It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia's new generation TFV will enter service.

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   
New BMPT tank fighting and support/apc vehicle

CLICK HERE FOR DETAILS/SPECS PICTURE

link on russian www.lenta.ru...

translated:

The capacity of the new tank support vehicle doubles the efficiency of six armored vehicles and 40 soldiers


The Russia army is taking a new military vehicle in the arsenal - the Terminator. Such a strange name has been given to the new tank support vehicle. At the end of 2004, when Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov was talking about new generations of the Russian arms that were planned to be added to the arsenal in 2005, he was talking about the Terminator too.

Specialists of the Ural Transport Machine-Building Design Bureau developed the new machine - the enterprise is a division of Uralvagonzavod, which is Russia's largest tank-maker.

Military specialists say that the capacity of the new tank support vehicle doubles the efficiency of six armored vehicles and 40 soldiers. Testing procedures for the latest development of the Russian defense industry are about to be over, a spokesman for the defense ministry's administration for armored vehicles, Nikolai Kovalev said.

"The use of the new machine in a tank battalion will add up to 30 percent of efficiency to the detachment. The tank support vehicle is capable of firing at three targets on a battlefield simultaneously," General Kovalev said.

The concept to develop the new tank support machine for the Russian army appeared from life experience itself.

Russian military specialists were originally going to solve the tank support problem with the help of self-propelled antiaircraft systems known as Shilka. Four 23-millimeter guns could provide appropriate defense and fire efficiency. However, Shilka systems are not armored because they were not developed for offensive actions. In addition, Shilka does not have the most important quality at this point - it cannot destroy tanks.

The new vehicle is capable of overcoming three-meter ditches and breaching 1.5-meter walls.

Specialists of the US Armed Forces are also working on the question to develop a new armored vehicle to replace a not very successful M-2 Bradly machine.

Spokesmen for the Israeli Defense Ministry evinced interest in the new Russian tank support machine during a military technological show in the city of Nizhni Tagil. Israeli officials said that they would like to conclude a contract with Russia to acquire new machines for their Merkava tanks that were used for scouring procedures in Palestinian settlements. They later said, however, that Israeli specialists would be able to develop a similar machine themselves.

The new Russian machine as the latest military technological development is not regulated with the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE). The Terminator is a vehicle of a new class. The CFE Treaty stipulates certain restrictions for the number of units of weaponry in Europe.




posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Impressive, must be a little bit more effective than the Bradley I think.

What Chassis is the turret mounted on? looks like a T-80 chassis...



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
Impressive, must be a little bit more effective than the Bradley I think.

What Chassis is the turret mounted on? looks like a T-80 chassis...



a little bit? look at its goddamn arsenal and armour, and no it's enforced T72 chassis..



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   
maybe but the bradley isnt for tank support, its for infantry support and transport.



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Hey,

I am not surprised with this new development, the Russians have always had a crude creative neck with new tank and apc designs, they aren't always pretty nor hi tech but they sure as hell do their job.

The Warrior in my opinion is the best APC out there, the bradley, sadly just never lived up to all it was meant to be, too slow, not enough range and very little protection.

Wonder if China will look into get some of these new Russian APCs?

- Philip



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Pardon my French but that thing is a freakin beast!


That could roll in the Green Zone everyday and no one would touch it.



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Great pictures.. but what does it do that's special and beyond high quality tanks??

Dallas



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Cool vehicle its like a high tech tank destroyer right?



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by gooseuk, too slow, not enough range and very little protection.


slow?!? 66 km/h is slow? are you joking? and they are being upgraded with explosive reactive armor, and range? huh? range in regards to what exactly?



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by blue cell
Cool vehicle its like a high tech tank destroyer right?



Yes, here is another good one too, the Khrizantema system in service with rf






The Khrizantema is an advanced, long range, supersonic anti-tank missile system intended for operation in day/night, all weather, and severe natural and man-made countermeasures environments. It can effectively engage last generation tanks such as Abrams, Leopard and Challenger thanks to its tandem shaped charge warhead. The Khrizantema missile can also accommodate a high explosive warhead. It features two independent guidance modes: automatic through millimeter waves and semi-automatic through a laser beam riding guidance system.

