Russian armour development.

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT

00_Chem_AJB Links 6/4/2008 3:05:01 PM

* http://russianarmor.info/Tanks...

** http://russianarmor.info/Tanks...

*** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...

*** http://www.globalsecurity.org/...

Quote Reply

00_Chem_AJB Links 6/4/2008 3:06:03 PM

Sorry Link 2 should be Link 1.

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 6/4/2008 5:01:01 PM

I see that you use Vasily 's site Chem , you 're right and you learn fast ;-)

""So my question is has Russia focused on making better ERA in favour of further development of composite armour more commonly seen on Western MBTs, after all Russia was the first to use composite (Combination K) on the T-64""

We don 't know really . It seems that the Russians are making excellent progress in active systems . By that , I mean "hardkill" systems as well as ERA . Russia has been using some very clever materials based on fiberglass and Kevlar for years .
I share the view that the Russians are correct in the choice they 're making .

In the old duel projectile vs armor , the projectile always won in the end and today hasn 't changed anything : an Hellfire or a Maverick will kill any MBT (exemple) .
So , to decide to go easy on the armor but to focus on defeating the incoming projectile is most probably the way to go .
If you can kill the APFSDS or the AT Missile before it hits , why would you need tons of armor made of steel or composites ?

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Herald12345 6/4/2008 5:01:47 PM

Now there is alot of speculation as to what will be Russia's new tank when they unveil it next year, but it seems it will incorporate Russia's latest ERA Kactus.** So my question is has Russia focused on making better ERA in favour of further development of composite armour more commonly seen on Western MBTs, after all Russia was the first to use composite (Combination K) on the T-64***

1. Israel invented explosive reactive armor in reaction to Russian Munroe Effect anti-tank missiles used by the Syrians and Egyptians,.

2, The Russians were the first to deploy composite armor, but the US, Britain, Italy and even France experimented with various schemes of composite armor as early as 1942 in the case of the British. The schemes were almost universally rejected on the basis of COST to manufacture.

Herald

Quote Reply

Herald12345 Sigh. 6/4/2008 5:08:48 PM

I see that you use Vasily 's site Chem , you 're right and you learn fast ;-)

""So my question is has Russia focused on making
better ERA in favour of further development of composite armour more
commonly seen on Western MBTs, after all Russia was the first to use
composite (Combination K) on the T-64""

We don 't know really . It seems that the Russians are making excellent progress in active systems . By that , I mean "hardkill" systems as well as ERA . Russia has been using some very clever materials based on fiberglass and Kevlar for years .
I share the view that the Russians are correct in the choice they 're making .

In the old duel projectile vs armor , the projectile always won in the end and today hasn 't changed anything : an Hellfire or a Maverick will kill any MBT (exemple) .
So , to decide to go easy on the armor but to focus on defeating the incoming projectile is most probably the way to go .
If you can kill the APFSDS or the AT Missile before it hits , why would you need tons of armor made of steel or composites ?

Cheers .

See you are here again to spout some more of your BS.

Chem-the projectile is always going to win. The purpose of the armor package as well as combined arms tactics from the very first Little John down to the latest RoK tank, is to play the combat percentages-to make sure enough tanks and crews survive to get through the anti-tank defense to exploit with shock, as they are supposed to exploit.

Herald

Quote Reply

00_Chem_AJB Come to think of it.... 6/4/2008 6:38:33 PM

Actually what you and Herlad are both saying makes sense. In the strategic view the Russians would use thousands and thousands of tanks in an assault, because they had so many, their armour needed to be just enough to ensure enough broke through the defensive lines, and as Herald said it is down to survivability statistics, the more tanks you have the less armour you can afford to put on them and still ensure mission success. This also works economically as it lowers to cost of each tank to the point you can afford to make thousands and thousands of them. The whole point of armour is to give a unit survivability on the battlefield, for the Russians survivability was also in numbers.

Now to what you said Blue about the Russian adoption of hard kill systems, as Russian tanks were designed as assault units, for use against soft targets and defensive infantry positions, so the biggest threat they would face would be anti tank missiles, which use HEAT warheads, which ERA can account for, and with the deployment of more lethal warheads like sabots and tandem HEATs, destroying the missile before it hits the tank becomes more desireable, enter the active protection systems.

