of the tank is reduced. I got into the motor, the tank stopped and then more than once and twice did get into it. And with a rear location with numerous injuries and hits, the tank can move. Like the Israelis, instead of the Merkavas, they are still thinking of creating something.
    The second drawback is that heated air rises from the windshield and makes it difficult to aim. For aimed shooting, you have to turn the tower to the side. It turns out to the enemy a few board needs to be substituted.
    Taken from here
    http://nnm.me/blogs/OlDi/konstruktivnye-uyazvimosti-osnovnoy-boevoy-mashiny-aoi-
    merkava-mk-4-okonchanie /
    1. +9
      13 May 2015 17: 24
      for 2nd 12th:
      I read your link.
      The author considers hypothetical options.
      In numerous real combat experience, the front
      the location of the engine did not make problems, and security
      Merkava-3 -4 against ATGMs and RPGs was high.
      Tank duel by OBPS from close range really
      may cause engine damage, but it's still better
      than the penetration of the rod directly into the fighting compartment.
      Abrams frontal protection is higher than that of Merkava - the author is right in this.
      But Abrams is much weaker protected from the sides and from behind.
      There is no 100% optimal layout solution for all options
      military operations.
      1. +1
        13 May 2015 19: 00
        Quote: voyaka uh
        There is no 100% optimal layout solution for all options
        military operations.

        : Alexey, here comes the "professor", and spoil everything ... (like Rzhevsky) laughing
      2. 0
        13 May 2015 19: 14
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Tank duel by OBPS from close range really
        may cause engine damage, but it's still better
        than the penetration of the rod directly into the fighting compartment.

        If the designer Merkava really thought that the engine of the tank for the bops was an obstacle, then they would not have put extra armor between the engine room and the fighting compartment. 8cm - if my memory serves me right. And to transfer this armor plate to the nose (so that the bop and engine would not hurt) is impossible, since the nose is already overweight with the forward transmission.
        1. +1
          14 May 2015 09: 25
          for Bad_gr:

          You're right. OBPS easily breaks through the engine. And vertical
          The 2nd armor plate performs an important function of the final defense.
          But the ceramics of the front armor plate, shattering to smithereens,
          already significantly slows down the "scrap". All together provides
          what was required - the rod does not fly into the fighting compartment.

          The layout of Almaty, in general, I like.
          I would still prefer "in Merkavian": engine, then uninhabited
          tower with AZ, then - the crew (in the stern). And the back exit.
          But this certainly has some disadvantages ...
      3. 0
        13 May 2015 19: 45
        Quote: voyaka uh
        Tank duel by OBPS from close range really
        may cause engine damage, but it's still better
        than the penetration of the rod directly into the fighting compartment.

        Or perhaps the priority was placed on the opportunity to make an exit in the stern of the tank and put several soldiers there, or that allows the soldiers to be evacuated from under fire.
        1. +1
          14 May 2015 09: 14
          Crew survival was paramount.
          Add. infantry squad landing was relevant until replaced
          120 mm gun with 105. Shelving with shells in
          the back of the steel was wider and the passage in the middle was compressed.
          Today in Merkava-4 you can put a maximum of 3 infantrymen
          in bronics closely squatting and one extra. person in the fighting compartment
          (usually an artillery fire spotter).
      4. 0
        14 May 2015 14: 40
        Quote: voyaka uh
        and security
        Merkava-3 -4 against ATGMs and RPGs was high.