The Khrizantema supersonic missile can also engage bunkers and low flying helicopters. The missile system has been designed to engage up to 15 targets within a few minutes, while 2 Khrizantema missiles can be fired simultaneously employing different guidance modes.

The Khrizantema was deployed with the Russian Army in 1998 aboard modified BMP-3 armored vehicles with a roof mounted radar system as well as other equipment and sensors. The modified BMP-3 Khrizantema carrier vehicle only needs a crew of 2-man with 2 Khrizantema missiles ready-to-fire. Reloading operations can be done automatically under armor protection.
Specifications
Length 1.5 m 5-ft
Ammunition load, msls 15
Missile loading automatic
Guidance automatic radar, semi-automatic laser
Max Range 6,000 m 6,593 yd
Max Speed 1,440 kph Mach 1.2
Max Weight 40 kg 88-lb
Piercing in Armor 1,000mm 39.37-in
Warhead Weight 10 kg 22-lb

Countermeasures Resistance
The system demonstrates robust performance against passive and active countermeasures. Dust, dense smoke and numerous fires at the battlefield do not affect the guidance system either.
Mobility and Survivability
The KHRIZANTEMA Missile System is mounted on the proven BMP-3 IFV chassis. The vehicle retains the full amphibious capability of the standard BMP-3. Its standard equipment includes a NBC system and a front-mounted dozer blade.
Radar detection of targets and their engagement with the supersonic missiles fired at a high rate at long range allow to eliminate threats at an early stage enhancing overall survivability of the KHRIZANTEMA System.




posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   
The inherent problem I see with this wonderful design is two-fold:
1) as with anything since the fall of Communism in Russia, production numbers will be minimal, at best.
2) Profit outweighs national interest, thus instead of keeping this strictly within the Russian military, it will be sold abroad, subsequently, ending up in a nation that the US can and will simply buy a few from for testing and R&D.

So, in short, what advantage Russia may gain over the Bradley is reduced because of the sheer production and in-service numbers of Bradleys and in upgrades gained from access to the Russian TFV. Let's not forget the STRIKER units, as well.





seekerof



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
The inherent problem I see with this wonderful design is two-fold:
1) as with anything since the fall of Communism in Russia, production numbers will be minimal, at best.
2) Profit outweighs national interest, thus instead of keeping this strictly within the Russian military, it will be sold abroad, subsequently, ending up in a nation that the US can and will simply buy a few from for testing and R&D.

So, in short, what advantage Russia may gain over the Bradley is reduced because of the sheer production and in-service numbers of Bradleys and in upgrades gained from access to the Russian TFV. Let's not forget the STRIKER units, as well.





seekerof



oh seeker i missed your whinings
WAH WAH RUSSIENS HAVE NO MONEY BECAUSE THEY ARE STUCK IN 1991 WAH WAH I BITCH ABOUT RUSSIAN MILITARY PRODUCTION NUMBERS EVEN THOUGH MANY US PROJECTS WERE CANCELED AND MANY MORE WILL FOLLOW CAUSE OF LACK OF FUNDS, let's not forget your "800"
f22s which by the way reduced to 200 if not less, anyway russia outclassed bradley long time ago already, it's just an improved m113 anyway








russia even has more t90's then american upgraded abramses..


it seems everytime russia is improving you start #ting your pants



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 07:52 PM
link   
and dont even mention the stryker that cannon fodder, also remember Your "success" doesnt come from the excelence of your hardware, your "success" comes from the fact that you have been fighting 3rd world badly trained boneheads.

www.d-n-i.net...

--
Stryker vs. reality of war. (save as)

even the basic RPG can punch trough 330mm of armor steel, andvanced ones 550mm or even more.. and the armor on Strykers is in tens of mm:s at max.. so if it gets hit, its toasted..

They basicly are dead if you encounter a enemy armed with any kind of AT-capability. All you need is a rifle with AP ammo, to attack Armored Car with RPG is a 110% over kill..


[edit on 16-3-2005 by Hellraiser]



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Your constructive criticism aside, Hellraiser, apparently I must be correct in my above analysis being that you did not counter it?

I guess this Russian TFV will be regulated to those other great and wonderful Russian programs that amounted to mere prototypes and scant minimal production runs.

