Military Review

Representative of the manufacturing plant: Deliveries of T-14 Armata tanks to the troops can begin at any time

129
It is known that the latest Russian will again take part in the Victory Parade on May 9, 2016 Tanks “Armata” (T-14). At the same time, the Deputy General Director of Uralvagonzavod Aleksey Zharich reports that the tanks are undergoing an extreme stage of testing, after which the T-14 will be put into service and carried out their serial deliveries.


From the statement of the official representative of the manufacturer for the newspaper "News":
The tests of "Almaty" are going according to schedule, there are no problems with this. (Serial deliveries) can begin at any time, as soon as the customer wants it.


According to the latest data, about two dozen Armata T-14 tanks are tested in the military.



Last year, T-14 “Armata” tanks appeared before a wide audience during a parade in honor of the Victory 70 anniversary celebration. The passage of the newest Russian tanks in Red Square aroused great interest both in Russia itself and abroad. Not without statements from liberal authors in the style of "Armata - cardboard layout." However, after some time, the liberal authors diminished the creative fervor of this nature, seeing that the “cardboard mock-up” aptly shoots targets at a special test site.
Photos used:
http://photocorrespondent.com
129 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Igor Pushkino
    Igor Pushkino April 15 2016 12: 42
    +30
    Good luck!
    1. Stalker.1977
      Stalker.1977 April 15 2016 12: 49
      +20
      Not without statements from liberal authors in the style of "Armata - cardboard layout"

      Our cardboard is so steel laughing
      1. cniza
        cniza April 15 2016 12: 52
        +15
        Less attention to liberals, more attention to our army and navy.
      2. poquello
        poquello April 15 2016 12: 56
        +15
        Quote: Stalker.1977
        Not without statements from liberal authors in the style of "Armata - cardboard layout"

        Our cardboard is so steel laughing

        and T90 no - can not knock out
      3. Observer2014
        Observer2014 April 15 2016 13: 14
        +7
        "Representative of the manufacturing plant: Deliveries of T-14 Armata tanks to the troops can begin at any time"
        And let us (including the site administration) involve in the search and publication of all the "expers" who tried to "crumble" here and there on "Armata", that it ("Armata") was supposedly made of cardboard and still very "raw" and so on. etc hi
        Yes, grandmother and St. George’s Day! laughing
        1. Prapor-527
          Prapor-527 April 15 2016 19: 09
          +5
          Here "Mechanic" was the main specialist in "Armata", cheerfully asserted that we would not see the tank at the 2015 Victory Parade for various reasons ... What is his "nickname" now?
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. alexmach
              alexmach April 15 2016 21: 14
              +3
              Yeah .. either using like 95% of users dynamically issued IP ...
    2. Michael67
      Michael67 April 15 2016 12: 53
      +6
      "(Serial deliveries) can start any time the customer wants it."
      And what does "want" mean? I ordered it, so I wanted it. Misunderstanding.
      And there are more and faster such tanks.
      1. vell.65
        vell.65 April 15 2016 14: 43
        0
        Quote: Michael67
        And what does "want" mean? I ordered it, so I wanted it. Misunderstanding.

        Pennies are needed for the order, but they may not always be available. hi
      2. Ezhaak
        Ezhaak April 15 2016 19: 10
        +2
        Quote: Michael67
        I ordered it, so I wanted it. Misunderstanding.

        Not just "ordered", but also paid. Did you like yesterday's stories of hard workers about unpaid wages? But people worked, manufactured products. Would you agree to work for the "pretty eyes" built by the director? I doubt it.
    3. Proxima
      Proxima April 15 2016 12: 56
      +6
      Quote: Igor Pushkino
      Good luck!

      The full-scale serial production of "Armata" would have already begun. Then the so-called "point of no return" will already be passed and it will be possible to breathe easy. Already, the cost of the T-14 is $ 7 million. When the series begins, its cost will decrease, as experts say, by almost three times. Then it will already be possible to think about the planned series of 2300 pieces. Hurry, hurry ...
      1. activator
        activator April 15 2016 16: 13
        +3
        Quote: Proxima
        Already, the cost of T-14 is equal to 7 million dollars. When the series begins, its cost will decrease, as experts say, almost three times. Then it will already be possible to think about the planned series in 2300 pcs. Hurry, hurry ...

        Do you really think that such a tank can cost 2,3 lyama dollars? Dreamer you however ...
        1. Aleksey_K
          Aleksey_K April 15 2016 20: 59
          +2
          Quote: activator
          Quote: Proxima
          Already, the cost of T-14 is equal to 7 million dollars. When the series begins, its cost will decrease, as experts say, almost three times. Then it will already be possible to think about the planned series in 2300 pcs. Hurry, hurry ...

          Do you really think that such a tank can cost 2,3 lyama dollars? Dreamer you however ...

          At the moment, the T-14 tank costs 250 million rubles. (a little over 3.5 million dollars). There is an official message about its value.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Prapor-527
            Prapor-527 April 17 2016 11: 40
            0
            Journalists once again enrage - comment about "Armata" against the background of the T-90SM video ...
    4. GYGOLA
      GYGOLA April 15 2016 12: 59
      +1
      "cardboard mock-up" shoots accurately at targets on a special testing ground.
      That accurately shoots it pleases, but the leftover sediment requires a refutation of the cardboard. Have you experienced this?
      1. Voyager
        Voyager April 16 2016 08: 46
        0
        And what do you think? wink
        1. GYGOLA
          GYGOLA April 16 2016 17: 42
          0
          I think a lot of things. But I always prefer to get detailed information.
    5. max702
      max702 April 15 2016 13: 26
      +5
      (Serial deliveries) can begin at any time as soon as the customer wants.
      Uh .. Quite recently, a representative of the plant stated that "Armata" ALREADY serially produced ...
      1. Error
        Error April 15 2016 13: 44
        0
        At last! The main thing is to stop the modernization of the T72 B3 and have already begun to equip the most technologically advanced tank in the world! And when at least some similar analogue comes out, we had about 2,5 thousand
    6. avt
      avt April 15 2016 14: 11
      +5
      Quote: Igor Pushkino
      Good luck!

      But with a 152mm gun!
    7. RUS96
      RUS96 April 15 2016 14: 40
      +5
      I just want to say: "Lucky tankmen, the whole world will see" laughing soldier
      1. Kasym
        Kasym April 15 2016 18: 48
        +3
        I remember that the T-64A, T-72 and T-80 on sea trials passed 12tys.km .; including sands, rugged terrain, heat and frost. Half a year they drove all over the Union in the early 70s, including firing ranges. Interestingly, the T-14 in our sands and dust dragged to test? hi
        1. co-creator
          co-creator April 15 2016 19: 30
          +3
          Quote: Kasym
          T-14 drag into our sands and dust to test?

          May have already experienced. The landfill is closed.
  2. Askiz
    Askiz April 15 2016 12: 45
    +4
    at this parade I want to see not "Armata", but Armada
    1. Alexey M
      Alexey M April 15 2016 12: 48
      +3
      There are never too many tanks ....
  3. ALLxANDr
    ALLxANDr April 15 2016 12: 46
    +3
    Great car !!!
    1. code54
      code54 April 16 2016 12: 37
      0
      Great! Just looking at her and I just can’t get used to what it is OUR! ;))) So used to the silhouette of our tanks from the T-55 starting!
  4. salad
    salad April 15 2016 12: 46
    +4
    Well, that's great smile
  5. lis-ik
    lis-ik April 15 2016 12: 49
    +23
    that the tanks pass the extreme stage of testing,

    How tired of the distortion of the Russian language, the word "extreme" is already being inserted into place and out of place. Have written at least "the final stage".
    1. lelikas
      lelikas April 15 2016 16: 58
      +13
      Quote: lis-ik
      How tired of the distortion of the Russian language, the word "extreme" is already being inserted into place and out of place. Have written at least "the final stage".

      -Gold words !
  6. Alexey M
    Alexey M April 15 2016 12: 49
    +1
    What is characteristic of some cars without a body kit. Three with a body kit, and the others have recently been driven to see.
    1. lelikas
      lelikas April 15 2016 16: 54
      +1
      Quote: Alexey M
      What is characteristic of some cars without a body kit. Three with a body kit, and the others have recently been driven to see.

      the body kit goes separately - and without it it hardly fits the width of the railway platform.
  7. Lanista
    Lanista April 15 2016 12: 51
    +4
    Any moment has come! It is time to start deliveries in warheads.
    1. Ezhaak
      Ezhaak April 16 2016 10: 25
      0
      Quote: Lanista
      It’s time to start deliveries in warheads

      Do you already know the patron who is ready to pay for these deliveries? Without payment, goods cannot be taken out of the store. If only correctly steal.
  8. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 April 15 2016 12: 51
    +3
    Times change.
    In the USSR, this tank would be a big secret.
  9. Engineer
    Engineer April 15 2016 12: 52
    0
    (Serial deliveries) can begin at any time as soon as the customer wants.

    And what the customer does not want?
    1. Verdun
      Verdun April 15 2016 22: 43
      0
      The customer does not want to overpay too much. I would like to be cheaper. Tanks, of course, are also needed, but not only them are needed for the army and navy. And "tests are proceeding according to the schedule" - it means not finished. Even if they go well, they must be completed.
  10. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter April 15 2016 12: 59
    +2
    That would be a tank biathlon to "drive" such a distance. Out of competition, but to clearly show all its charms. Let the experts then discuss how many conventional tanks are needed to stop one like this.
    1. 2s1122
      2s1122 April 15 2016 14: 30
      0
      So what’s the matter, Shoigu needs to be offered. Let the foreigners defend with exponential firing yes
    2. Cat man null
      Cat man null April 15 2016 14: 31
      +1
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      That would be a tank biathlon to "drive" such a distance

      - for what, excuse me, purpose?

