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 ...
BUMP for later!
How do you make a low profile APC with a rear engine chassis?
Support rollers & live track, too, like U.S. vehicles have had since the 1940’s.
Has a similar outline as the M60. And if it is that secret, why is it running down the street in Moscow in broad daylight?
... and the gas is coming from eating beans... The idea of compartmentalized tank is fairly old and implementation proved to be cumbersome and expensive. Now consider the operators: the same drooling imbeciles you see in Youtube videos a lot lately. The combination will be fun to burn though :)
Like Ukrainian T-64 from 60-s...
The gun looks like a placeholder. The back side is very Abrams-like.
You’re right. So...the new thing about the T-14 is the gas turbine engine (along with improved fire controls)?
Used to be that new Russian hardware was revealed in the May Day parade in Moscow.
Hold my Vodka while I pop a wheelie
A little off topic here but I came across this story one day.
Hundreds of rusting tanks abandoned in secret Ukrainian depot unveiled as Russia’s armoured vehicles line its streets
There are more than 400 abandoned tanks at the plant in a secret, heavily guarded depot in the town of Kharkiv
The depot is in the Slobozhanshchyna region of eastern Ukraine - just 20 miles from the border with Russia
Photographer Pavel Itkin, 18, was able to sneak into the heavily monitored site without being spotted by guards
He spent two hours walking around the barely-used repair centre taking photographs of old tanks and engines
PUBLISHED: 09:37 EST, 3 March 2014
Crewless turret - long been a dream of pencil necks in the US procurement system...but you can’t navigate, or see obstacles immediately next to the tank. Cameras and periscopes can help, but nothing beats being able to look out from the top of the turret.
Gas Turbine - same hp as the M1, but interesting that the US is toying with the idea of converting M1s to a traditional diesel engine.
125 mm gun - proven effective.
Gun effective range - the range listed in the article eclipses the M1. I hope its propaganda, or the M1 range has secretly increased (its a function of the fire control system more than ammunition).
Autoloader - the Soviets and Ruskies have used for years. Cuts down on the number of conscripts needed to man the tank. But very basic functions, such as pulling security all night in shifts, favor having a 4th crew member.
Same chassis concept - A good idea on paper. The M1 chassis is actually used for a bridge layer, as an example. But a personnel carrier traditionally has a door in the REAR, for obvious reasons. The rear engine tank setup doesn’t seem to work with this.
But I’m looking at it as a tank vs tank weapon...this think might be very effective at terrorizing civilian populations in eastern Europe.
Bring back the Warthog!
Doesn’t matter all that much now. With drones, attack helos, and attack aircraft, the tank is just a show of strength on the modern battlefied. Tanks are vulnerable to even small AT crews with top attack. And if we have the tech, you know the Chinese have stolen it and sold it.
The U.S. and U.S.S.R. proved in WW2 - build enough mediocre tanks, you can overrun the best tanks in the world.
Not exactly a secret place, it has been mentioned in stories of Ukraine many times over the last year.
One of the commenters claims the pics were taken in 2012, and I thought I had seen them before.
I imagine that by now, many of those have found their way to the battlefield, and into rebel hands, as well.
I wouldn’t count the tank out just yet. Most of the vulnerabilities you cite presume one nation will have complete air superiority over the other - which is not guaranteed.
And top attack anti-tank missiles have been around probably longer than you think. At least 30 years, probably longer. They haven’t proven to be a game changer yet, and there are countermeasures.
The problem with anything that can stop a tank is...well...it has to be in the right place at the right time to be effective. Anti-tank missiles have relatively small ranges, and they generally can’t do a frontal attack (even with top attack, since another tank may fire back). So they have to lie in wait, not unlike deer hunting with a bow - everything has to be perfect.
And aircraft don’t stay up in the air forever. They have to refuel, get maintained, etc. This is nibbling on the edges of the age old debate about whether or not air power can take and hold ground. History has shown that air power alone cannot do it. So, I think tanks will be around for a while.
The T-80B and T-80U had a gas turbine engine in them which predates this tank by 30+ years.
BMP-3
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.