T-14 Armata - new gen Russian tank

That "T-99" was so wrong... like why does it use Ob-490 turret and why on top of the T-49 chassis while we know the Lider have it's own dedicated one.
 
Let me get back to the old news about the possible/probable cancellation of Kurganets.

Of the three main families of the new generation of russian armoured vehicles the Kurganets is the weaker one: with its 25 tons is not so different from the actual versions of BMP-3 actually in full production, while the Boomerang wheeled armoured vehicle (seriously, let's find an suitable english equivalent of romance languages (auto)blindo/blindee word, for God's sake) is at 33 tons.
Actually, the ARMATA(both T-14 and T-15) are being tested together with B-19 i.e. a BMP-3 with an Epoch turret so I will not be surprised at all if they will found that the advantages of the new model is not worth the cost of replacing not just the basic IFV but all the support and specialized vehicles already built using the old chassis (that is still in production).
The whole idea behind the new families were to simplify the logistical burden of the actual system by reducing the number of vehicles used in a tactical unit but it could be reached even better by using an already existing one IF their own performances are not too distant from actual requisites, something that BMP-3 line IMHO fit perfectly into.
 
Last edited:
Marcellogo said:
Let me get back to the old news about the possible/probable cancellation of Kurganets.

Of the three main families of the new generation of russian armoured vehicles the Kurganets is the weaker one: with its 25 tons is not so different from the actual versions of BMP-3 actually in full production, while the Boomerang wheeled armoured vehicle (seriously, let's find an suitable english equivalent of romance languages (auto)blindo/blindee word, for God's sake) is at 33 tons.
Actually, the ARMATA(both T-14 and T-15) are being tested together with B-19 i.e. a BMP-3 with an Epoch turret so I will not be surprised at all if they will found that the advantages of the new model is not worth the cost of replacing not just the basic IFV but all the support and specialized vehicles already built using the old chassis (that is still in production).
The whole idea behind the new families were to simplify the logistical burden of the actual system by reducing the number of vehicles used in a tactical unit but it could be reached even better by using an already existing one IF their own performances are not too distant from actual requisites, something that BMP-3 line IMHO fit perfectly into.
Click to expand...
Better protection and especially against mines and more room inside for the troops makes this very much worth the cost. Additional kurgy weight can go all the way up to 35 tons.
I also expect kurgy to have better buoyancy reserve on water.
 
Last edited:
What are the main benefits of Kurganets (compared to a T-15 in its minimum armour configuration)? I have a vague impression that Kurganets was more of an APC used in less intense combat roles with the T-15 intended to accompany that tanks as an IFV. But I've always felt like I was missing something.
 
Avimimus said:
What are the main benefits of Kurganets (compared to a T-15 in its minimum armour configuration)? I have a vague impression that Kurganets was more of an APC used in less intense combat roles with the T-15 intended to accompany that tanks as an IFV. But I've always felt like I was missing something.
Click to expand...

There is an APC and IFV Kurganets, though it remains to be seen which will be bought, and in what numbers.

T-15 is just much heavier and larger (and presumably expensive) so its super unrealistic to replace the massive IFV park with them, plus their deployment mobility is worse.
 
Avimimus said:
What are the main benefits of Kurganets (compared to a T-15 in its minimum armour configuration)? I have a vague impression that Kurganets was more of an APC used in less intense combat roles with the T-15 intended to accompany that tanks as an IFV. But I've always felt like I was missing something.
Click to expand...
Kurganets is not a vehicle: it's a whole family. T-15 a.t.c. is a vehicle of the Armata family.
The idea was to get rid of the plethora of different vehicles present in a russian great unit (up to 22 in a motor rifle division) to just a single main one + a secondary one for brigade.
And here lies the first problem.
The same term brigade hints clearly that those new families and the operative concept underneath them were conceived as a part of Serdiukov's reform plans that were mainly cancelled by his successor and actual MoD Shoigu.
With the re-introduction of the divisional level of command one of the fundament of the reform immediately went awry: a brigate level unit equipped with a single or a pair of different vehicles would be reasonable, a whole division would be instead just absurd.
Another big problem is instead the fact that the time to develop all the whole array of specialized vehicles already realized on the basis of the main legacy ones would be enormous in any case.
So, a.t.m. the Russian ground forces are at a crossing point: it is better to keep on with the introduction of the new families, all of them in a massive way or it is instead better to further modernize the legacy platform when convenient?
Quite pragmatically, they have decided to explore all possible paths in the same moment instead to choose just one A priori without even testing the alternatives routes: so given the enormous size of their own army they will acquire the new family and equip some units with them. in the same time they would modernize the old models when convenient and equip other units with them.
So they would both have on a side ( I guess near Ukraine) units with the most modern and combat capable fighting vehicles in the world, on the other a great numbers of still efficient and effective fighting units all around in the shortest time possible.
Given that the new families of vehicles would adopt a series of common , modular turrets they are actually installing them also on legacy ones (BMP-2 and BMP-3 above all) and the thing seem to works.
Some commonality was tried, with success, also combining components of different legacy families.
They have re-introducted into services some modernized BMP-1 with engine and transmission of the last series of BMP-2 and the turret of BTR-82A: the units that have tested it ended up preferring them to both of the other.
 