      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      to clearly show all their charms

      - Girls have "charms", the tank doesn't have them ..

      Here is just interesting:

      - Where can you show the work of KAZ at the "biathlon"?
      - Where to show the advantages of the Armata in target detection at the "biathlon"?
      - where (and so on ...)?

      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Let the experts then discuss how many ordinary tanks are needed to stop this.

      - colleague, "experts" are already .. discussing, got it already and "biathlon" with the participation of Armata will not subtract anything here and will not add

      IMHO yes
    3. Alekseev
      Alekseev April 15 2016 16: 05
      +3
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      That would be at the tank biathlon

      Tank biathlon - there is an event to popularize military service, especially in tank troops.
      Educational event.
      But for serious state and military trials, spectators need. And compliance with the given parameters is tested there much more stringently.
      It is also not necessary for anyone to know in detail the characteristics and features of the device of the new combat vehicle.
      It is an axiom.
      For now, it’s enough for us to know that all the advanced systems available in tank building: combined armor, DZ, active protection, a modern layout, a powerful power plant, communications equipment, aiming and surveillance devices are used there in full and on a new one compared to the T-90 level.
  11. Wedmak
    Wedmak April 15 2016 13: 00
    0
    Now we are waiting for the first train with fresh cars in some sort of Moscow region.
  12. x.andvlad
    x.andvlad April 15 2016 13: 09
    +2
    The tests of "Almaty" are going according to schedule, there are no problems with this. (Serial deliveries) can begin at any time, as soon as the customer wants it.
    It seems that the customer will want after the training system for the new generation of crews in sufficient quantities for the aircraft will be established. This is an important issue. The crews should be exclusively professionals in their field with a certain degree of admission to the secret technique. Perhaps in the first stage, only officers.
    Corresponding amendments to the tactics of combat employment of these machines will also be required.
    All these questions require a certain amount of time. I want to believe that they are being solved in parallel.
  13. magician
    magician April 15 2016 13: 15
    +1
    Scary news for NATO countries in Europe. Urgently needed to increase and cut the budget for defense, the Russians are coming! The Baltic States will sing tomorrow: they saw the T-14 brigade on the border.
    1. Voyager
      Voyager April 16 2016 08: 50
      +2
      I thought the first were Ukrainians ...
  14. Max40
    Max40 April 15 2016 13: 23
    +1
    Ready it is clear. But with what barrel are they ready to supply?
    1. Wedmak
      Wedmak April 15 2016 13: 35
      +2
      But with what barrel are they ready to supply?

      125 mm, since 152 mm is unlikely to be in the near future.
  15. PKK
    PKK April 15 2016 13: 24
    +1
    Quote: Igor Pushkino
    Cinema RU Today, 12:42 ↓ New

    Good luck!

    And let the crews successfully master a new car, new tactics, use tanks to the fullest possible!
  16. mamont5
    mamont5 April 15 2016 13: 28
    +3
    Quote: Alexey M
    There are never too many tanks ....

    Unfortunately, it happens. Everything is good in moderation.
  17. shinobi
    shinobi April 15 2016 13: 32
    +3
    However, they will now begin to throw all kinds of sofa "experts" at the fan. I think the experience of Syria is taken into account. I would run it in combat, where the thread is not far away.
  18. engineer74
    engineer74 April 15 2016 13: 46
    +1
    Not in vain, I think, the 1st Guards Tank Army was reanimated! Deserved army on new technology! fellow
  19. X Y Z
    X Y Z April 15 2016 14: 21
    0
    And whoever doubts, can put on a lancer uniform, saddle a horse and try to chop plywood with a blade in his hand. Some have already tried, failed.
  20. From Samara
    From Samara April 15 2016 14: 22
    0
    To test them in real combat conditions ...

    I wonder what for the Marine Corps Modification will be?
  21. Vadim237
    Vadim237 April 15 2016 14: 58
    -4
    Something less and less hard to believe that there is a complex on the Armata that destroys RPGs and ATGMs on approach to the tank - the guides in the tower niche are very similar to the "Tucha" smoke screen system.
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null April 15 2016 15: 11
      +7
      Quote: Vadim237
      guides in the tower niche are very similar to the "Tucha" smoke screen

      - because round and the cap on the end? laughing
      - I have to upset you: this is still KAZ. A cloud is smaller in size and does not shoot sideways, but directly, and .. in short, it is not a cloud No.

      Vadim, would you at least read Vika about Afghanistan, or something .. there’s a quite sensible article on this subject ..

      "Cloud" ... YYYYYYY laughing laughing laughing
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 15 2016 16: 12
        -5
        Well, if you compare this system with Drozd 2, then this system has two grenades and there are less covers on the rails - just like on Tuche or the Curtain rails, and the defeat of the BOPS by shrapnel seems unlikely - here, most likely, along with the RPGs and ATGMs destroyed by infantry in a radius of 50 meters can kill, especially about such a component of Afghanistan as mortars that destroy shells when approaching a tank, no one officially spoke to either the designers or the military, even in the Military Reception, they simply listed - armor, dynamic protection, electronic warfare system and active complex protection, which includes sets of smoke and aerosol grenades.
        1. Cat man null
          Cat man null April 15 2016 16: 24
          -1
          Vadim, you .. miracle love

          Quote: http://topwar.ru/31710-sistemy-aktivnoy-zaschity-bronetehniki.html
          The latest active defense model in development is the Russian KAZ “Afganit” Kolomna KBM, designed for installation on combat vehicles created as part of the promising armored platform “Armata”. From open sources of information, only the millimeter range of its radar is known, the near intercept line and the maximum intercept speed of armor-piercing sub-caliber shells - 1700 m / s. Nevertheless, it can be assumed that, unlike domestic and foreign predecessors, it is for the first time planned to use protective ammunition with a warhead type warhead described in Russian patent RU 2263268 in Afganit. The launcher consists of a carriage rotating in vertical and horizontal the plane. Additional guidance of the attack nucleus on the target is carried out using the programmed initiation of one of the fuses located in the form of a matrix on the back of the explosive block of the warhead

          This is from an article with topwar, if you do not understand .. and read the article on Wik already ..

          The tower on the right is larger. Color marked:

          1 - review cameras
          2 - receiving antenna of the active protection complex of the upper hemisphere
          3 - radar of the active protection system "Afganit"
          4 - charge block complex active protection of the upper hemisphere
          5 - block of charges of the active protection complex "Afganit"
          6 - a rifle slot, from which the striking element of the KAZ "Afghanit" flies out. Black lid can rotate 360 ​​degrees to direct the element to the desired direction. Each tube contains several tens of charges
          1. alexmach
            alexmach April 16 2016 11: 07
            +1
            I wonder what will happen to all this equipment if a pair of 30mm high-explosive shells hits the tower?
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 April 16 2016 18: 02
              0
              Half of them will fail.
    2. opus
      opus April 15 2016 17: 27
      +2
      Quote: Vadim237
      in the niche, the towers are very similar to the "Tucha" smoke screen.

      what you show is a variation of "Drozd-2"
      KAZ "anti-shell mortars" under the T-14 tower (finish off the ATGM and BOPS), are similar to the shots for KAZ "Drozd-2" ... a protective charge is fired and at a distance of 6-7 m from the mortar cut striking a fragmentation field attacking ammunition.

      at the top:

      installation of smokemetal aerosol emissions (The complex is safe for environmental infantry), as in Koreans


      Afganit spotted by ATGM radars and direction finders, and then sprayed only 2 kg of the cheapest aerosol from a mixture of sand and metal sawdust (Aluminosilicate microspheres with filiform metal fillers, which serve as a cloud of dipole reflectors
      ) will create a cloud that is opaque in all spectra, which will cover the surface of the earth for about 2000 m2 of area. The area of ​​Armata itself is about 32 m2, i.e. the probability of a "blind hit" Javelin no more than 1,6%
      what next:
      blinding KAZ dramatically increases the efficiency of the dynamic and passive armoring of the tank, because ATGMs that have lost controllability will converge with the armor more often at not optimal sharp angles. For example, Javelin descends before approaching the target at an acute angle of about 13 ° and in the event of a missile blinding by Afganit, and as a consequence of the failure to perform the "rolling down the hill" maneuver to reach an angle of attack of 60 ° before hitting the target itself, then at the same 13 ° angle The Javelin hits the tank's ERA without presenting a big problem for the Malachite VDZ.
      The Afghanite "prefers" to confuse the attacking ammunition than to detonate it near him (infantry, electronics, radar, IR, Lasers, cameras - all of this can be damaged)
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 15 2016 19: 09
        -3
        You can’t find the painfully trimmed variation of Drozd - there is no official evidence that these mortars are designed to destroy flying shells, for obvious reasons, they most likely abandoned this system, as they refused the Arena.
        1. opus
          opus April 15 2016 20: 55
          0
          Quote: Vadim237
          Painfully trimmed variation Thrush do not find

          how is it "stripped down"?
          5 vs 4 tubes on each side?



          or 12 aerosol / smoke exhausters (T-14) versus 4x

          ?
          Radar "Drozd-2" (130m) does not stand next to AFAR radar (T-14) (This is that glde "cables")




          Research and development work "Sector-2N" was and is not in vain.
          New mv and tube material
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. Cat man null
            Cat man null April 15 2016 21: 03
            +1
            This .. dear .. looked at your comments - you, the campaign, know everything and everything wink

            The question is all-knowing: from what hangover did you even take that Afghanit and Drozd have something in common? Well, besides the fact that both this and that - KAZ tank?

            I look forward to a reasoned reply. I remind you: there is no publicly available data on Afghanit. From the word "in general".

            And?

