New Russian Stealth Tank to Have Remotely Controlled Gun Turret

[zzzz]

Russia’s future main battle tank (MBT) will be equipped with a remotely controlled gun, the Izvestia newspaper said on Monday citing a defense industry source.

The gun will be digitally controlled by a crewmember located in a separate compartment, which would be made from composite materials and protected by multi-layered armor. The crew compartment will be also isolated from the motor compartment to increase survivability on the battlefield.

The secret project, dubbed Armata, has been approved by the Russian Defense Ministry. It is being implemented by the tank manufacturer Uralvagonzavod in Russia’s Urals region.

Work from other projects, including Object 195 and Black Eagle, will be incorporated in Armata's design.

The prototype of Armata MBT is expected to be ready by 2013. The first deliveries to the Russian Armed Forces are scheduled for 2015.

Russian experts believe that the appearance of the remotely controlled gun would eventually lead to the development of a fully robotic tank which could be deployed as part of a spearhead in the offensive.

Also, the tank will be designed with stealth technology, that is, reducing visibility to radar, infrared and other regions of the spectrum by specially designed geometric shapes and radar absorbing materials and coatings, which dramatically reduces the range of detection and thus improves the survival of the combat vehicle.

New Russian Tank to Have Remotely Controlled Gun | Defense | RIA Novosti

 

[RayKalm]

Very good.

 

[Android]

Come on lets buy it

 

[Birbal]

It's amusing how people complain that Russia is still using Cold War era tanks with the T-90 just being an upgraded version of the T-72. In reality, it's no different from anywhere else, such as in America, where we're still upgraded variants of the old M1 tank.

In fact, Russia is making a major leap forward with the development of this Armata tank. Isolating the turret from the crew compartment is a major visionary idea that could set the Armata tank apart from all the other tanks, which have been recycling the same basic structure for at least almost 60 years.

 

[Audio]

It's amusing how people complain that Russia is still using Cold War era tanks with the T-90 just being an upgraded version of the T-72. In reality, it's no different from anywhere else, such as in America, where we're still upgraded variants of the old M1 tank.

[/QUOTE]

You conveniently neglect to mention the superiority of the M1 vs anything that the Russians can offer. And the giant leap present between the M60 and the M1 which the Russians weren't able to follow with T-72/T-90 series.

 

[Zabaniyah]

It's amusing how people complain that Russia is still using Cold War era tanks with the T-90 just being an upgraded version of the T-72. In reality, it's no different from anywhere else, such as in America, where we're still upgraded variants of the old M1 tank.

In fact, Russia is making a major leap forward with the development of this Armata tank. Isolating the turret from the crew compartment is a major visionary idea that could set the Armata tank apart from all the other tanks, which have been recycling the same basic structure for at least almost 60 years.

The M1 Abrams and the Leopard 2 come from a common ancestor - MBT-70:

It has a very good record. But then, the best tank choice depends on the country user's operational requirements.

I can't simply run around in an Abrams in my country. It'll die. That makes the T-90 or any similar class better for me.

This Russian development is interesting, let's see

 

[Birbal]

You conveniently neglect to mention the superiority of the M1 vs anything that the Russians can offer. And the giant leap present between the M60 and the M1 which the Russians weren't able to follow with T-72/T-90 series.

The T-72B was certainly a match for the M1A1. Not sure about the M1A2 or T-90 (information about them is mostly classified, so RHAe armor thickness and other parameters for these tanks are only speculation ).

Here's what Jane's has to say about the Kontakt-5 ERA developed by the USSR:

Jane's International Defence Review 7/2007, pg. 15:

"IMPENETRABLE RUSSIAN TANK ARMOUR STANDS UP TO EXAMINATION"

By Richard M. Ogorkiewicz

Claims by NATO testers in the 1990s that the armour of Soviet Cold War tanks was “effectively impenetrable” have been supported by comments made following similar tests in the US.

Speaking at a conference on “The Future of Armoured Warfare” in London on the 30th May, IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness explained that US Army tests involving firing trials on 25 T-72A1 and 12 T-72B1 tanks (each fitted with Kontakt-5 explosive reactive armour [ERA]) had confirmed NATO tests done on other former Soviet tanks left behind in Germany after the end of the Cold War. The tests showed that the ERA and composite Armour of the T-72s was incredibly resilient to 1980s NATO anti-tank weapons.

