Russia To Launch Armata Prototype Tank By 2013

  1. #106
    Defence Professionals Damian
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,459
    Likes
    2002
    Poland
    BTW, interview with Mr. Murakhovsky I mentioned.

    :: : 195
    p2prada likes this.

  2. #107
    Defence Professionals Damian
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,459
    Likes
    2002
    Poland
    Double post
    Last edited by Damian; 12-04-12 at 11:03 PM.

  3. #108
    Regular Member Saumyasupraik
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    112
    Likes
    53
    Aren't the T-90S we produce at HVF equipped with Kaktus and not Kontakt-5?The Kaktus is still not as advanced as the Relikt but is definitely not outdated, are any Russian tanks in service with the ground forces or any other nation equipped with the Relikt?

  4. #109
    Member of the Year 2011 Kunal Biswas
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    Posts
    23,544
    Likes
    21193
    India
    T-90S produced in Russia as well as India are equipped with Kontakt-5..
    Relikt is used over T-90MS..
    Kaktus is heaviest used on test bed tank black eagle..

  5. #110
    Defence Professionals Damian
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,459
    Likes
    2002
    Poland
    No, Indian, Russian and any other T-90 are still equipped with 4S22 Kontakt-5, while only several demonstrators build in Russia, T-72BM vel T-72B2, T-80B (known also as T-80BM) under Rogatka modernization program, and newest T-90M/MS use 4S23 Relikt.

    ERA known as Kaktus, was only shown on prototype tank Object 640 (that have popular name "Black Eagle" in the internet). It is not known if Kaktus is less or more advanced than Relikt, both might have been developed at the same time. There is even more ERA developments in Russia, for example some time ago photos of universal turret module "Burlak" were shown and it appears that this time, protection of this turret is based less on composite armor and more on some sort of new type of ERA in really huge cassettes. Even older vehicle Object 187 was reported to use protection codenamed Malachit, but it is uncertain if this codename is for ERA only or whole protection = composite armor, ERA and active protection system.

  6. #111
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    744
    Likes
    281
    Europe
    It for sure was not designed "by the same bureau". The Leopard 2 was designed mainly be the German state in cooperation with a different number of companies. The whole development took (including earliest phase of concepts) about two decades. I have read a lot of times that KMW would have helped with the development of the Arjun, but KMW exists since 1999, prior this there were two companies - Wegmann and Krauss-Maffei, the latter one had more or less nothing to do with the development of the turret. Even though there were a lot of differences in German and Indian requirements, which could have lead to another design.
    The Arjun is more or less a hybrid between Russian and NATO tank design - the design of the frontal hull and the placement of the turret armour follows the Soviet/Russian design doctrine (which IMO speaks against much influence from German companies), while the turret side/rear shape (~turret bustle) and the mantlet design have their origin in Western turret design doctrines.

    That's not the way the Leopard 2 was designed (or the Leopard 1 was designed). A number of different hulls, turrets and components were made by different companies. Coordinated was it all by the government. Germany does not have "tank design bureaus".

    it's exaggerated to some degree. We can see that the side armor modules end prior the hole for the commander's thermal imager in some other pictures, but the welding seams on the images might simply be wrong. Otherwise quite accurate.
    Last edited by methos; 13-04-12 at 06:02 PM.

  7. #112
    Defence Professionals Damian
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,459
    Likes
    2002
    Poland
    Indeed, and we can observe similiar scheme in many other tank designs developed in Asia region.

    armork

    South Korean K2 for example, turret sides are protected only by thin RHA and covered by storage boxes, eventuall ERA can be mounted however but won't do much about tandem shaped charge warheads or APFSDS... in fact even HE ammunition with delayed or programmable fuze can be dangerous here, for example newest US AMP programmable HE can perforate ~150mm of RHA/CHA.

    ztz98ztz99

    Or the Chinese ZTZ-96 and ZTZ-99 series, although Chinese seems to angle side armor to some degree to hide it behind front armor, it is not as effective however as on Russian or Ukrainian tanks.

    5093021319 646dfacd52
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/2gatep/4961576583/

    Or Japanese Type 10 tank, these modules on turret sides might look like an armor modules but in reality are storage boxes. Hinges for covers are clearly visible, in concept it is very similiar to Leclerc storage boxes also placed around turret. Also take a notice on the edge of turret side and it's distance to tank commander cupola, it's shows more or less actuall thickness of turret side armor.

    It is rather interesting why turrets in machines of these nations are designed that way. Perhaps main concern here is weight issue... but then why to design turret this way? It is possible to design a Russian/Ukrainian type turret with bustle autoloader module, as Ukrainian Object 478H vel T-84-120 proves.

    Yatagan 001

    So the most important question is why? Such design solution makes vehicle vurnable not only to pure sie attack but also attack from vehicle frontal arc, as I showed in my previous posts.

    It might look at some points wrong due to limitations of drawing. Due to inclination of armor, at some points near the turret roof there are cuts and similiar difficult to replicate on drawing things.