            PS: Bernard Shaw - my fiery greetings laughing
            1. opus
              opus April 15 2016 21: 57
              +5
              Quote: Cat Man Null
              This .. dear

              I like your approach, dear.
              I have long wanted to tell you.
              1. I do not track down how you others and their grammatical errors, too.
              2.Although you wish, please.
              I looked at you and I see that you are generally the same "broad profile" (slightly different, but "profile" Blokher), though everything: Putin, the National Guard, Putin's correct privatization and so on, other sycophants.
              Typical repertoire of a political instructor. "Results of the week"?
              However, poor Cyril (Tu-22M3: is it time for retirement?) In how he spread it: both in grammar and in (well, etc.) .NO! But not to the point.

              So "he threw himself with kakshki" ...

              Quote: Cat Man Null
              The question, about the all-knowing: from what hangover did you even take, h

              From the same "hangover" you are our chatty "cat" (not castrated? No?), From which you show the world this pearl

              (about the impact core, already touched)
              "Rumors my friend, rumors"


              Quote: Cat Man Null
              PS: Bernard Shaw - my fiery greetings

              You will see the March torn cat at the garbage dump (after you finish broadcasting political information on the Internet) -tell hello (from me personally), otherwise we don’t intersect with them ...
              1. Cat man null
                Cat man null April 15 2016 22: 03
                +1
                Quote: opus
                I have long wanted to tell you ...

                - a wonderful answer. And, most importantly - strictly in essence laughing

                Thank you, you understand yes
                1. opus
                  opus April 15 2016 22: 17
                  +3
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  - a wonderful answer. And, most importantly - strictly in essence

                  learning
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  This .. dear .. looked at your comments - you, the campaign, know generally everything and everything

                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  Thank you, you understand

                  I had no doubts. If the political instructor chews, he will correct the mistakes, he will throw the "poop". The radar will turn on the troll, run "-" will deliver.
                  I am only glad to deliver the moral instruction satisfactorily.

                  Therefore, there was no fear.

                  How about the "shock core"?
                  or
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  shooting gap from which the striking element KAZ flies "Afghanite". Black lid can be rotated 360 degreesguiding the element in the right direction

                  I don't understand sho "flies out", the question is how (charging by creating increased pressure in the tube)
                  and I don’t understand WHY for 360 degrees? (In the port screens and the canopy of the tower to peel)?

                  or chew about
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  The structure of the gold and foreign exchange reserves of the Russian Federation:


                  -------------------
                  Probably say goodbye to the sim?
                  good luck to you.
                  how did you find the cat already? ... at the trash.
                  1. Cat man null
                    Cat man null April 15 2016 22: 23
                    +1
                    opusso don’t bother you so ..

                    You are not in a position to substantiate your fabrications, to say "I do not know" to you .. something does not allow wink

                    Do not be sad - with age it goes away .. usually yes

                    Quote: opus
                    Probably say goodbye to the sim?

                    - Duc, this .. I kind of already said goodbye ..

                    PS: And zasim - it’s still written together tongue
                    1. opus
                      opus April 15 2016 22: 40
                      +1
                      Quote: Cat Man Null
                      PS: And zasim - it’s still written together



                      ------------

                      Relax. I'm used to proving my words / thoughts. This is what I was taught.
                      Is it just worth the time?
                      1. Cat man null
                        Cat man null April 15 2016 22: 56
                        +1
                        Quote: opus
                        Is it just worth the time?

                        - not worth it

                        Quote: opus
                        I'm used to proving my words / thoughts

                        - this time did not work

                        Quote: opus
                        This and taught

                        - You were taught to throw feces, to hike. And find "knowledge" on the Internet .. you are our erudite laughing

                        All. I am done with you. Answer some other stupidity (more feces and more pictures, the main thing), and calm down.

                        You won. As always laughing
              2. Shark Lover
                Shark Lover April 16 2016 03: 37
                +1
                Elegantly answered, with pleasure read !!!! A huge plus !!
          3. Vadim237
            Vadim237 April 15 2016 22: 55
            0
            You look at the length of these shells and compare them with these 107 mm mortars twice as short - the design has low efficiency compared to Arena 2, in which the shells have a directed explosion and if the designers wanted to put intercepting shells on Armata, they would put containers from the Arena.
            1. opus
              opus April 15 2016 23: 11
              +1
              Quote: Vadim237
              You look at the length of these shells and compare with these 107 mm mortars twice as short

              1. What to look at (more specifically, I did not understand)
              2. The first atomic bombs were also very large. Now 8 ton F-16 carrier.
              3.Drozd is still the development of the "80s"
              4. The caliber of the thrush is 95 mm, the T-14 is 80 mm? (Offhand, too lazy to scale with a ruler)
              Quote: Vadim237
              has low efficiency compared to Arena 2,

              Well, "efficiency" is hardly applicable here, especially in conjunction with the caliber.
              "Thrush" -80 degrees (40/40) along the longitudinal axis of the tank

              Arena-2 = don't know what

              Arena-E?


              Quote: Vadim237
              and if the designers wanted to put intercepting shells on Armata, they would put containers from the Arena.

              find a lot of differences?

              Shl. about the "core" at the end of this film is crap ("I searched for a long time on the Internet, put your likes), about the core it is to the" cat ". And so it is more or less chewed



              1. Cat man null
                Cat man null April 15 2016 23: 26
                0
                Quote: opus
                find a lot of differences?

                - if you carefully watch the video "Complex of active protection of the tank" (from 12.30, 30 sec.), you will hear that Afganit "hits the projectile not with small fragments, but .. nucleus.. "

                This is what I call "rumored" wink

                Quote: opus
                Shl. about the "core" at the end of this film is crap ("I searched for a long time on the Internet, put your likes), about the core it is to the" cat "

                - Oh, managed to finish .. offset!
                - to the cat, to the cat .. under the tail laughing
                - also "searched for a long time on the Internet" and .. nothing worthy of trust, did not find .. pichalka sad



                A picture is beautiful yes
              2. Vadim237
                Vadim237 April 16 2016 10: 47
                0
                The guides in the tower niche in Armata are more than 100 millimeters even without a ruler, and as for the video, they confirmed that the fragmentation elements are ineffective against BOPS, about KAZ on Armata there are only speculation and reasoning.
  22. Vadim237
    Vadim237 April 15 2016 16: 57
    -2
    "Nevertheless, it can be assumed that, in contrast to domestic and foreign predecessors, in" Afganit "for the first time it is planned to use protective ammunition with a warhead of the shock core type described in the Russian patent RU 2263268. The launcher consists of a gun carriage rotating in a vertical and Additional aiming of the shock core at the target is carried out with the help of programmed initiation of one of the fuses, located in the form of a matrix on the back side of the explosive unit of the warhead "- Something that does not fit with mortars under the tower.
    "Shooting slot from which the striking element KAZ" Afghanit "flies out. The black cover is able to rotate 360 ​​degrees, directing the element in the right direction - And who or what turns this grant - there is a stepper motor in each mortar - when fired it will end For me, this "shooting slot" is a technological hole for manually removing the cover.
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null April 15 2016 17: 07
      0
      Quote: Vadim237
      And who or what turns this grant - there is a stepper motor in each mortar - when it is fired, it will end

      - And you, by the hour, are you not an American spy? No, what woodpecker The unbeliever Thomas is understandable. As for the spy, there are still doubts laughing

      Quote: Vadim237
      For me, this "arrow slot" is a technological hole for manually removing the cover

      - as well as the external laughing

      That's it, Vadim .. I'm tired of you .. you can't laugh so much - your stomach becomes sick yes
    2. opus
      opus April 15 2016 18: 06
      0
      Quote: Vadim237
      It is planned to use protective ammunition with a warhead of the type of shock core described in the Russian patent RU 2263268.


      RU 2263268 is jelly.

      here you have to grind such a mondule to the tower

      What's the point? what to "melt / wash out"?
      And with the spoke you still have to get (give the control unit, point the pe, pair / lead) into the attacking ammunition.
      enough time? computing power and RP radar enough?
      Executive mechanisms (azimuth, elevation angle) of the control system with KAZ will carry such a load (acceleration)

      "Why does a goat need a button accordion"? when the shrapnel scatters the ATGM (s) into the trash or misleads the "true
      "BOPS?
      and especially with guidance you don’t need to stir up
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 15 2016 19: 25
        -2
        The shrapnel will destroy the ATGM, but the BOPS is gone - the striking elements will simply ricochet against the cylindrical body of the "pin" and such shells, when bursting, can injure the infantry and damage nearby equipment and even the tank itself on which the system is mounted.
        1. opus
          opus April 15 2016 21: 05
          +2
          Quote: Vadim237
          damaging elements will simply ricochet against a cylindrical body

          they will impart momentum to the rod. this is enough to knock him off the "pantalyga"

          Quote: Vadim237
          and such shells at break can injure the infantry and damage nearby equipment and even the tank itself, on which the system stands.

          repeat
          Quote: opus
          The Afghanite "prefers" to confuse the attacking ammunition than to detonate it near him (infantry, electronics, radar, IR, Lasers, cameras - all of this can be damaged)

          KAZ is the last frontier that has broken through the BP.
          The tilt angle, sector and range of the shot are designed so as not to damage themselves and the infantry
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 April 15 2016 23: 39
            0
            The example with balls in the case of BOPS will not work - directional kinetic energy is too large - the deviation depends on the size, mass, speed, quantity, and also the location of the striking elements on the core, precisely along the axis length, it is impossible to guess where the fragments will go, as well as calculations for all available and promising cores, KAZ Drozd 2 could not cope with BOPS, so these fragmentation, mortar, and grenades will also not be able to - just do not twist both the same principle of operation and even if shrapnel fragments get to the right points of the core, then this will lead to a deviation from the axis by a maximum of a couple of degrees, but we know that modern BOPS has a ballistic cap with a damper that when meeting with armor will bring the core back to the axis, by the same couple of degrees.
            1. opus
              opus April 16 2016 00: 22
              0
              Quote: Vadim237
              directional kinetic energy too large

              Energy value SCALAR, the term "directional" is not very (not applicable)
              Are you probably talking about body impulse? CE is a vector quantity, the concept of "direction" is applicable to it

              Quote: Vadim237
              it’s precisely along the length of the axis that it’s impossible to guess where the fragments will go,

              just to hit the damaging element, preferably under 90g to the BOPSA velocity vector.
              will get, BOPS will "go away", that's enough.
              He breaks the crowbar in this way (at the beginning) .. not very

              Quote: Vadim237
              core back to the axis, at the same couple of degrees.

              this is for inclined armor

              =====================
              Contact 5


              DZ was supposed to give powerful lateral impulse to destabilize or destroy the core BOPS

              The cover of the DZ block is made of thick (about 20 mm) high-strength armor steel. Upon impact, the BPS generates a stream of high-speed fragments that detonate the charge. The impact on the BPS of the moving thick cover is sufficient, to reduce its armor-piercing characteristics.

