2015 Moscow parade rehersal (new stuff , Armata, Kurganets , Boomerang)

[Prechko]

Its own, means this?
View attachment 219485

One of the tanks moving on Red Square suddenly stopped while others drove on. The engine was still rumbling but it wouldn't move. After an attempt to tow it failed, the T-14 rolled away under its own steam about 15 minutes later.

From @Associated press.

 

[ptldM3]

I think You have a comprenehsion problem. I didn't say T-14 is crap.

You implied it by posting a picture of a T-14 and then saying "OMG" and "WTF". Look up the definition of passive aggressive trolling.

What I underlined is the size and sloped shape advantages of T-14 you proudly told us a few days ago.

The T-14's turret is clearly smaller then the Altay's, how do you fail to see that? It is substantially smaller then most other tank turrets. Also when did i mention anything about the slope? I mentioned that the T-14 has a clear advantage over the Altay only after you Turks started trolling and making fun of the T-14. And my point still stands firm, the T-14's unmanned turret is a massive advantage in survivability.

I just asked It was the same slopped/lower turret You told us or There are some disappointment you meet When you see real T-14 ? In other word, What did you hope and What did you found ? Is it needed to quote what you have written a few days ago? Just enlighten us...

Stop putting words in my mouth, i never said anything about slopped, i was talking about the size of the turret and the weight savings which would result in a smaller turret.

do you need a microphone?
i really wonder how old are you?

You and Cabalti need your eyes checked:

Look at the width of both turrets especially the T-14 turret, notice how it tapers off towards the end.


I fully expect the Turks to start arguing that the Super duper advanced and super heavy and dominant Altay has a thicker hatch/roof armor:



Altay Hatch/roof thickness:

Armata hatch:

 

[Kamil_baku]

From @Associated press.

You believe your eyes or Russian "press" ?

You implied it by posting a picture of a T-14 and then saying "OMG" and "WTF". Look up the definition of passive aggressive trolling.










The T-14's turret is clearly smaller then the Altay's, how do you fail to see that? It is substantially smaller then most other tank turrets. Also when did i mention anything about the slope? I mentioned that the T-14 has a clear advantage over the Altay only after you Turks started trolling and making fun of the T-14. And my point still stands firm, the T-14's unmanned turret is a massive advantage in survivability.









Stop putting words in my mouth, i never said anything about slopped, i was talking about the size of the turret and the weight savings which would result in a smaller turret.








You and Cabalti need your eyes checked:



View attachment 219487
View attachment 219490




View attachment 219488 View attachment 219489



Look at the width of both turrets especially the T-14 turret, notice how it tapers off towards the end.


I fully expect the Turks to start arguing that the Super duper advanced and super heavy and dominant Altay has a thicker hatch/roof armor:



Altay Hatch/roof thickness:


View attachment 219493


Armata hatch:


View attachment 219494

the second picture is not even Altay.. its the Korean tank.. Dude, i feel like i should train you about army technologies and give sertificate Uraaa
Go to play your video games..

 

[ptldM3]

You believe your eyes or Russian "press" ?

There was hundreds of people that said it eventually moved on its own power including a someone from Russian Defence Forum that was there. Nice trolling attempt, yes the T-14 has some kinks it needs to sort out before final production but at least the T-14 designer put in the effort to use their own engine and not just purchase one from abroad. What part of the Altay is even Turkish? It's tracks?

You believe your eyes or Russian "press" ?

the second picture is not even Altay.. its the Korean tank.. Dude, i feel like i should train you about army technologies and give sertificate Uraaa
Go to play your video games..

I fixed it, i mixed both pictures up because the Altay copied the K-2. The Altay is the tank that has skateboard tape/sandpaper all over the top of it.

 

[cabatli_53]

You implied it by posting a picture of a T-14 and then saying "OMG" and "WTF". Look up the definition of passive aggressive trolling.










The T-14's turret is clearly smaller then the Altay's, how do you fail to see that? It is substantially smaller then most other tank turrets. Also when did i mention anything about the slope? I mentioned that the T-14 has a clear advantage over the Altay only after you Turks started trolling and making fun of the T-14. And my point still stands firm, the T-14's unmanned turret is a massive advantage in survivability.









Stop putting words in my mouth, i never said anything about slopped, i was talking about the size of the turret and the weight savings which would result in a smaller turret.








You and Cabalti need your eyes checked:



View attachment 219487
View attachment 219490




View attachment 219488 View attachment 219489



Look at the width of both turrets especially the T-14 turret, notice how it tapers off towards the end.


I fully expect the Turks to start arguing that the Super duper advanced and super heavy and dominant Altay has a thicker hatch/roof armor:



Altay Hatch/roof thickness:


View attachment 219493


Armata hatch:


View attachment 219494

Ruski, You compare hatch thickness of Altay with Armata and reaching a conclusion about protection level ? That's the way How you are presenting your knowledge about such matters ?