    Weld lines on drawing are indeed wrong... sort of misinformation done on drawings in Hunnicutt books to made armor looks thinner than it is in reality. My lines are based on external weld lines seen on photos of real tanks, and internal photos. So armor in reality will end somewhere behind red lines. But the armor thickness values are more or less correct.

    What is interesting, I never found a clear photos of opened and empty armor cavieties of turrets on production line... damn OPSEC.
    Last edited by Damian; 13-04-12 at 06:20 PM.
    Kunal Biswas likes this.

  8. #113
    Defence Professionals militarysta
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,568
    Likes
    621
    Poland

    People who see that don't talk.
    In USA
    in UK
    in Gemany
    and in Poland.

    You know that.
    BTW: many infos and photos came from freindly solders and you have it whit one "subject"/warning - You cant post it, and show from whit unit you have that. If you break this even one tme you will never have acess to interesting thinks.

  9. #114
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    744
    Likes
    281
    Europe
    I have asked around a little bit - in two of the biggest German forums nobody knows anything between a cooperation between KMW (or the predecessors) and India for creating the Arjun.

  10. #115
    Defence Professionals Damian
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,459
    Likes
    2002
    Poland
    Hmmm, starts to be interesting. So any other explanation for curious similiarity in design? Maybe DRDO designers were just inspired by Leo2 design? Or something else?

  11. #116
    Defence Professionals militarysta
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,568
    Likes
    621
    Poland
    When Im looking on Arjun I see our (polish) never exist "Gorila" tank, or even PT-2000 The same wishful thinking and trust that homeland industry can produce good tank whithout any experience in developmend. Good bless in Poland we took ex-German Leo2A4.

    In India the situation is slightly different - but in my opinnion Ajrun is fu**ed up - especially if you compare it to K2 or Altay, or Leo2A6HEL/E/Ex etc. The question is when Indian army will have really goog tanks making in cooperation whit western tank industry (NEXTER, KMW, etc). Russian have only "new" T-90M (in which the tower was removed most of the defects known form T-90A (Ob.188A1/A2), but hull in T-90A/SA/M is still "live zombie" known form Ob.184 (T-72B).


    BTW in "Aramta" thema - all sights shown that this program will be ended in 2015-2017 successfully there are some new fact known about Armata, Ob.195, Ob.477 and others and when we arrange the puzzle it seems that Armata have very, very strong base and in fact it isn't new program
    Last edited by militarysta; 16-04-12 at 07:46 PM.

  12. #117
    Defence Professionals militarysta
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    1,568
    Likes
    621
    Poland
    BTW:

    utubekhiladi

    Well defending Israeli CL Mk.II clones is not very impressive... according to test in Poland it can overpass only ~500-550mm RHA on 2000m (depends on HBscale, and target structure (monolit, or HB plates, etc) This even about 550mm RHA is middle 1980. level. It's not hi-tech in 2012...

    It's depend - SC whit caliber between 70 -155mm with copper insert, and obtuse angle between 40-60. and with 0,3 -3kg explosive material
    have between 1,5 and 9 MJ If You want I can checkt PG-7W in tabels -as I remember it was about 2,5 MJ

    Polish CAWA-2 (middle 1990.) passive cermic armour was able to stop 125mm APFSDS whit E = 5,7MJ
    utubekhiladi likes this.

  13. #118
    Member of the Year 2011 Kunal Biswas
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    BHARAT, INDIA, HINDUSTHAN
    Posts
    23,544
    Likes
    21193
    India

    In that case its good for Poland not India, Indian Army field some where 3000 tanks in different terrain it was important to have a tank made in India as it obvious, Home made tanks can be modified as per demand but same don't apply Licences Produce tanks..

    Arjun MK-1 is first tank, Arjun MK-2 & 3 are next in evolution, Now there is where you can compare to K2 or some Turkish tanks.




    Carry on..

  14. #119
    The Preacher utubekhiladi
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    TX, USA
    Posts
    3,021
    Likes
    1414
    India
    close enough you are in ballpark range
    Last edited by utubekhiladi; 16-04-12 at 08:59 PM.

  15. #120
    DFI Technocrat p2prada
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Holy Hell
    Posts
    9,522
    Likes
    3287
    India
    If the Arjun Mk1 needs to be compared to any tank, then it has to be with a tank that was designed in that timeframe, ie, late 80s and early 90s. There was no major evolution to the design only until now(Mk2). Maybe if a Mk3 is designed, then we may see much larger changes. Let's see how FMBT pans out. Perhaps we will know stuff only after 6 years, earliest.

    Anyway seems like OFB and DRDO have developed a new shell for T-90. They will undergo tests pretty soon.

    defence eXpress: Integrity Pact invoked against Israeli defence firm

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23-01-12, 11:54 AM
  2. Russia to present nuclear train prototype in July
    By A.V. in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 26-02-11, 10:59 AM
  3. Russia's defense spending to rise by 60% by 2013 - paper
    By Triton in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-07-10, 03:10 PM
  4. Russia's defense spending to rise by 60% by 2013 - paper
    By Triton in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30-07-10, 11:10 AM
  5. Russia to keep 2nd place in fighter jet exports until 2013
    By Triton in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 22-07-10, 09:20 AM