              And this is not in the "flight" but already on the armor, when the generation actually began.
              1. Vadim237
                Vadim237 April 16 2016 10: 27
                0
                The fragmentation system of destruction for BOPS has a low efficiency, as you said "just to hit" the striking element, it is very unlikely that they will hit the right point; to protect the tank from BOPS, an active protection scheme based on the Arena is best suited, where instead of fragmentation striking elements into the core will hit a kilogram slab at an angle of 45 degrees to the core axis and this will give one hundred percent destruction of the BOPS on approach to the tank, and everything that is written about Afganit is unconfirmed rumors and assumptions of Western experts. There are no official characteristics of the complex from the developers.
                1. opus
                  opus April 16 2016 11: 49
                  +1
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  Fragmentation system

                  I would call it shrapnel.
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  has a low efficiency, as you said "if only to hit" the striking element, then it is very unlikely that they will hit the right point

                  Efficiency is hardly applicable. Probability is more preferable.
                  The hit point is not important. Flying lopm - the subject is quite long, the CM in the middle. accordingly, the hit of the damaging element at a point spaced from the CM at a distance L will give:
                  1. Impulse (will change the momentum of scrap, both in value and in vector)
                  2. The unfolding moment = m * L
                  3. Derivation will help
                  4. Aerodynamic forces of the movement medium will also try
                  All this together will give a change in the angle of encounter with the armor.
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  kilogram plate at an angle of 45 degrees to the axis of the core

                  ??

                  KAZ "Arena" is a protective ammunition "fired" from the cell, which is detonated at a distance from the object and forms a bunch of damaging elements that destroy the target on approaching the tank

                  The difference (on the knee): Thrush shoots the striking elements towards the target

                  the arena shoots ammunition with a pe above itself (to the side), after an explosion, which PEs fly towards the target.
                  Quote: Vadim237
                  and everything they write about afghanit

                  Well, the stump is clear.
                  That's why we write, think, think, argue here.
                  And some people (cats, for example) are looking for grammatical errors from those who write, argue, think, prove, express their opinion. B (h) that is.
                  Someone trains the brain, someone asshole
                  1. alexmach
                    alexmach April 16 2016 12: 39
                    +1
                    Flying lopm - the subject is quite long, the CM in the middle. accordingly, the hit of the damaging element at a point spaced from the CM at a distance L will give:


                    This is if you can even get into this scrap. Something tells me that the scrap flying out of the tank gun should fly at a distance of 2 kilometers no slower than the same shrapnel. Well, he is not only long but also thin.
                    1. opus
                      opus April 16 2016 13: 17
                      0
                      Quote: alexmach
                      This is if you can even get into this scrap.

                      stick the crowbar into the ground

                      take a gun (shotgun) and a rifle (rifled)

                      depart at 25-50m.
                      experiment.
                      with "flying" is not worth it. You have no control system, no radar, no ballistic computer.

                      Have you ever wondered why skeet shooting is carried out by shot / buckshot?



                      and this?



                      and what about the high-explosive fragmentation shells A3-ZS / OF-62P for the AK-726 and AK-176 gun mounts?


                      Quote: alexmach
                      and at a distance of 2 kilometers fly no slower than the same shrapnel. Well, he is not only long but also thin.

                      it flies at a speed of 1400m / s (at a meeting with a target, and 1700-1900 at the barrel cut), "buckshot" is within 300-450m / s.
                      what?
                      The law of conservation of momentum is satisfied in any collision


                      Off-center hit with the same the masses

                      it is seen that in a collision with different velocities (scalar quantity) and vectors (direction), the resulting V changes both in magnitude and direction.
                      It must be used correctly for different masses.
                      but this does not change the essence, billiards
                      1. alexmach
                        alexmach April 16 2016 13: 35
                        +1
                        depart at 25-50m.
                        experiment.
                        with "flying" is not worth it. You have no control system, no radar, no ballistic computer.


                        it flies at a speed of 1400m / s (at a meeting with a target, and 1700-1900 at the barrel cut), "buckshot" is within 300-450m / s.
                        what?
                        The law of conservation of momentum is satisfied in any collision


                        I have no doubt about the law of conservation of momentum, but the fact that a faster projectile can confidently hit a slower one, 3-5 times slower, is where doubts arise. Even with radar and JMA
                      2. opus
                        opus April 16 2016 13: 46
                        0
                        Quote: alexmach
                        hit slower while 3-5 times slower - this is where doubts arise. Even with radar and JMA

                        EKV speed (SM-3), at a finish of 3,2-4km / S, a satellite (BG of a ballistic missile) flying at a speed of 7,2-7,94km / s at a range of sqrt (400 km ^ 2 + 300km ^ 2) strikes (So, on my knee I figured), GBI, THAAD is the same.

                        Condition: so that the approach speed (the sum of the projections of the vectors V on the line m / y by two CMs) is not more than 10-12 km / s
                        Quote: alexmach
                        here doubts arise. Even with radar and JMA

                        If there is any doubt that "buckshot" (a bunch of submunitions) will hit the BOPS ...
                        Then I fantasies about "hitting a shock core (spoke in a scrap)" ...

                        I don’t comprehend at all. Let the percussion nucleus hit the plate, the flying one will be fired at the firing range ...
                        ---------------------
                        defeat at a distance of up to 30m from the protected object (MSA will capture over 150-300m).
                        A dozen (or maybe fifty) of the damaging elements, buckshots spit out.
                        The probability of interception is certainly not 1,0, or even 0,98.
                        How many I do not know (data did not open), Drozd: 0,7-09.
                        Yet 0,7 (70% count) is better than nothing?
                        or?
                      3. alexmach
                        alexmach April 16 2016 14: 10
                        +1
                        I’m not sure how correct it is to compare KAZ with these SM-3s. I see the latter as a significantly more complex system.

                        Then I fantasies about "hitting a shock core (spoke in a scrap)" ...

                        No, well, about the spoke, this is for cats.

                        The probability of interception is certainly not 1,0, or even 0,98.
                        How many I do not know (data did not open), Drozd: 0,7-09.
                        Yet 0,7 (70% count) is better than nothing?
                        or?


                        I can’t imagine how this probability can generally be estimated for OPS. If, as we said before, the crowbar can deviate by several degrees, then who is able to fix this deviation at all?
                      4. opus
                        opus April 16 2016 14: 18
                        0
                        Quote: alexmach
                        I’m not sure how correct it is to compare KAZ with these SM-3s. I see the latter as a significantly more complex system.

                        1. The principle is the same.
                        2. Of course difficult:
                        -in KAZ 50-30m interception, in a homogeneous environment, and in missile defense at a range of 500m (+/-) and in heterogeneous (atmosphere from 000 atm to 1, vacuum, approach time, etc.)
                        -KAZ intercepts objects with V 1,4 km / s, missile defense about 8 km / s
                        - It’s enough for KAZ to correct the flight of the BOPS (rebound, etc.), the missile defense must be DESTROYED by the warhead (if the nuclear warhead doesn’t fall to KVO 150 m, but 3 km away, this is certainly easier (for the object), but for the country ...)

                        Quote: alexmach
                        then who is able to fix this deviation at all?


                        armor.
                        What would happen like this


                        not so

                      5. Vadim237
                        Vadim237 April 16 2016 15: 53
                        0
                        You have in the first photo some kind of spaceship from a science fiction film - but definitely not armor with hits.
                      6. opus
                        opus April 16 2016 16: 27
                        0
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        You have some kind of spaceship in the first photo

                        thought the upper hemisphere of the tower Merkava4?

                        No? So I’ve made a mistake.
                        Then:

                        1 ricochet from an inclined frontal sheet, 2 penetration extra. Reservation defending the shoulder strap of the tower; 3 rebound from the tower. 4 penetration of the tower with the same shell in the thickest place.
                        Quote: Vadim237
                        These deviations can be detected by high-speed conventional and x-ray cameras.


                        1. what is the difference, who will "fix" them?, The main thing is that the BOPS velocity vector, its direction to change
                        2. For x-ray shooting, you need a source and a receiver (photographic plate, film), and the subject must be located m / a small distance (CT, fluorography). The x-ray is not light, does not reflect (almost)
                  2. Vadim237
                    Vadim237 April 16 2016 15: 55
                    -1
                    These deviations can be detected by high-speed conventional and x-ray cameras.
                2. Cat man null
                  Cat man null April 16 2016 14: 59
                  0
                  opus, ek poked you wink

                  Quote: opus
                  If there is any doubt that "buckshot" (a bunch of submunitions) will hit the BOPS ...
                  Then I fantasies about "hitting a shock core (spoke in a scrap)" ...