Armata has two hatches on chassis which is directly an open target to top attack missiles. That's why It must be protected more than usual.

but Altay is a different story since Altay's clear turret shape hides hatch. At final version, The front of turret will even be longer with integration of Akkor radars. That's why hatches are opened sides but not vertically. During turning of turret, It is hidden under the armours. It is same at K-2 and other tanks.

 

[Shahnameh]

@ptldM3

Bro, why are you even wasting your time with these torks?
These guys are either trolls or mentally handicapped.

They actually try to compare themselves with Russia in terms of military tech. They should just stick to ripping of a Korean K-2 tank and renaming it.

Anyway, these people are just jokers. Every few years they unveil a new ground vehicle, which do not even go into production, they just unveil these things for propaganda purposes.

Their military is a joke. They're reliant heavily on import of parts etc for all these systems, which themselves are just rip offs. These guys are as much self sufficient as saudi arabia

Anyway, you're bringing shame to Russia to even compare yourselves to these jokers. When these jokers can manufacture a proper surface to air missile without begging NATO, China, when they can design and build a submarine without putting together a german sub and when they can actually make a tank without ripping of a k-2 then they can talk.

When it come to real strategic military hardware, these torks are nowhere to be found.

 

[ptldM3]

Ruski, You compare hatch thickness of Altay with Armata and reaching a conclusion about protection level ? That's the way How you are presenting your knowledge about such matters ?

Turk, i am comparing hatch thickness to protection level. Because there is no compensation to thick armor. I think only a Turkish Altay fanboy would argue that the Altay's ~.5-1" thick hatch/roof is comparable to the T-14's ~5"-6" armor.

Armata has two hatches on chassis which is directly an open target to top attack missiles. That's why It must be protected more than usual.

And guess what the Altay has 2 paper thin hatches on its paper thin turret, for a grand total of 3 hatches, while the T-14 only has 2 hatches that are about 5 to 6 times thicker.


Moral of the story, you make fun of the T-14 having 2 hatches on the hull while the Altay has 2 hatches on the Turret with one also located on the hull as well. At the end of the day the T-14 can withstand some top attacks and RPG's hits to the roof while the Altay would be lucky to withstand a standard .50 cal to the roof.

but Altay is a different story since Altay's clear turret shape hides hatch. At final version, The front of turret will even be longer with integration of Akkor radars. That's why hatches are opened sides but not vertically.

Yes and the Altay must also have the ability to fly, right? The Altay's hatches are not hidden from anyone and even if they were hidden, it would not change the fact that the Altay has a paper thin roof. Let me repeat that, thin hatch means thin roof.

@ptldM3



Anyway, you're bringing shame to Russia to even compare yourselves to these jokers. When these jokers can manufacture a proper surface to air missile without begging NATO, China, when they can design and build a submarine without putting together a german sub and when they can actually make a tank without ripping of a k-2 then they can talk.

When it come to real strategic military hardware, these torks are nowhere to be found.

Well they are the one's that started it first, so i had no option other then to defend my honor. But it is pathetic how they started the fight but now are struggling to counter my arguments. The latest argument which was from a Turkish "think Tank" was that the T-14 has 2 hatches so it is "vulnerable" yet the Altay has 3 hatches that are paper thin.

Another guy was bragging about the Altay's FCS (fire control system) being "modern". I'm not sure why he was bragging about some unknown "modern" FCS, someone forgot to give him the memo that FCS systems have been around for 60+ years and all tanks have them. The guy clearly didn't know anything about FCS or tanks in general. so when he read that the Atlay had a FCS he jumped on it as if it was something unique only to the Altay.

And yet most turks also keep claiming that the T-14 turret is bigger then the Altay's. I don't know which of those comments are the dumbest.

 

[SOHEIL]

You asked. I didn't say anything about the Russian designers. What do you think happens when an (un)manned turret jammed or something? If you consider my answer BS, please have the courtesy to provide a better answer.

there must be some mechanism to prevent it !

 

[ptldM3]

there must be some mechanism to prevent it !

Anything that is mechanical can break, with that said Russia has been using autoloaders for over 50 years, every tank from the T-64 to the Armata has auto loaders, Russians are all about reliability so if the auto loader would have issues they would have abandoned the design decades ago but they did not which says a lot. Many other tanks including new "western" tanks have also switched over to autoloaders. The people bashing autoloaders are obviously jealous, they are getting defensive and insecure; in their mind Russia is supposed to be outdated and rusty and their engineering is supposed to be pathetic. So when the T-14, T-15, Boomerang, Kurganets 25, ect came out the same people had to find anything and everything to attack the T-14 on, no matter how silly, the worst thing is that many of the people are trolling but will pretend that they are not. The biggest arguments people have towards the T-14 is that tanks are a thing of the past and drones are the future (as if drones will stop entire armies fielding heavy tanks and having air superiority). The other argument is that the T-14 is just an Abrams "rip off" and of course the proverbial but...but...but...it's an auto loader therefor it will jam and we will just destroy it.