        Here it is necessary to clarify whether it was the engine in front that defended Merkavu, or still some other protection elements?
  40. The comment was deleted.
  41. +1
    13 May 2015 23: 21
    It is very important that the T-14 will have an APU: saving engine resource, and improved camouflage when operating electronics. The T-14 is showing good promise: the Construllers have done a great job. Would bring all the "bells and whistles" ...
  42. 0
    14 May 2015 00: 35
    It’s interesting, how will the FCT barrel be changed remotely after overheating too? The article is good, the tank is breakthrough and the machine gun is clearly not consistent.
  43. 0
    14 May 2015 00: 43
    A 152 mm gun will be put on Armata on subsequent models of cheers !!! laughing
  44. avt158
    -2
    14 May 2015 04: 03
    Three people have one way out. The shell under the shoulder of the tower, the barrel went into the commander's hatch. An acoustic shock, inside a panic, it’s good if you don’t burn yet.
  45. 0
    14 May 2015 04: 29
    Dear experts of military observation, I need your help .... We need the names of the best examples of Russian military equipment ... a tank, plane and ship of the Navy. There is no question with the tank, it’s an armata, but there was a hitch with the planes and the ship, there are so many that just get lost. Please, if it’s not difficult to discard the names in a personal .... Thank you soldier
  46. Lakotachief
    -1
    14 May 2015 11: 56
    Outwardly, of course, not ice, angular, like a chopped ax No. . Could make more squat and streamlined. Well, okay, the developers know better. Tanchik is generally innovative in general, although the idea of ​​an uninhabited tower originally belongs to the Americans, who are developing their MBT of the future: http://btvt.narod.ru/1/gen4.htm here is a video: https://www.youtube.com / watch? v = 2AZe8jOuGpo
  47. 0
    14 May 2015 15: 00
    I wanted to ask - how vulnerable is suo viburnum to shelling armata?
    it sticks out not weakly, any partisan can get out of a berdanka.
    it’s interesting to know at least how much the bursts withstand fire withstand at 5.45, 7.62 mm,
    including armor-piercing bullets
  48. +1
    14 May 2015 15: 12
    A new technique appears, which means the military-industrial complex has begun its revival. I would like to quickly forget the bitter experience of the 90s and not repeat the mistakes. To put on stream the production of such weapons, one needs scientific and technical + production potential, and Russia has it.
    1. 0
      14 May 2015 15: 18
      in order not to make mistakes, DO NOT FORGET them
  49. Rex
    +1
    14 May 2015 15: 43
    Here is the photo for the comparative dimensions of the T-14.
    They wrote that there would be a test program outside the CVO
  50. +1
    14 May 2015 16: 00
    "Probably, perhaps, there are rumors" - one water in the article for the lack of official information.
  51. 0
    14 May 2015 16: 10
    Quote: avt158
    Three people have one way out. The shell under the shoulder of the tower, the barrel went into the commander's hatch. An acoustic shock, inside a panic, it’s good if you don’t burn yet.

    If you see everything exactly like this, then what should you do, for example, if you have a car and you need to drive it n number of kilometers. and there is one spare wheel, there are no workshops on the road.
    There are a lot of variables in your statement or a simple “if”.
  52. 0
    14 May 2015 16: 10
    Quote: opus
    Why not Japanese, or EEC?


    Why not SSSRovsky, I have "Electronics 35" good They gave him a gift for 17 or 18 years, he graduated from school, then the Institute, now the son is playing around and is happy because the battery and the mains and the green numbers are on, he has been plowing for 26 years and nothing, hi
  53. 0
    14 May 2015 16: 17
    Quote: voyaka uh

    The layout of Almaty, in general, I like.
    I would still prefer "in Merkavian": engine, then uninhabited
    tower with AZ, then - the crew (in the stern). And the back exit.
    But this certainly has some disadvantages ...

    How about "The new T-14 tank will be manufactured with guns of different calibers"
    We are talking about the possibility of installing a 125A2 gun of 82 mm caliber instead of a 2 mm caliber gun of the 83A152 type.
    ...
    The fact is that the 2A83 tank gun of 152 mm caliber was tested for the “Object 195” (T-95, R&D “Improvement-88”), and went through the entire test cycle. For it, as part of the Grifel development work, new types of ammunition were developed, including armor-piercing finned sub-caliber, which, as Rogozin said, provides armor penetration of steel armor more than a meter thick. New types of high-explosive and cumulative ammunition and a new guided missile launched through the gun barrel have also been developed.
    ...
    http://interpolit.ru/blog/armata_gotovitsja_k_proryvu/2015-05-14-5072

    It might also be interesting to read http://yablor.ru/blogs/tank-t-95-obekt-195-proekt-priobretaet-realnie-och/137402
    7 Tank T-95 (Object 195) - the project takes on real shape from 26.03.2011/XNUMX/XNUMX
    ...
    The main armament of the tank consists of a 152 mm cannon (2A83, “Plant No. 9”, VNIITM), the auxiliary armament of a 30 mm automatic cannon. Fire control system based on multi-channel sighting and observation systems with integrated images of different ranges. The developer of the sighting system was KMZ OJSC; for the thermal imaging channel it was planned to use a Russian-made FPU NPO Orion. Electrical equipment and TIUS elements were manufactured by NPO Elektromashina.
    ...