                  - correct doubts. Only you there incorrectly indicated the source .. here is the source (one of), for example:

                  http://topwar.ru/31710-sistemy-aktivnoy-zaschity-bronetehniki.html

                  ... it can be assumed that ... for the first time in “Afganit” it is planned to use protective ammunition with a warhead of the type of shock core described in the Russian patent RU 2263268. The launcher consists of a carriage rotating in the vertical and horizontal plane. Additional guidance of the attack nucleus on the target is carried out using the programmed initiation of one of the fuses located in the form of a matrix on the back of the explosive block of the warhead ...

                  On the one hand, this innovative solution is the most effective for the destruction of small-sized high-speed armor-piercing subcaliber shells. On the other hand, the use of a compact impact core instead of a spatial stream of fragments requires the KAZ radar and fire control system to implement a higher level of accuracy in determining the coordinates, speed and direction of flight of targets

                  - note, the author has already noted the difficulties in implementing such a scheme that you are swinging in all directions here yes
                  - since this is still nothing more than "the author's conjectures" (Andrey Vasiliev), I wrote at one time:

                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  - The thrush knocks the target with fragments, Afganit, rumored - shock core

                  Total:

                  - refute opportunity use of the "shock core" in the KAZ you cannot
                  - Your arguments boil down to the fact that "it does not happen, because it is impossible, nothing and never." Strong, let's face it, arguments wink
                  - attempts to throw feces and banana skins (instead of argumentation) do not honor you .. although I personally do not care, have fun laughing

                  Here, and the support team is already going:

                  Quote: alexmach
                  No, well, about the spoke it’s for cats

                  Funny you ..
                3. Vadim237
                  Vadim237 April 16 2016 16: 01
                  0
                  Too expensive and complex KAZ will turn out - using the shock core.
                4. opus
                  opus April 16 2016 17: 10
                  0
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  - correct doubts. Only you there incorrectly indicated the source .. here is the source (one of), for example:

                  Well, I didn’t want to answer. You have a classic diagnosis: ass.
                  you don’t argue, don’t prove, but b (h) dit after others, looking for mistakes (grammatical, for example) and "poop, his poop).
                  Moreover, Zh-bolik himself did not publish / write anything but political information.
                  They said goodbye ...
                  However, the butt-ignored ignore will perceive it as weakness, will rise and go on spoiling further. Therefore, they chatted.
                  1. "The original source" to which you are referring, I have not read (and I will not, about which below), I do not know the author (and I hardly will be), "patent" RU 2263268 - who is Bulkin A.M. -xz.I don’t think more weighty Cat Man Null, see the same political instructor.
                  2. Let's consider only a picture of an ardent apologist "cumulative slot shells

                  what we "have" is an absurd delusion:
                  rifle gap from which the striking element KAZ "Afganit" takes off. The black lid can rotate 360 ​​degrees, directing the element in the right direction. Every tube contains dozens of charges
                  3. Consider genital cracks closer:

                  Questions:
                  -why 360g. cretin it is clear that (260) 290gr out of 360 will fly into the tank hull into the turret space and into the adjacent tube. So?
                  - Where can this slit (perpendicular to the axis of the tube) spit out the striking element? What?
                  Smash the cameras, IR sensors, radar, to open the tower’s false armor? -Yes !!!
                  anything else? No! Ay sorry, break through TB, damage infantry or neighboring tanks, etc.
                  -see cumulative shells. For a long time searching, we find that the minimum caliber of the COP is somewhere, from 70mm (75mm) and above. There are no cumulative bullets.
                  How can something cumulative fly out of a slit that looks like 2 cm x 4 cm. Sho tse also for "nano spit"?
                  Tube size (PU) well mm 70 -90 ..

                  You did not think about the appearance of an RPG grenade or a cumulative mine and a CS projectile and why?

                  and why the mine spits on 15 meters, and the cop after direct contact with the obstacle.
                  Give a hint?
                  - what and in what way, through this genital gap, the "KAZ striking element" (nano element, see above) accelerates to the speed necessary to intercept the attacking BOPS (1400m / s) or ATGM (600m / s), at a distance of at least 15 m ...
                  What? what force (AXIAL, moreover). After all, it should kick a nano K-charge at a speed of at least 400 m / s. What?
                  -What are the axial loads on the launch tube and the "black cap with slots"?
                5. opus
                  opus April 16 2016 17: 12
                  0
                  - "The black slug with slots" rotates 360g "due to what? The electric motor? Its axis runs through the launch tube along its entire length?
                  Hmmm .... "na fuya goat button accordion"? How much does it cost? the vitality of this spittoon?
                  Further to the "basics"

                  -Why do we need a CS with UY for removal or burning / washing (destruction) CYLINDER BODY(not plates,perpendicular to the axis of the COP).
                  BOPS -TST. How (at what angle) will fly to it K-spit-HZ.

                  Will the quasi-liquid "slip" on a cylindrical surface?
                  It’s easier (easier) to leave on Wednesday, and not burn a round-sided BOPS.
                  -a striking element of KAZ with KUYA well, must be 100% into scrap (BOPS).
                  Shaw is very complicated, expensive, and there is no time for guidance.
                  "rotating black cap" with sexual it is clearly not capable of this, and if we consider that the tank MOVES (usually over rough terrain), the tower rotates, also with gaps in pursuit .... to get a spit of "quasi-liquid" into the attacking BOPS (ATGM) well, practically unlikely.
                  question: why then the COP? Shrapnel is not easier?
                  I hope Roman "helped" you?
                  Gather all of the above into a heap, think about it (do not waste time searching for other people's grammatical errors, do not throw poop,THINK).

                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  opus, ek poked you

                  Well, at least I do not sausage ...


                  / unlike you /
                  -------------------------
                  I so hope we are all now? at all? Aufwiedersein?
                  hi
                6. Cat man null
                  Cat man null April 16 2016 19: 21
                  +1
                  Quote: opus
                  I so hope we are all now? at all? Aufwiedersein?

                  - yeah well .. why .. I'm already wondering laughing

                  Well, well .. you are all right fellow

                  But it’s not clear yet: And what kind of tubes are these? Under the tower which?

                  Only, I ask you:

                  - I don’t need pictures about the cumulative jet, shells, mines .. I know what's what
                  - and in general - it’s not safe to consider an opponent as much stupid as yourself. It's a hint wink

                  Just say - what do you think these tubes are? If possible - briefly and clearly.

                  And everyone will be happy ..
                7. opus
                  opus April 16 2016 19: 39
                  +1
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  If possible - briefly and clearly.

                  "Buckshot Spitters". Or a charge that then sows buckshot
                  So it will work? I kind of wrote like that?
                  Quote: opus
                  what you show is a variation of "Drozd-2"
                  The KAZ “anti-shell mortars” under the T-14 turret (finish off the ATGM and BOPS) are similar to the shots for the Drozd-2 KAZ ... a protective charge is fired and at a distance of 6-7 m from the cut, the mortar hits the attacking ammunition with a fragmentation field.

                  Quote: opus
                  at the top:
                  installation of smokemetal aerosol emissions (The complex is safe for environmental infantry), as in Koreans

                  Something is wrong ? YES? No?


                  Finally, we "approached" the constructive fellow
                  and "black caps with slots" are just plugs ..
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  I don’t need pictures about the cumulative stream, shells, mines .. I know what's what

                  Well, you know how I could have missed that when you
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  rifle the gap from which flies striking element KAZ "Afganit". Black lid rotates 360 degreesguiding the element in the right direction. Each tube contains several tens of charges
                  well and so on. "rumored with a shock core" ....
                  / It's not a fact that I'm right, but my version, it seems to me, is more realistic than the "black cap", with slots spitting striking elements with a cumulative IMPACT Core (!), And briskly rotating 360g ... /
                8. Cat man null
                  Cat man null April 16 2016 19: 58
                  +1
                  Quote: opus
                  "Buckshot Spitters". Or a charge that then sows buckshot

                  - understandably. thank yes
                  - it’s somewhat strange, IMHO, that they only look forward-to-side, with a circular radar survey .. well, oh well

                  I hope to live to see the moment when this feng shui is declassified .. or at least a clear description of it appears.

                  opusbye hi I am with you .. did not quarrel .. laughing
                9. opus
                  opus April 16 2016 20: 22
                  +1
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  look forward and sideways, with a circular radar survey .. well, oh well

                  So the Chinese paid attention to the fact that the T-14 should be turned towards the turrets in the direction of the AT’s attack, which reduces the density of fire on the target.
                  Ours answered: at AZ, we are good.
                  Tubes are clearly not rotary (with close resolution, it is clear that they are not moving), although .... xs m. This is a smart example.
                  As for the "black caps", upon closer examination, it seems to me that these are just stubs before the parade (well, no one in their right mind will demonstrate equipment with a combat filling next to the VVP), and the cracks: it is easier to pick them out with a screwdriver. i am wrong

                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  I hope to live to see the moment

                  I’m waiting for at least 1N T-14 to appear in Sertolovo.
                  Tady, I’m picking it up.

                  Hoped that the "Battle Steel" will be rolled out crying




                  Yes, somewhere.
                  For 200 rubles, my children rode on the T-60, SU-76, Pz2, even the T-90 was not.
                  But they shot from the heart with 85 mm. Well and gryazyuk +++++
                  I washed the car, but I didn’t receive the clothes, my shoes and the children, a little face off my wife, called us ungrateful animals belay (you might think thankful)
                  Quote: Cat Man Null
                  I am with you .. did not quarrel ..