 

[SOHEIL]

Anything that is mechanical can break, with that said Russia has been using autoloaders for over 50 years, every tank from the T-64 to the Armata has auto loaders, Russians are all about reliability so if the auto loader would have issues they would have abandoned the design decades ago but they did not which says a lot. Many other tanks including new "western" tanks have also switched over to autoloaders. The people bashing autoloaders are obviously jealous, they are getting defensive and insecure; in their mind Russia is supposed to be outdated and rusty and their engineering is supposed to be pathetic. So when the T-14, T-15, Boomerang, Kurganets 25, ect came out the same people had to find anything and everything to attack the T-14 on, no matter how silly, the worst thing is that many of the people are trolling but will pretend that they are not. The biggest arguments people have towards the T-14 is that tanks are a thing of the past and drones are the future (as if drones will stop entire armies fielding heavy tanks and having air superiority). The other argument is that the T-14 is just an Abrams "rip off" and of course the proverbial but...but...but...it's an auto loader therefor it will jam and we will just destroy it.

Any picture from armata's autoloader ?

 

[ptldM3]

Any picture from armata's autoloader ?

No.

 

[Cossack25A1]

The T-14 may not look like as what the "proposed" designs that have circulated across the Internet, but it surely look good.

 

[vostok]

 

[Kamil_baku]

@ptldM3

Bro, why are you even wasting your time with these torks?
These guys are either trolls or mentally handicapped.

They actually try to compare themselves with Russia in terms of military tech. They should just stick to ripping of a Korean K-2 tank and renaming it.

Anyway, these people are just jokers. Every few years they unveil a new ground vehicle, which do not even go into production, they just unveil these things for propaganda purposes.

Their military is a joke. They're reliant heavily on import of parts etc for all these systems, which themselves are just rip offs. These guys are as much self sufficient as saudi arabia

Anyway, you're bringing shame to Russia to even compare yourselves to these jokers. When these jokers can manufacture a proper surface to air missile without begging NATO, China, when they can design and build a submarine without putting together a german sub and when they can actually make a tank without ripping of a k-2 then they can talk.

When it come to real strategic military hardware, these torks are nowhere to be found.

I wonder what is your nationality that you feel embarrassed to put flag on your profile..

Turk, i am comparing hatch thickness to protection level. Because there is no compensation to thick armor. I think only a Turkish Altay fanboy would argue that the Altay's ~.5-1" thick hatch/roof is comparable to the T-14's ~5"-6" armor.









And guess what the Altay has 2 paper thin hatches on its paper thin turret, for a grand total of 3 hatches, while the T-14 only has 2 hatches that are about 5 to 6 times thicker.


Moral of the story, you make fun of the T-14 having 2 hatches on the hull while the Altay has 2 hatches on the Turret with one also located on the hull as well. At the end of the day the T-14 can withstand some top attacks and RPG's hits to the roof while the Altay would be lucky to withstand a standard .50 cal to the roof.








Yes and the Altay must also have the ability to fly, right? The Altay's hatches are not hidden from anyone and even if they were hidden, it would not change the fact that the Altay has a paper thin roof. Let me repeat that, thin hatch means thin roof.




Well they are the one's that started it first, so i had no option other then to defend my honor. But it is pathetic how they started the fight but now are struggling to counter my arguments. The latest argument which was from a Turkish "think Tank" was that the T-14 has 2 hatches so it is "vulnerable" yet the Altay has 3 hatches that are paper thin.

Another guy was bragging about the Altay's FCS (fire control system) being "modern". I'm not sure why he was bragging about some unknown "modern" FCS, someone forgot to give him the memo that FCS systems have been around for 60+ years and all tanks have them. The guy clearly didn't know anything about FCS or tanks in general. so when he read that the Atlay had a FCS he jumped on it as if it was something unique only to the Altay.

And yet most turks also keep claiming that the T-14 turret is bigger then the Altay's. I don't know which of those comments are the dumbest.

dude, you have no clue about army technology... you are such a kid..

Any picture from armata's autoloader ?

find the answer for this video....

 

[Kamil_baku]

You implied it by posting a picture of a T-14 and then saying "OMG" and "WTF". Look up the definition of passive aggressive trolling.










The T-14's turret is clearly smaller then the Altay's, how do you fail to see that? It is substantially smaller then most other tank turrets. Also when did i mention anything about the slope? I mentioned that the T-14 has a clear advantage over the Altay only after you Turks started trolling and making fun of the T-14. And my point still stands firm, the T-14's unmanned turret is a massive advantage in survivability.









Stop putting words in my mouth, i never said anything about slopped, i was talking about the size of the turret and the weight savings which would result in a smaller turret.








You and Cabalti need your eyes checked:



View attachment 219487


View attachment 219496


View attachment 219489



Look at the width of both turrets especially the T-14 turret, notice how it tapers off towards the end.


I fully expect the Turks to start arguing that the Super duper advanced and super heavy and dominant Altay has a thicker hatch/roof armor:



Altay Hatch/roof thickness:


View attachment 219493


Armata hatch:


View attachment 219494

ALtays Hatch sicknes..