  54. 0
    14 May 2015 16: 35
    Corrected the address from the post above

    yablor.ru/blogs/tank-t-95-obekt-195-proekt-priobretaet-realnie-och/1374027
  55. 0
    14 May 2015 20: 30
    But I still can’t understand everything from the ZPU. What caliber and why is it directed away from the panorama optics?
  56. 0
    14 May 2015 23: 05
    Who cares, it’s now convenient for the three of us to get drunk in a tank! drinks laughing
  57. kig
    0
    15 May 2015 10: 42
    What is this niche to the right of the cannon? if a shell hits there (and it will definitely hit there), then it has nowhere to go. only forward, that is, inside the tower.
  58. 0
    15 May 2015 11: 16
    Nice car
  59. 0
    15 May 2015 14: 23
    I also think the modularity of the valve design and a single platform is a huge plus. And the question is not even about changing modules in the field, but more about unification during production. That is, to create, say, 3-4 fundamentally different machines, it is necessary to perform from 60 to 80% of the same operations. It is great! This is speed and a very serious reduction in the cost of production. And subsequent operation will be easier, because the bulk of the parts are of the same type, with the exception of combat modules, but let the crews learn this. And the examples of the auto industry are clear, combining efforts to create unified platforms, and everyone can hang up the 2 frills as they please. A striking example is the platform of commercial vehicles Mercedes Sprinter, WV Crafter, Renault, Peugeot - these are all essentially 1 car, because there is one platform. If you think about how much money is saved... Otherwise, everyone would have their own platform. It will be the same with armature! And this is ZBS Yes
  60. 0
    15 May 2015 15: 16
    What about
    The development of ammunition for Armata tanks is carried out by Rosatom specialists.
    http://www.rg.ru/2015/05/14/armata-site.html
    ...
    It has long been an open secret that conventional explosives are used, among other things, to initiate the detonation of a nuclear warhead. However, they are ordinary only in that their explosion is a chemical and not a nuclear reaction. But in terms of their properties, they still differ significantly from the explosives that, for example, are used to fill cannon shells. They have a completely different energy.

    It is, of course, unrealistic to transfer technologies used in nuclear munition fuses one-to-one into ammunition for tank guns. First of all, by price, otherwise one shell may cost more than a tank. But relying on the existing technical potential is quite realistic, which is what Rosatom specialists did when creating shells for the Armata tank.

    Everything related to the new ammunition is classified even more than the design and performance characteristics of the new armored vehicles. One can only assume that the power of a conventional high-explosive projectile and an armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile will become no worse than its Western counterparts. This means that there will be no need to “burn through” the armor with a cumulative jet, which, as is known, is effectively destroyed today by means of dynamic protection. The main thing is to hit the target with the projectile. And then - a powerful explosion will destroy all active-passive protection, all external optical-electronic surveillance systems, and, most likely, elements of the tank's chassis.
    ...
  61. 0
    15 May 2015 17: 50
    And without screens the car is more beautiful, much more beautiful!
  62. 0
    15 May 2015 19: 51
    For friends. So many interesting things have been said - a carriage and a small cart. And for what reason????? ARMATA tank. So what??????? Like he's so-so. This and that. And if you really look and evaluate.???? So this is all a show and stuffing in the media - another advertising company. No more. ARMATA - based on all the analyzes - this is pure CONCENTRATE CAR - sorry - CONCEPT TANK, That's it. CONCEPT is tested. How accepted, what they will say. Another stuffing. And WE all began to talk about it together and seriously. Well, everyone understands, even on Military Materials (who are interested, you can look at them) they found a lot of shortcomings. There's even one niche on the tower -...... What can I say. It's just a projectile attractor. Well, there is no need to talk further. And you are all about the gun. God be with her. Whatever it was, they stuck it in, nothing more. and the engine, just like there were a lot of them in the warehouse, was put in. And you are all a diesel turbine. This is the concept - that's the main thing - the rest will follow over time.
  63. sims2000
    -1
    15 May 2015 21: 41
    The chassis seems to be normal, but the turret... Some kind of sharaga... Zaman is still like that... It seems like there should be sights there or what? Don't know...
  64. 0
    15 May 2015 21: 58
    50/50
    on the one hand, it’s good that at least someone is thinking about the possibility of a new layout in the tank, given its presence in the theater of operations