                  And you will forgive me, I (rereading) something ... was inadequate yesterday. But the explanation will be struck in PM. Maaaskva yesterday made the whole brain.
  • Vadim237
    Vadim237 April 16 2016 15: 34
    +1
    Agree, if shrapnel elements could hit BOPS, then this principle would have long been implemented in KAZ Drozd - but no, but at the expense of destroying cores I meant the installation of throwing plates instead of fragmentation elements in the Arena to destroy BOPS - that is, the projectile takes off at an angle of 45 , and then, at a certain height, he shoots a slab at the meeting point with the core, it is already possible to assert with confidence that the Afganit system is not intended to intercept BOPS, for sure there is an electronic warfare system on the tank that works on the principle of "Mercury" detonates ATGM fuses, and maybe even piezoelectric elements RPG grenades, and multi-component explosive reactive armor and armor serves as protection against BOPS - cheap and cheerful. In principle, it is possible to find out what kind of guides under the tower are - at the exhibition "Intrepolitech"
    1. Cat man null
      Cat man null April 16 2016 15: 55
      0
      Quote: Vadim237
      Basically there is an opportunity to find outwhat are these guides under the tower - at the exhibition "Intrepolitech"

      - for sure. Personally, they will report the performance characteristics there, show drawings and movies, how and what works there
      - Vadim .. are you really so naive, or are you foolishly talented?
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 16 2016 18: 11
        0
        At the previous exhibitions "Interpolitech" I was told a lot of things, but I do not need performance characteristics - I just know it or not.
    2. opus
      opus April 16 2016 17: 32
      0
      Quote: Vadim237
      then this principle would have long been implemented in KAZ Drozd

      it is, almost

      what am I talking about?

      Quick kill





      Iron Fist "almost like that" - high-explosive (or rather compression) effect on the ammunition



      Trophy (ASPRO-A)

      Quote: Vadim237
      at the exhibition "Intrepolitech"

      Frets
      1. Vadim237
        Vadim237 April 16 2016 18: 14
        0
        I mean, in KAZ Drozd, they would intercept BOPS, if it was possible.
      2. opus
        opus April 16 2016 18: 26
        0
        Quote: Vadim237
        would KAZ Drozd intercept BOPS, if it was possible

        technically, he was hindered by a backward radar, a digital computer, proven algorithms, etc.
        Americans have recently implemented HTK (SM-3, GBI, THAAD, etc.). We have not yet.
        That's the whole answer.

        against bpos added

        Quote: opus
        Contact 5


        DZ was supposed to give powerful lateral impulse to destabilize or destroy the core of BOPS

        The cover of the DZ block is made of thick (about 20 mm) high-strength armor steel. Upon impact, the BPS generates a stream of high-speed fragments that detonate the charge. The impact on the BPS of a moving thick cover is sufficient to reduce its armor-piercing characteristics.

        And this is not in the "flight" but already on the armor, when the generation actually began.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • kmv.km
    kmv.km April 15 2016 23: 43
    -2
    The Victory Parade 2015 is memorable !!! Well, a little "cunning", for Interested - the contours of the tank "Armata", BMP - based on "Armata", Kurgan, SPG - COALITSIA - KRASSAVA (although from my humble point of view, SHE would look more effective, from the point of view of mass-dimensional compliance , on the basis of the platform "Armata" !!!, BTR BOOMERANG - KRASAVCHEG !!! became known a little earlier, by preliminary information, by Rehearsals for the Victory Parade, etc., etc.

    Now I will become "enemy of the people No. 1" at the Forum, but I will express my opinion Frankly:
    The T-14 "Armata" tank, regardless of the caliber of its guns - 125 or 152 mm, will, IN THE BEST CASE, become a "land" analogue of the "naval" submarines of the "Lyra" project - Unique; Overly Difficult, i.e. NOT acceptable; Not Timely; NOT massive, that is, again, NOT acceptable !!!

    After the Parade, there were quite a few articles and Video Tests in the Networks, all of them once again STRENGTHENED my personal opinion that the T-14 "Armata" is a STUPID (for Today) development of the Tank Forces for the Russian Army.

    T-90 MS or SM ... THAT IS WHAT NEEDED, BMP -3 ... THAT IS WHAT NEEDED. CONVEYOR ASSEMBLY !!!
    10,000 cars NEEDED !!!

    Modernization of the T-72 is also NECESSARY !!! But explain the Comrades - Professionals from the Forum, why the Objective
    Has criticism of the "budgetary" modernization of the T-72B3 disappeared completely from the Forum? Russian Bears do not go to the taiga, are they afraid to meet Shoigu there ?, so what happens?
    1. Voyager
      Voyager April 16 2016 09: 03
      +1
      Quote: kmv.km
      Now I will become "enemy of the people No. 1" at the Forum, but I will express my opinion Frankly


      One gets the feeling that you yourself understand that now you will say stupid things, but you can’t stop request

      The whole world appreciated the performance characteristics of Almaty, which is rare today. Do you say dead end? Well, yes, let's order 10 (why?) Already obsolete tanks with vulnerable BK and we’ll give a damn about the new concept of the Unified Armata platform, on which they are going to produce about ten types of other armored vehicles.

      Enough to do the modernization already. A step forward has been taken.
    2. Albert1988
      Albert1988 April 16 2016 15: 43
      +1
      Unfortunately, those wonderful machines that you propose to produce instead of "armata" already at this stage do not meet the requirements of the time in many respects. And most importantly, they no longer have the modernization potential. Russia is not so rich, after all, to now make 10000 pieces of equipment suitable only for "today", so you have to do what is called immediately on "tomorrow".
      I will dare to assume that you are clearly not young anymore, you served in the Soviet army, and since then have retained the idea of ​​military equipment. Of course, in the USSR, the army has always met the requirements of the time. But times are changing, and now tens of thousands of "cheap and simple" will no longer be effective, but will only lead to large losses. Now we need a few, but extremely high-tech (within reason) types of weapons, to which "armata" belongs.
      Quote: kmv.km
      T-14 "Armata" -TUPIKOVE (for Today) for the Russian Army, the development of the Tank Forces.

      And most importantly, you are talking about a "dead end direction development". But the whole point is that this development before" armata "simply did not exist! There was complete stagnation of what we have, what" them ". And it is" armata "that is at least some movement, at least some development (and in fact, very serious) in tank building over the past 30 years not less (!), and not only in Russian tank building, but in the world in general!
      1. kmv.km
        kmv.km April 16 2016 22: 41
        +2
        Albert1988 Unfortunately, those wonderful machines that you propose to produce instead of "armata" ...

        Thank you for the reasoned answer-opinion-comment! hi
        You do not agree with my opinion, I understand, as they say, in a dispute "is born", rather, TRUTH SHOWS-SHOWS.
        As for the "Soviet" in me - you are right! But I'm NOT AGAINST NEW!
        Your arguments are convincing, I agree with you VERY in many ways, perhaps my arguments, I have not expressed quite accurately.

        I AM NOT AGAINST the creation and development (ONLY FOR) of the Unified Platform of "Tracked" Armored Vehicles - Armata!
        But, from my point of view, this Platform should "wear" only "breakthrough" - very promising systems, "COALITION" for example !; even Heavy BMP T-15 in limited quantities! (I hope the Combat Module with a 30 mm cannon is a forced "joke" for the Victory Parade).
        BUT "put" on Armata the Deadborn in the Global Sense "Terminators", "Pinocchio"; even the necessary ARVs and bridges, etc. etc. - it is Economically Criminal! In my opinion, the T-72, 80, 90 and MTLB platforms as well are not BAD with this business!
        I AM NOT AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT (ONLY FOR) of Domestic Tanks - including the T-14, Design Bureau must Work and Create! You are Right, T-14, this is the most serious movement in the world tank building! But why are you sure that this movement is the One - Right?

        But I am CATEGORALLY AGAINST the concept of using "a few, but extremely high-tech (within reason) types of weapons" in ALL (indiscriminately) Types -Army of the Russian troops !!! ESPECIALLY IN Motorized Rifle and Tank Troops !!!

        This Concept can be justified in the strategic nuclear forces, airborne forces, air defense (I just assume).
        But given the territory of the Russian Federation and knowing how many tanks the USSR had (64,000 units including PT ...), I am SURE that my modest figure is 10,000 Verified
        should not scare armored vehicles !!! THIS IS VERY Humbly and CHEAP !!!

        Your Concept, as applied to Tanks, is quite suitable for the Euro-members of NATO! One has 50 pieces, another has 100 pieces, the third has half a thousand ... When they put it together, It will turn out - Armada, not even counting the "amerikosov", when their Sea Convoys go to Europe, We will need to take up the Nuclear Dubin!
        But so that it doesn't come to this, we need the Mass of Our Tanks, based on the Acceptable "today's" Characteristics, and not the Unique (so far very conditional) Characteristics of Our Tanks, and Single (globally) Instances.
        1. alexmach
          alexmach April 16 2016 23: 50
          +4
          But whatever comes to this, we need the Mass of Our Tanks, based on the Acceptable "today's" Characteristics


          Plus. Small, professional, well-equipped armies are needed for "peacetime wars". Our times may well slide down to quite a "military". And in the event of a large-scale war - every T-72 on the move will be worth its weight in gold.

          And what we have now are plans for the purchase of 2 or 2,5 thousand T-14s. about 500 T-90s, and they plan to upgrade them to the SM version + 2 thousand planned T-72BM3. And that total of 5 thousand conventionally modern tanks and all the old stuff. And how Armata actually shows itself is not yet clear, much has been written about the budget of the T-72BM3.

          A BREM based on the Almaty should also be done. A universal platform is needed for that. Firstly, in units armed with Armata and Bremen, it should be on the Armata platform for unification. Secondly, the more cars build on the platform, the cheaper its production.
          1. Albert1988
            Albert1988 April 17 2016 13: 02
            0
            Quote: alexmach
            Our times may well slide down to quite a "military".

            The fact is that in the event of a global conflict, ground armies will not have such an important role as before, now they will "steer" long-range missiles (I generally keep quiet about ICBMs) and aviation (as the main strike force and as another carrier of the same missile defense systems). long range).