First image may be the first sighting of vacuum apfsds. Not sure though. Tank launched atgms, HE and HEAT shells as well.

Second image is a variety of 57mm shells for the high pressure 57mm cannon. Apfsds, HE, and even what looks to be the guided shell for the derivation 57mm anti aircraft cannon.

Third and fourth images are of what look to be the apfsds for the medium pressure 57mm cannon of the new epoch turret.

725389-2.jpg

972209.jpg

t309964.jpg

t627801.jpg
 
Last edited:
For better clarity the first and second image shown on this post is the high pressure 57mm cannon. T-15 and Derivation specifically. Third image is an older image of a mockup of the high pressure 57mm ammo.

Russian_hi-tech_firm_develops_new_combat_module_for_57mm_caliber_1.jpg
fsuhwf279ki11.jpg
uc1asy2cpr771.jpg


Fourth image is of the new epoch turret with the medium pressure 57mm cannon. Fifth image is an older image of the HE shell for the 57mm medium pressure cannon.

v-uhodyashem-godu-rossiiskie-bmp-poluchili-57-mm-pushki-i-novye-rakety-m6qn7q6e-1608895741.t.jpg
jtlav13.jpg
 
Would love to get feedback from you guys if the first image I posted above is the 3BM70 vacuum-2 apfsds.
 
Given the level of destruction of both armor and mechanized vehicles currently happening, there may be some reconsideration of the viability of the program(s) without re-engineering (?)
 
Forest Green said:
Halted indefinitely I would say given the current situation, i.e. cancelled until further notice.
Click to expand...
yasotay said:
Given the level of destruction of both armor and mechanized vehicles currently happening, there may be some reconsideration of the viability of the program(s) without re-engineering (?)
Click to expand...
As well as that, the fact the Armata program was deeply intertwined with the now totally discredited Brigade Tactical Group concept (much as the Stryker is with the present day U.S. Army Brigade Combat Team concept), along with the fact that gas turbine vehicles seem to be coming back into favor big time with the Russian army, are likely also major factors (ironically, the original Armata design concepts, before Uralvagonzavod convinced the government to give it full control of the program late in the day, were apparently gas turbine powered).

On an interesting note however; via the SNAFU blog:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1606997746929774593
View: https://twitter.com/yanvonzeebroeck/status/1606997746929774593


Whether this is some form of Russian maskirovka or a last ditch attempt to save the T-14 and the program in general remains to be seen. At the present time I'd say only the T-15 Heavy IFV, and possibly the 'Terminator 3', have a good chance at outliving the (seemingly inevitably doomed) Armata program.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Whether this is some form of Russian maskirovka or a last ditch attempt to save the T-14 and the program in general remains to be seen. At the present time I'd say only the T-15 Heavy IFV, and possibly the 'Terminator 3', have a good chance at outliving the (seemingly inevitably doomed) Armata program.
Click to expand...
All tank production facilities were devoted to the T-90M last I heard. And that was a media release from Russia itself.
 
Forest Green said:
Grey Havoc said:
Whether this is some form of Russian maskirovka or a last ditch attempt to save the T-14 and the program in general remains to be seen. At the present time I'd say only the T-15 Heavy IFV, and possibly the 'Terminator 3', have a good chance at outliving the (seemingly inevitably doomed) Armata program.
Click to expand...
All tank production facilities were devoted to the T-90M last I heard. And that was a media release from Russia itself.
Click to expand...
They(and their most critical components) literally live on separate production lines...
 
Ainen said:
Forest Green said:
All tank production facilities were devoted to the T-90M last I heard. And that was a media release from Russia itself.
Click to expand...
They(and their most critical components) literally live on separate production lines...
Click to expand...
I think the implication was that there would be only T-90M production lines. Russia has even been using the T-90Ss intended for India in Ukraine, such is the shortage. Is there a link to say the T-14 has actually entered series production? I mean, posts on Twitter can say literally anything.
 