    Well, on the other hand, dear friends, look how much money was invested in this!
    what do we get out of this?! super controversial option! and not in the best performance

    After leaking the photo before the parade, I looked at a couple of sites where gun lovers gather, I can say everything there without any cheers for patriotism and other things, they calmly criticized this “miracle”. No chance.

    Most of the complaints are about the turret, although initially the whole feature should have been in the chassis...
    The project is still very crude, it still takes a long time to bring it to fruition...
  65. 0
    15 May 2015 23: 31
    Read what they write in Novaya Gazeta about “Armata”, it seems that the person is simply poisoned by the poison of hatred towards Russia, the poison is directly spraying from his mouth, read, here is the link http://www.novayagazeta.ru/comments/68416. html
  66. +1
    15 May 2015 23: 41
    And the comments below, this will JUST BLOW UP!!!!!, there is a bunch of freaks living in our country and despising it!! READ. THEY DIDN'T GO TO THE PARADE, FOR THEM WE LOST THE WAR.
  67. 0
    15 May 2015 23: 41
    And the comments below, this will JUST BLOW UP!!!!!, there is a bunch of freaks living in our country and despising it!! READ. THEY DIDN'T GO TO THE PARADE, FOR THEM WE LOST THE WAR.
  68. 0
    16 May 2015 05: 54
    Don’t listen to this nonsense - Yasha Kedmi: about the front engine, and about the rear doors of the T-14, and about all his assessments
    http://warfiles.ru/show-88185-yakov-kedmi-armata-na-dva-pokoleniya-obognala-drug
    ie-tanki.html
    Here is the real assessment of the T-14:
    http://www.novayagazeta.ru/comments/68416.html?print=1
    1. +1
      16 May 2015 09: 24
      Quote: fider
      Here is the real assessment of the T-14:

      In your eyes.
      But in fact, we saw something even cooler. Did not impress . lol
      hi
      1. 0
        17 May 2015 13: 15
        Cynic
        Not in my eyes, but according to the assessment of a competent specialist whom I trust.
        1. 0
          17 May 2015 15: 26
          Quote: fider
          and according to a competent specialist

          I could have said that _ In his eyes , but to be honest, it’s demagoguery.
          It has already been said here, and more than once, that what we know about Armata is what we see and nothing more, and what can we say about a car that has not undergone a full run-in? Never mind !
          Let's remember the same T-80U, how many years passed before it acquired its final form. How many childhood illnesses did he have?
          And yet, Armata, this is a platform and expecting it to be the BEST as a tank is not on friendly terms with reality. True, at this stage, while he is the only one, this is quite achievable.
          A station wagon will never be better than a purpose built car.
          But the platform always allows you to assemble the required configuration for the required tasks, which is very expensive if done separately.
          hi
  69. 0
    17 May 2015 14: 35
    And yet, where is the third one hiding? It looks like they are sitting across, but if something happens, he jumps out through the driver’s hatch. And the tower is bullshit in my opinion. It is not for nothing that Rogozin said that the possibility of installing a 152mm cannon is being considered. Isn’t it a bit fat to make 125 and then start redoing it right away? Rather, this is a ceremonial picture, and on normal military vehicles they will put something else. But in reality this will not happen very, very soon, unfortunately. And it immediately struck me that the tank’s hull was either already from the 90s, or much higher.
  70. 0
    31 January 2018 22: 40
    Something is wrong with the armature.
    There is too much air in the tank, it is not compact.
    He's not promising.

"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"