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 6/4/2008 7:10:55 PM

I 'm glad that we are back on the topic .

Nowadays , the Russians do not have anymore "thousands and thousands" of tanks . I may say that at the time , the Russian tactic (swarm) would have worked up to border of France where France would have used the Tactical Nuclear Pluton missile . But that is not the point .

Since we 're discussing a choice and a new tactic , there is no need to discuss the Russian "steel" .
Hardkill systems works great when they 're well built , I can 't deny that . I wish that France (or others) would be as good as the Russians are right now . The Isrealis are working on a pretty good hardkill system too and knowing them , it will do the job . They 've been hammered enough by Hezbollah to work hard on the system ...

""Now to what you said Blue about the Russian adoption of hard kill systems, as Russian tanks were designed as assault units, for use against soft targets and defensive infantry positions, so the biggest threat they would face would be anti tank missiles, which use HEAT warheads, which ERA can account for, and with the deployment of more lethal warheads like sabots and tandem HEATs, destroying the missile before it hits the tank becomes more desireable, enter the active protection systems.""

Indeed .
The problem the Russian engineerers are facing is not the AT missile , it is rather slow and can be dealt with , the problem lies in Western APFSDSs . These are coming at you real fast and they are small . Designing a system who can stop an APFSDS is a complicated thing . The best approach needs three things :
- a 360deg fast radar systems coupled to a fast FCS
- a fast computer to do the work
- a hardkill system based on a strong enough shrapnel cloud to kill or deviate a very strong rod

All of this must be fitted on a Tank (weight , size , replenishment , etc ...) Big problem but the Russians are very clever .
It is the reason why the Russians do not care about the latest developments in composite armors , they think that they can manage a good hardkill system . Arena already does a excellent job as killing AT missiles , soon they 'll have something better . I dare say that the new system will be part of the new Black eagle (which already use the Kactus ERA) .

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 6/4/2008 7:38:31 PM

I repeat , where are SYSOPS ?

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 6/4/2008 8:14:24 PM

SYSOPS ?

Cheers .

Quote Reply

Bluewings12 6/4/2008 11:01:45 PM

""Your own words-describe Russian tactics in your own words.""

Aaah , I see where you' re going now . Unfortunatly , no-one has the answer for sure , not even the Russian themselves !

You see , the Russians are building up a brand new Army right now and the hardware they put on line is telling . By "brand new army" , I mean that they had to cut down dramaticaly (spelling ?) the numbers of fighting Units and they had to think about something else than "swarm" tactics . So , they tried and they are still trying to get everything to work together in the same way than we do in the West : Space Intels , then C4s , then Airforce , then TACSOPS .

When I say that what they put on line is telling , I am not talking about numbers , but about battelfield technologies .
There is one thing the Russian are known for : they are clever and cunning .
The Russians do not have any battefield management system worth of talking about like we have in the West ( French FINDERS system , US FBCB2 system , etc ...) , so they rely on hard learned drills and survival on the spot .
This is why they are developping hardkill systems because they cannot act as quickly as we can on the battlefield , they must erase the potential ATGM kill .

To archive that , they count on two things first : their Troopers armed with medium range anti-tank weapons (the famous RPG-7 series) and a system who can protect the tank from an unseen fire (ARENA and what else ?) . The Russians are not convinced that they can win the Air Dominance (they are right to think so) , so the survival on the ground is of the utmost importance .
To say further than that (what their own drills are) is unclear even to people in the know like myself . I am still talking (Skype and Teamspeak) and E-mailing Russian Tankers and they don 't say much but they have a great interest in what we are doing , especialy on how we use our AT Teams .
*****
When the Russian went in (in the past) , they were using a lot less Troopers than they do now because they tried to use the Guderian Art of Warfare : shock and speed . They tried it in A-Stan long ago and against US armed Afghanis , it didn 't work .

They are now on something more "western" .
But there is one thing the World has to understand : Europe doesn 't fear anymore the Russian Army . France and Germany alone could stop on the ground the Russian Army (remember that we are discussing ground warfare and not total war) .

So , what are the Russian tactics right now with Armored Batallions (or Divisions) ?
If we knew for sure , we would be talking about it ...

Cheers .

Quote Reply

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT