Posted on 03/30/2015 6:09:58 AM PDT by C19fan
In March, a Russian motorist filmed a very unusual, camouflaged tank rolling down a street outside Moscow. Most likely, it was the mysterious T-14 — or Armata — heavy tank, which could represent a major evolution in Russian tank design.
The Kremlin has largely kept the T-14 under wraps, both literally and metaphorically. But we have a pretty good idea of what it can do.
(Excerpt) Read more at medium.com ...
Isn’t the BMP-3 more of a side engine unit? A 1500 HP turbine is pretty big.
I saw a cartoon from the 1930’s once. It envisioned one policeman controlling several tank like vehicles with a radio.
I think the Soviets liked this type of idea, and took it seriously. If you think about it, most of the M1 could be done easily by remote control - and since the early 1980’s, the UCOFT and SIMNET have practically demonstrated how easy this would be. But UCOFT has no provision for loading and SIMNET has the loader press a button. We can’t actually load a round by remote control. The Russians can. So I think they still dream of a time in which a tank company commander sends out 50-60 ‘tank drones’, completely un-manned, into battle.
The pentagon has similar dreams. Their dreams are based on only the projectile being autoloaded, and the propellant being introduced into the chamber as an injected liquid.
Both bad ideas, IMHO.
The range listed is for the missiles launched via the main gun.
So factor in minimum arming range, ToF, and the fact they’re command guided, their new tank will still be dead before their missile is even 3/4 of the way downrange.
Overall I’d say they’re up to maybe M-60A3TTS, M-1IP, M-2A0/A1 level in sight, armor, and munitions technology which means they’re still 20-30 years behind us.
“The range listed is for the missiles launched via the main gun.”
Holy Sheridan Batman. That’s been tried before.
Another issue with an autoloader: What if you want to switch rounds when you have a live round in the breech, say from HEAT to APFSDS? Can it extract a live round and swap it with another one?
Maybe, but if you don’t have a crew, besides having a much lower profile, the tank can become more or less disposable— if it’s really a drone, you don’t need the heavy armor, you can just make more (and much cheaper and lighter) tanks.
Tsar Putin brought the May Day parades in Red Square back too
I think most people greatly underestimate how difficult it is to traverse terrain in a tank. You are constantly avoiding obstacles...usually holes in the ground. We already have heavily armed remote controlled weapons (predator drones). So I don’t think we will field unmanned tanks anytime soon.
May Day parades with red flags, hammer & sickle emblems, armored vehicles & mobile missile launchers, bemedaled generals & bigwigs on top of the Lenin mausoleum, all that give-peace-a-chance stuff.
BTW, during his school days Putin’s arrogance earned him the nickname `Tsar Putka’, a pun on the giant cannon Tsar Pushka inside the Kremlin wall.
They might show some prototypes on the parade, but the tank as described would be prohibitively expensive to go for mass production. And, consider the extra cost to make it idiot-proof - a must for Russians. Overall, I think it’s just a hype to intimidate us. Russian saying: don’t try to scare a porcupine with your bare bottom :)
They are switching to alcohol surrogates en masse: sanctions do work.
The BMP-3’ engine is mounted under the floor in the rear. The engine on one side, the transmission and PTO on the other. The PTO is for the hydrojets. And IIRC it’s a 500hp engine in the BMP-3, and the Russians don’t have anything more powerful than a 1,250hp turbine that’s small enough to fit a tank.
Hold it right there. The Russian T-34--especially the T-34/85 version with the 85 mm gun--was absolutely deadly to German tanks, especially since it could withstand a lot of punishment and the 85 mm tank gun could take out most German tanks. The Russians did field bigger tanks such as the IS-2 more comparable to the German tanks, but they served in much smaller numbers compared to the T-34/85.
T-80 had gas turbine since 1976 too.
The Russians love firing missiles out of the main guns going as far back as the T-64B and the AT-8. Older tanks such as the T-55 and T-62 have been modernized to have ATGM capability. The only Russian tank that doesn’t have ATGM capability is the T-72 even though the T-90 is actually a modernized T-72.
And they never get rid of anything, I bet they have depots full of T-34/85’s, IS-2, IS-3, T-10, etc somewhere east of the Urals.
Lol
The T-34/85’s advantages were light weight, Christie suspension, faster speed and shear numbers.... Even with the 85mm gun, they had to close to well within range of the German guns to score kills.
The older 76.2mm could kill Pzkfw III and IV at 500m. The 85mm could kill same tanks at greater ranges, but had a hard time with Tigers and Panthers. The T-35/85 required a tungsten penetrator from 500m to kill a Panther whereas the Panther could kill at almost double that range.
But why?
I don’t think a Sheridan ever fired a missile in anger...and I wonder if a Russian tank has either.
I don’t understand what a missile can do that a HEAT round can’t. If the Ruskies are still sticking to the missile and autoloader, they really are stuck in the past, IMHO.
BTW, in an earlier post, you mentioned the M1-IP! Half the tankers I talk to have never even heard of it. In 1991, that’s what we had at Camp Casey, Korea. Blast from the past.
Joseph Stalin is famous for saying
“Quantity has a quality of its own”.
Quantity is quality
Variant: Quantity has a quality all its own
This quote is reminiscent of the Marxist theoretical principle that steady quantitative changes can lead to a sudden qualitative leap. It is therefore likely that Stalin may have said something like this. However, in the variant “Quantity is quality”, there is an undialectical equation of the two. Stalin is therefore unlikely to have used this variant; the variant “Quantity has a quality all its own” is therefore more likely.
This quote is sometimes tied to a commentary on Russian tank and troop production
I’ve seen this attributed to him on dozens of web pages.
It probably should go in unsourced until someone can trace a primary source down.
It should probably go in the garbage can. 205.237.144.123 19:00, 20 February 2013 (UTC) Activist (talk) 19:06, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
bookmark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.