            Quote: alexmach
            And what we have now are plans for the purchase of 2 or 2,5 thousand T-14s. about 500 T-90s, and they plan to upgrade them to the SM version + 2 thousand planned T-72BM3. And that total of 5 thousand conventionally modern tanks and all the old stuff. And how Armata actually shows itself is not yet clear, much has been written about the budget of the T-72BM3.

            As for the procurement of approximately 2000 T-14s - this is only an approximate quantity - the tank must pass the tests, and then its operation in the troops begins, and if it is successful, then mass purchases will go, so they can buy more tanks.
            And then the tanks themselves now need not so much, but BMPs need a lot, because our old BMPs are already absolutely unable to cope with their role. Which, however, is strange - so far no one has voiced the purchase plans for the T-15 and Kurgan with boomerangs ...
            1. alexmach
              alexmach April 17 2016 14: 11
              +2
              The fact is that in the event of a global conflict, ground armies will not have such an important role as before


              Let there be, will they play their part. What do you think about the fools in the Soviet Union in the military leadership or ICBMs they lacked? The war cannot be fought solely by missiles at a great distance, sooner or later, things will go on to ground operations.

              for our old infantry fighting vehicles are already absolutely unable to cope with their role.


              What would such a claim need to start to figure out what is their role then? What can they not cope with? As for me, the BMP-3 is a great car, specifically for the mass army and post-armagidon. Only they are not enough.

              Which, however, is strange - so far no one has announced plans for the purchase of T-15 and Kurgan with boomerangs

              So, too, because they have not yet passed the tests. And the same Boomerang is still being finalized.
              1. Albert1988
                Albert1988 April 17 2016 16: 27
                +1
                Quote: alexmach
                Let there be, will they play their part.

                Naturally there will be, but not the same as before, in the sense that thousands of armored armadas with 90% probability are a thing of the past.
                Quote: alexmach
                What do you think about the fools in the Soviet Union in the military leadership or ICBMs they lacked?

                Then the "tank avalanche" tactics were quite viable. now it just doesn't make sense anymore.
                Quote: alexmach
                The war cannot be fought solely by missiles at a great distance, sooner or later, things will go on to ground operations.

                It will be conducted by such methods at the initial stage, and then the winning side in this "duel" will go with ground forces to "clean up" everything that remains of the loser. The problem of such a war is that these very long-range missiles will reach everything: military factories, airfields, headquarters ... So after such strikes there will be such damage to infrastructure that they cannot be quickly repaired, and the one who "missed" more missiles is already half lost. Naturally, I am not a specialist, and everywhere my own nuances are possible, but the overall picture will most likely be just that.
                Wars tend to change greatly with the development of science and technology. Remember the First World War - machine guns and powerful artillery led to the fact that all the tactics and strategy of the wars that took place earlier was sent to the dump.
                Quote: alexmach
                What would such a claim need to start to figure out what is their role then?

                But it is simple - to transport infantry (including under enemy fire) and maintain this infantry with their fire during the battle. Their armor is thin, most of the anti-tank tools flash it just like cardboard, but the worst part is mine protection, it is generally none. namely, mines - the absolute scourge of modern armored vehicles. Remember that our campers prefer to ride a BMP-1/2 and BTR-ah not under armor а on armor, which is a complete nonsenos, but think - why so?
                Quote: alexmach
                As for me, the BMP-3 is a great car, specifically for the mass army and post-armagidon.

                Firstly, modern armies are not so massive, they are more about quality than about quantity (as everything is said according to Alexander Vasilievich wink ), and secondly, after Armageddon, with the greatest probability, if anyone fights, it will be more of a guerrilla war, and BMP-3s are just extremely vulnerable in such a war, because from behind each bush something anti-tank can fly in, and BMP-3 has "aluminum" armor ...

                And as regards Kurgan and boomerang - we’ll wait until they finish it more or less, I think it will be interesting to hear the announced procurement figures)))
                1. alexmach
                  alexmach April 17 2016 18: 23
                  +2
                  Their armor is thin, most of the PT means it flashes it just like cardboard,


                  and what modern armored infantry fighting vehicle or armored personnel carrier can withstand anti-tank weapons? 50 ton ravings?

                  this is a mine defense, it is generally no


                  Mine protection is generally basically a high clearance and a V-shaped bottom. Accordingly, an increase in the height of the machine.

                  And as regards Kurgan and boomerang - we’ll wait until they finish it more or less, I think it will be interesting to hear the announced procurement figures)))


                  Yes, this argument is rather purely theoretical. Since the BMP-3 in our troops, there’s nothing at all, and no new purchases are planned at all, and new vehicles are only being tested.
                  1. Albert1988
                    Albert1988 April 18 2016 13: 24
                    0
                    Quote: alexmach
                    and what modern armored infantry fighting vehicle or armored personnel carrier can withstand anti-tank weapons? 50 ton ravings?

                    Bradley is also an old car, very badly tailored and has exhausted its modernization potential. To protect against modern anti-tank vehicles, completely new measures are needed, such as KAZ (which by the way are on both the T-14 and T-15 with Kurgan!), And, as practice shows, on existing vehicles (the same BMP-3), integrate poorly, and therefore new machines are needed.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Mine protection is generally basically a high clearance and a V-shaped bottom. Accordingly, an increase in the height of the machine.

                    Taking into account modern high-precision weapons, the silhouette of the machine is not as important as it used to be, although I absolutely agree. that a "two-story mansion" should not be fenced off on caterpillars. But if you look at the height of such machines as the T-15 and Kurganets, then their height is not so great, although according to the developers there is a full-fledged U-shaped bottom.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Yes, this argument is rather purely theoretical.

                    Any debate about modern weapons will be largely theoretical, because secrecy has not been canceled yet. wink
                    Quote: alexmach
                    Since the BMP-3 in our troops, there’s nothing at all, and no new purchases are planned at all,

                    Why, not so long ago, there was an article on our VO dedicated to the very fate of BMP-3, and there the representative of the Ministry of Defense clearly said. that the machine will be purchased in small batches for reconnaissance and landing units.
                    Quote: alexmach
                    and new cars are only in testing.

                    Therefore, I propose to be patient and wait for the end of the test)))
        2. Albert1988
          Albert1988 April 17 2016 12: 52
          +2
          Thank! I completely agree with you about the birth of truth in a dispute. And so I always try to argue calmly and reasonably, which, by the way, is a pleasure to observe in your comments. Alas, this is a rarity in VO - people have been lately all on emotions.
          Quote: kmv.km
          But, from my point of view, this Platform should "wear" only "breakthrough" - very promising systems, "COALITION" for example !; even Heavy BMP T-15 in limited quantities! (I hope the Combat Module with a 30 mm cannon is a forced "joke" for the Victory Parade).
          BUT "put" on Armatu the Deadborn in the Global Sense "Terminators" ...

          First of all, there are no plans to create something "dead-born" on the basis of armata, but as regards ARVs, you were very mistaken. BREMs, especially modern and maximally unified ones, are needed very much, let me remind you that during the Second World War, the Red Army suffered very much at the initial stages due to the almost complete absence of such equipment (it is well described in the memoirs of General Sandalov). Moreover, the construction of the widest range of equipment on the basis of reinforcement will greatly reduce the cost of its production, and also greatly simplify the repair of equipment due to the maximum unification of spare parts.
          As for the old T-72/90, these machines should never be scrapped, but it is quite possible to put them in reserve, I think everyone understands this.

          Quote: kmv.km
          But I am CATEGORALLY AGAINST the concept of using "a few, but extremely high-tech (within reason) types of weapons" in ALL (indiscriminately) Types -Army of the Russian troops !!! ESPECIALLY IN Motorized Rifle and Tank Troops !!!

          The fact is that modern weapons just make it possible to minimize the size of the ground army (of course, also within reasonable limits) while maximizing its effectiveness. But strategic weapons (not necessarily nuclear) should be increased as much as possible - for all global wars will first of all begin with massive strikes by long-range cruise missiles (like our "Caliber"). And here the main thing is not so much in the number of these missiles as in the number of launchers in order to achieve the maximum mass volley so that as many missiles as possible reach the enemy and hit their targets. So now it is necessary to increase the number not of ground equipment, but of aviation and other possible carriers (and launchers) of long-range CDs.
          Quote: kmv.km
          Your Concept, with reference to Tanks, is quite suitable for the NATO Euro-members! One has 50 pcs, the other has 100 pcs, the third has half a thousand ... When they put it together, It turns out - Armada

          If we talk about Europe, then even together there the armada will not work - because everything has been sawn for a long time already. And then I didn’t say that Russia should have 100 or 200 tanks, just instead of these 64000 there would be enough commercials of 5000 tanks (I honestly took the digital from the ceiling, they’ll name the specialists more precisely, I just mean that there aren’t so many tanks) . Why? Yes, because in the first place tanks are now used in a slightly different way - no one with an armada will go on the attack anymore, and every modern tank costs dozens of old tanks in terms of their effectiveness.
          But BMPs, modern armored personnel carriers - you are absolutely right - you need tens of thousands, because the BMP-1/2 and BTR-80 (various modifications) that we have are too vulnerable, and the BMP-3 is too specific a machine, which for all its advantages are clearly not suitable for the role of mass BMP.
          1. alexmach
            alexmach April 17 2016 14: 24
            +3
            and the BMP-3 is too specific a machine that, for all its merits, is clearly not suitable for the role of mass BMP

            This is interesting. Explain the idea in more detail. Why?
            1. Albert1988
              Albert1988 April 17 2016 16: 09
              0
              Quote: alexmach
              This is interesting. Explain the idea in more detail. Why?