In contrast to the original, or 'light', type of ERA which is effective only against shaped charge jets, the 'heavy' Kontakt-5 ERA is also effective against the long-rod penetrators of APFSDS tank gun projectiles, anti-tank missiles, and anti-armour rotary cannons. Explosive reactive armour was valued by the Soviet Union and its now-independent component states since the 1970s, and almost every tank in the eastern-European military inventory today has either been manufactured to use ERA or had ERA tiles added to it, including even the T-55 and T-62 tanks built forty to fifty years ago, but still used today by reserve units.

"During the tests we used only the weapons which existed with NATO armies during the last decade of the Cold War to determine how effective such weapons would have been against these examples of modern Soviet tank design. Our results were completely unexpected. When fitted to the T-72A1 and B1 the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU (Depleted Uranium) penetrators of the M829A1 APFSDS (used by the 120 mm guns of the Cold War era US M1 Abrams tanks), which are among the most formidable of current tank gun projectiles. We also tested the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger (the gun of the A-10 Thunderbolt II Strike Plane), the 30mm M320 (the gun of the AH-64 Apache Attack Helicopter) and a range of standard NATO Anti Tank Guided Missiles – all with the same result of no penetration or effective destruction of the test vehicles. The combined protection of the standard armour and the ERA gives the Tanks a level of protection equal to our own. The myth of Soviet inferiority in this sector of arms production that has been perpetuated by the failure of downgraded T-72 export tanks in the Gulf Wars has, finally, been laid to rest. The results of these tests show that if a NATO/Warsaw Pact confrontation had erupted in Europe, the Soviets would have had parity (or perhaps even superiority) in armour” – U.S. Army Spokesperson at the show.

Newer KE penetrators have been designed since the Cold War to defeat the Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well). As a response the Russian Army has produced a new type of ERA, “Relikt”, which is claimed to be two to three times as effective as Kontakt-5 and completely impenetrable against modern Western warheads.

Despite the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Tank industry has managed to maintain itself and its expertise in armour production, resulting in modern designs (such as the T-90, the T-95 and mysterious Black Eagle) to replace the, surprisingly, still effective Soviet era tanks. These tests will do much to discount the argument of the “Lion of Babylon” (the ineffective Iraqi version of the T-72M) and export quality tanks being compared to the more sophisticated and upgraded versions which existed in the Soviet military’s best Tank formations and continue to be developed in a resurgent Russian military industrial complex."

 

[Zabaniyah]

On a side note, the T-72s the Iraqis used back in the First Gulf War were downgraded variants. AKA: "Monkey Models"

Soviet armor were pretty formidable machines. And likely still are.

 

[IND151]

how about fitting turret of Armata aka T 99 on Arjun Mk2 hull?

surely Arjun has more space for crew and ammo?

 

[Audio]

The T-72B was certainly a match for the M1A1. Not sure about the M1A2 or T-90 (information about them is mostly classified, so RHAe armor thickness and other parameters for these tanks are only speculation ).

Here's what Jane's has to say about the Kontakt-5 ERA developed by the USSR:

Lol...you pulled this from some forum?
A gaming forum too at that? Jane's Rewiev about Russian tank armour - Battlefront Forum

Let me link you a proper tank debate forum thread about your wunder Russian armour. The article is considered fake there.
EFFECTIVENESS OF SOVIET HEAVY ERA - Tanknet

Working good, right? And this is no monkey model, it's a Russian tank from Chechnya. Second pic shows T-72 with Kontakt 5.

You actually say that 70 tons equals 40 tons in protection terms. Right?.....

Here are some armor figures for you to digest. They are widely regarded as the most accurate representation of values available to the non-military world.
http://collinsj.tripod.com/protect.htm, they have been posted on this forum already.

Enjoy.

 

[Saif_ullah]

looks cool

 

[OrionHunter]

Wow! The Armored Corps would be delirious just looking at this beaut!

Now when do the Indians plan to get their hands on this one as well as the Russian Black Eagle? Sooner than later, I guess!

 

[Zabaniyah]

The Black Eagle was a prototype.

 

[zzzz]

..................

 

[zzzz]

[/CENTER]

Working good, right? And this is no monkey model, it's a Russian tank from Chechnya. Second pic shows T-72 with Kontakt 5.

This tank ran out of ammo and then all crew left it.