Last edited:
Its war, and just like in previous wars what is known and needed is more important than what could be best. Also unlike what many think the state tests for new equipment is thorough and grueling. The t-14 is no exception and from what little I have heard there have been some pretty big issues with the engine and particularly the APS. The military apparantly has been telling them to make it right or it will not be purchased at all.

But this isnt doomer stuff cadets are being trained for this tank. It will be made in some derivation Russia is still trying to remove dysfunction, corruption and bad work culture from parts of their MIC. Now with more funding to the military branches I think in a few years we will see some programs expedited.

The problem with discussions of Russian kit is there are very many who have a pathological anger or disdain for it. Then you have the other side that waves away screw ups and criticisms and can see no wrong in Russian military equipment. I am a fanboy myself but I am not deluding myself that they have some extremely serious trials ahead. They will need to really rev up reform, policing and funding of all their MIC.

I am sure the T-14 will be made. Russian leaders in gov, media and all that need to stop making very optimistic timelines and be careful of bold claims. Though I will say with their stuff more often than not eventually those claims are true. Hope to see more respect for really awesome engineering and design. Their whole defense ideology and equipment is not like any other nations. So different, which is why I dearly love their stuff! Sorry for the ramble ;-)
 
I see where you are coming from, the phylosophy is different is all. As the Germans did, the USSR went to heavier tanks though WW2 but as the Germans did, were moving to lighter vehicles at the end. Not saying everything they did went that way but the trend very much did.

USSR/Russian kit has a reputation for being workmanlike with little care for perfect welds and more emphasis for being fit for purpose minus frills or 'owt which I can understand when it fits the purpose.

My own perfect WW2 tank layout is not a heavy tank but a light/recce tank, the T-50.
Well enough armed to be a decent 'sniper' amd with a good recce ability it was a fine piece of kit. It cost too much and was used as a medium so wasted with few being constructed, a lost opportunity.
 
The T14 seems to be all things to all men. Touted as a wonder tank compared with Leopard 2 and M1 it might have been expected to prove its worth somewhere in Ukraine. But equally, if it is like early Leopard 2 and M1 in the 1970s it may need a lot more work before it can go into frontline service.
Given that there is a w sorry special military operation going on we can hardly expect anyone to tell us what is really going on with T14.
 
it may need a lot more work before it can go into frontline service.
Click to expand...
T-14 is under development since 2009 and this is if you do not take into account many years of development of obj.195. So we have already 14 years and it is more than enough to start operating in conditions of real battlefield.
 
The problem with charm projects is that they become bigger than the sum of their parts. The problem then becomes less of the glorious techno wunderwaffe but what happens if it fails. Hence, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_cruiser_Deutschland .

A ship that was cursed by its name so bad they had to rename it, in case the allies got to sink a ship called Deutschland. Not something the ever trope aware party could allow. A sow's ear becomes not a silk purse but a barbed wire wrapped cucumber for the edification of the enemy.
 
Good job the "United States" supercarrier got canned. Dont think we ever named a warship United Kingdom or Great Britain.
 
uk 75 said:
Good job the "United States" supercarrier got canned. Dont think we ever named a warship United Kingdom or Great Britain.
Click to expand...

The USN has had five USS Americas (including a very early ship of the line that we gifted to France, and two major warships since the end of WW2). One of the original six USN frigates was USS United States and Truman (CVN-75) was almost named United States.
 
You also had a missile frigate/cruiser called England if I remember right. Named after a person rather than my place.
 
uk 75 said:
You also had a missile frigate/cruiser called England if I remember right. Named after a person rather than my place.
Click to expand...

Yep, a pair of them, even (one DE, then a DLG/CG), named for John C England, who was killed at Pearl Harbor. There were pithy quotes about "there will always be an England in the USN" but then CG-22 decommed in 1994 without replacement. I'm somewhat surprised there isn't a DDG now.
 
I'm doubtful about all of these claims about the demise of the T-14 program or how it is a poor design in general. While I'd wager that it is still quite far from combat ready there is definitely potential there. Russia isn't going to abandon their plans for future MBT development even though they have very serious other concerns at the moment.

A bigger problem than the quality of the most modern Russian tanks seems to be a lack of experienced and well trained crews for them as well as competent officers who aren't trying to sell the engines, tracks, and whatever else when nobody is looking.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom