4
4
0
I hope for the sake of our Tankers, this is BS, but you can't sit on your Duff for two decades and not expect to get lapped in tank development. "Citing Russian news sources, a story in The National Interest by Dave Majumdar says Russian weapons developers claim that their Afghanit active protection system mounted on a T-14 Armata "has been proven effective at intercepting depleted uranium-core armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) cannon shells."..."
If the T14's missiles they describe are tube launched, not so worried. That really never works out well.
If the T14's missiles they describe are tube launched, not so worried. That really never works out well.
Upgraded Abrams tank vs. Russia's T-14 Armata
Posted from foxnews.com
Tanks
Strategy
Logistics
Military Industry
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
1
1
0
Also, turns out manufacturing of these tanks is expensive and difficult, and foreign arms buyers want T80s and T90s instead.
Looks like the Russians won't mass produce it after all.
Looks like the Russians won't mass produce it after all.
(1)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
1SG (Join to see) the active defense system and some of the other features are capable of being spun off in the way of retrofits for existing systems, which are already mass produced. Once upon a time, the T80 and T90 were deemed too expensive to mass produce, so they were there as the boogey man under the bed for Force planners. Now they are being produced in larger numbers to be an export and now a threat. I remember in 1995/1996 the T80 being something that caused concern for the Armor community. The T72 was the boogeyman that wasn't as the Iraqi desert was littered with their flipped, blown off turrets in 1991.
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
LTC Jason Mackay - The Russians might know how to build a quality tank all the way back to WWII, but in my view armor is a dinosaur that is a whole lot less survivable and relevant on today's battlefield. If we ever get in a peer war, it'll likely be the Navy and Air components that are decisive.
Having said that, building advanced weaponry is both hard and expensive. We have had trouble fielding acceptable numbers of F-35s and F-22s for similar reasons, and it is why (among other things) we are still operating 80's vintage weapon systems across nearly all armored formations.
The Russians simply don't have the money to do it absent arms sales, and frankly don't have an enemy that would necessitate such a vehicle in mass numbers.
I think they realize this, and are trolling us with it's supposed capabilities to get us to spend money on countering a non-threat.
Wouldn't be the first time the Russians have done so.
Having said that, building advanced weaponry is both hard and expensive. We have had trouble fielding acceptable numbers of F-35s and F-22s for similar reasons, and it is why (among other things) we are still operating 80's vintage weapon systems across nearly all armored formations.
The Russians simply don't have the money to do it absent arms sales, and frankly don't have an enemy that would necessitate such a vehicle in mass numbers.
I think they realize this, and are trolling us with it's supposed capabilities to get us to spend money on countering a non-threat.
Wouldn't be the first time the Russians have done so.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
We gave a bunch of Abrams Tanks to the Iraq he Army in the Iraq he Army turn them over to Hezbollah. I wouldn't be surprised that one or two made it back to Russia for destructive testing.
https://goo.gl/images/LWQcXz
https://goo.gl/images/LWQcXz
Image: Video Of Hezbollah Transporting American Tanks - Business Insider
Found on Google from businessinsider.com
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I wonder how the autonomous wingman maneuvers and knows the engagement area and fire patterns.
(0)
(0)
LTC Jason Mackay
I am assuming low tech, one of the three man crew drives it. Likely just get the auto wingman to pop out, draw fire, so the tank can kill the enemy tank.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google