              Nothing really really interesting:
              The BMP-3 has excellent weapons, excellent dynamic characteristics, is capable of swimming, but at the same time it has very weak armor by modern standards, weak mine protection, and most importantly - the specific layout of the BMD ala makes the machine not very convenient for landing, and it carries this car is only 5 people.
              Now we need well-protected vehicles, with thick armor and developed mine protection, while being as spacious as possible. That is, now we need Kurgan and T-15. The BMP-3 will most likely play the role of a reconnaissance vehicle and fire support when crossing water obstacles.
              1. alexmach
                alexmach April 17 2016 16: 42
                +3
                Well, here you can argue.

                BMP-3 has excellent weapons, excellent dynamic characteristics, is capable of swimming,


                And in my opinion for a lightly armored vehicle this is the main thing. + Do not forget that it is air transportable. That is mobile.

                very weak by modern standards booking

                Well here is a double edged sword.
                Firstly, according to some sources, the frontal projection holds a 30mm armor-piercing-subciber. In my opinion this is quite at the level of modern requirements for light infantry fighting vehicles, unless of course this is true.
                Of course, all sorts of designers with hinged protection modules are a more modern solution.

                weak mine protection

                In my opinion, this parameter is more relevant for wheeled vehicles. But yes, in general, the main modern trend is to increase security.

                specific layout ala BMD makes the machine not very convenient for landing

                Which our car is convenient for landing? BTR-60? Any layout solution is a compromise between conflicting demands. In my opinion, this option is far from the worst.

                and this car carries only 5 people.


                Not 5 but all the same 8 - motorized rifle squad. + if you can lock it there + 3 people can be placed. One to the troop compartment and two more to the places of the front shooters

                Well protected vehicles, with thick armor and advanced mine protection, are now required.

                Well, we did not have such machines as the T-15, a really interesting car. She has her own niche. That's just the better security - the more mass. The more difficult this car will be on the roads and the more difficult it will be to transport it with any transport.

                at the same time as capacious


                But I'm not sure about that. Do you need buses? 8-12 people, including the crew, in my opinion is no longer rational. What should they do when the machine fails? More important than capacity. let him carry additional prara of MANPADS, hand-held rocket-propelled grenades, a single-use drone of some sort. Well, the soldier should climb there in his warrior.
                1. Albert1988
                  Albert1988 April 17 2016 18: 38
                  0
                  Quote: alexmach
                  And in my opinion for a lightly armored vehicle this is the main thing. + Do not forget that it is air transportable. That is mobile.

                  Exactly, aircraft transportability is not the main thing for a mass infantry fighting vehicle because a mass infantry fighting vehicle will be transported primarily by rail.
                  Quote: alexmach
                  In my opinion, this parameter is more relevant for wheeled vehicles. But yes, in general, the main modern trend is to increase security.

                  Mine protection is now, unfortunately, extremely important for any equipment - if you look at the "Military Acceptance" program in which they talked about the reinforcement, you will notice (in the samples collected at the plant, which do not have rollers yet) a characteristic U-shaped bottom configuration. And yes - the tendency to increase protection really does take place, and this is clearly not from a good life, but from the sharply increasing power of portable anti-tank weapons, so that a lightly armored vehicle can now survive only as a fast reconnaissance vehicle, but not as the main means of fire support for infantry.
                  Quote: alexmach
                  Not 5 but all the same 8 - motorized rifle squad. + if sneak It is also possible to put + 3 people there.

                  Here, "if you put it" is the main thing! That is, 5 airborne personnel is the norm, that is, they can normally land, and the rest who were "shoved" in the first place will simply be transported in hellish conditions, and secondly, they will not be able to leave the car normally.
                  Quote: alexmach
                  Do you need buses? 8-12 people, including the crew, in my opinion is no longer rational.

                  why the capacity of about 8 landing troops is very normal - look at the photos of the T-15 landing squad and count the landing chairs there, and the crew there are only 2 people.
                  Quote: alexmach
                  What should they do when the machine fails?

                  The same as before)))))
                  Quote: alexmach
                  More important than capacity. let him carry additional prara of MANPADS, hand-held rocket-propelled grenades, a single-use drone of some sort. Well, the soldier should climb there in his warrior.

                  Namely, all of this, all the more so, in BMP-3 it’s not enough to cram a little inside, well, it’s inconvenient to get out of the airborne squad, especially in the warrior, and the Kurgan and T-15 have convenient ramps at the back and nothing prevents.
                  Quote: alexmach
                  That's just the better security - the more mass. The more difficult this car will be on the roads and the more difficult it will be to transport it with any transport.

                  Her weight is not much different from that of the tank, so that on the roads and during transportation there will be no more problems than with conventional MBTs.
                  1. alexmach
                    alexmach April 17 2016 19: 41
                    +1
                    Exactly, aircraft transportability is not the main thing for a mass infantry fighting vehicle because a mass infantry fighting vehicle will be transported primarily by rail.


                    The main thing is not the main thing but not superfluous. Here's an article about starters next - that’s how they were specially designed for the forces of rapid deployment. Moreover, what can be transported by road transport and to BDK and it will be easier to transport by rail, the same loading and unloading will be easier and faster. Not the most superfluous is this quality.

                    Her weight is not much different from that of the tank, so that on the roads and during transportation there will be no more problems than with conventional MBTs.

                    Yeah .. And the price is probably also at the level of MBT. Both units and operations. And what mass is possible at such a price?

                    Yet again. Are we talking about the T-15? And who said that it will be mass. The Kurgan should be massive as I understand it, but he is easier and easier in terms of security.
                    1. Albert1988
                      Albert1988 April 18 2016 13: 38
                      +1
                      Quote: alexmach
                      The main thing is not the main thing but not superfluous.

                      Yes, but it is impossible to create a fully universal wunderwafel, the machine must first of all perform its primary tasks well, which means it will have to sacrifice something.
                      Quote: alexmach
                      Here's an article about starters next - that’s how they were specially designed for the forces of rapid deployment.

                      And therefore, strikers have many shortcomings, including the inability to properly install at least any heavy weapons on them, although on the other hand they do not need this. But at the same time, do not confuse machines for small mobile forces of rapid deployment (BMP-3 is perfectly suitable for them by the way) and machines for ordinary linear units.
                      Quote: alexmach
                      Yeah .. And the price is probably also at the level of MBT. Both units and operations. And what mass is possible at such a price?

                      The price of an MBT is determined primarily by the expensive electronics in its combat module, all the rest of the hardware is not so expensive. For the T-15, the combat module and KAZ will make the price, BUT! The Kurgan, which in your opinion will be more widespread, has the same modules and KAZ! This means that their cost will not differ much. Moreover, you forgot that with just mass production, the price of a product drops by 2 times, that is, it is more profitable to produce such machines in large quantities - only then they will become profitable.
                      Moreover, it is believed that when these very heavy infantry fighting vehicles catch up with tanks in firepower, then it will be possible to "safely abandon" the MBT in its pure form.
                      Quote: alexmach
                      The Kurgan should be massive as I understand it, but he is easier and easier in terms of security.

                      The question is, what do you think is massive? I think that if the T-15s operate only in close conjunction with the tanks, then 2-3 thousand will be enough, and the Kurgan should in the future replace all of our old infantry fighting vehicles, so that it will not be enough to produce ten thousand. But if it turns out that the same T-15 is very good outside of cooperation with MBT, then they can decide to produce it in larger quantities.
                      You correctly mentioned that these are new machines, they still need to be tested and developed for them the optimal tactics of application, and their required number will also pour out of this.

                      Again, I would like to emphasize - now "mass and cheap" will not be rolled out, they will fit only for coffins for a large number of soldiers. And you can't save on the life of a soldier, especially for us and especially now. So less is better, but better. Not by number, as they say, but by skill))))) Everything according to the immortal Alexander Vasilyevich))))
        3. Albert1988
          Albert1988 April 17 2016 13: 09
          +1
          And finally:
          Quote: Albert1988
          I AM NOT AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT (ONLY FOR) of Domestic Tanks - including the T-14, Design Bureau must Work and Create! You are Right, T-14, this is the most serious movement in the world tank building! But why are you sure that this movement is the One - Right?

          I did not say that this direction is the only correct one. I only said that it is in principle the only one - no one except us has done anything fundamentally new in the last 30 years. Yes, and for us this development lasted a very long time from the end of the 80s, and only now it has actively gone ahead, so it is quite possible that in the future the concept of an armored tank can be corrected.
  • Denis Skiff
    Denis Skiff April 16 2016 15: 35
    +1
    How does this Armata tank differ from what is pictured in the article? Or are they not there, differences?
    1. Albert1988
      Albert1988 April 16 2016 15: 47
      +1
      Quote: Denis-Skiff
      How does this Armata tank differ from what is pictured in the article? Or are they not there, differences?

      In my opinion, it is obvious - in the photo in the article the T-14 has no side skirts.
      1. opus
        opus April 16 2016 17: 36
        +1
        Quote: Albert1988
        In my opinion, it is obvious - in the photo in the article the T-14 has no side skirts.

        color? wink


        Side screens into parts tanks removed. Alabino. 11.04.2016/XNUMX/XNUMX


        4,6 and 7 did not get b-screens?











        1. alexmach
          alexmach April 16 2016 23: 56
          +1
          4,6 and 7 did not get b-screens?


          Maybe they broke it? During military tests, for example.
          Honestly, it would be better if they were not preparing for the parades but working at the training grounds. It is necessary to modify the tank, adopt it and launch the series
          1. Vadim237
            Vadim237 April 17 2016 01: 27
            +1
            So this tank is a platform, already at the final stage of testing and everything is ready for mass production.
          2. Albert1988
            Albert1988 April 17 2016 13: 11
            0
            Quote: alexmach
            Honestly, it would be better if they were not preparing for the parades but working at the training grounds.

            So they work)))) And then they just came off for a month))))
  • The comment was deleted.