BTW, I'll take 160+ 'Raptors' any day over those non-produced Mig-1.42's, the Berkut, the fabled Black Eagle MBTs, etc., etc., and etc. I'll take those Bradley's and Strikers over 20-less than 60 hours flight time and training for those Russian pilots and continuing to rust, Russian naval vessels. The S-300 and S-400 anti-air systems have been compromised. Whats left? Rhetoric it seems versus one taking the simple facts as they are. If what I say is in error, then what will be the production numbers of this Russian TFV? The problem I see when posters post concerning Russian "new" concepts and designs is that they always fail to produce anything that stipulates production numbers. Whys that? I'm all ears and more than willing to see your side of this.


Keep up the good work though. Interesting TFV and undoubtedly if had been designed during the Russian 'golden years" would have at least been built in numbers to pose a serious and credible threat. Not likely under the current circumstances, sadly.




seekerof



posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Your constructive criticism aside, Hellraiser, apparently I must be correct in my above analysis being that you did not counter it?
whatever you say...

I guess this Russian TFV will be regulated to those other great and wonderful Russian programs that amounted to mere prototypes and scant minimal production runs.
yeah too bad its beyond the prototype stage and cost half the price of a t90 and even less to just upgrade existing t72s


BTW, I'll take 160+ 'Raptors' any day over those non-produced Mig-1.42's, the Berkut, the fabled Black Eagle MBTs, etc., etc., and etc.
yeah do not forget to add your super next generation commanch
, your crusader arty, your JCM, your LOSAT, etc etc..
, hell even f22 may be canceled soon

"To pay for the war, the Pentagon also may have to scrap a $71 billion program to acquire F/A-22 fighter jets built by Lockheed Martin Corp. as part of a wider overhaul of U.S. spending priorities, said McCain, an influential member of the Armed Services Committee.

"We may have to cancel this airplane that's going to cost between $250 million and $300 million a copy," said McCain, who spearheaded a drive that stalled another multibillion-dollar Air Force project involving leasing or buying modified Boeing Co. refueling planes. "



also its impractical for russia to buy 70$ million per aircraft right now (mig-39) as it can just upgrade the existing fleet with new generation avionics/weapons etc.. which is what russia doing and there are already more then 100 upgraded sukhois alone not to mention the helicopter fleet..

I'll take those Bradley's and Strikers over 20-less than 60 hours flight time and training for those Russian pilots and continuing to rust,
what that doesn't make sense strykers and bradleys dont fly seeker and also stryker is a piece of crap as you may see by the pdf i provided, bradley isnt even amphibious and sucks in TTHOUSANDS about 25,000$ a month on just maintaining its tracks
Russian naval vessels.enough to nuke your cvg's to hell and back The S-300 and S-400 anti-air systems have been compromised.oh no you got crappy 70's/80's era pmus what shall russia do
still has a real air defence umbrella unlike a few non functional star wars dreams
Whats left? Rhetoric it seems versus one taking the simple facts as they are.whatever you say
If what I say is in error, then what will be the production numbers of this Russian TFV?i would guess in large number as russia has many t72's left which can be easely upgraded to this
The problem I see when posters post concerning Russian "new" concepts and designs is that they always fail to produce anything that stipulates production numbers. Whys that? I'm all ears and more than willing to see your side of this.




seekerof



also would be sad to see this baby go


Funding curb forces Virginia reality check


By Andrew Koch JDW Bureau Chief
Washington, DC

The long-term health of the US Navy's Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack submarine (SSN) - one of its most cherished programmes - appears in grave danger because of the growing cost of the war in Iraq, tightening defence budgets and mounting deficits.

According to US Department of Defense (DoD) documents, statements by senior navy officials and insider accounts, a combination of funding shortfalls and pressures from the highest levels of the DoD are moving decision-makers toward the conclusion that the Virginia-class programme should be cancelled well before its planned 30 boats will be built.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 03:45 AM
link   
The Russia Gov is has been doing an EXALENT job deciving you Americans about just how many Tanks and Fighting veicals are built I assure you more than 25,000 (THOUSAND) of these babies have been built, it wont be revieled until WW3 starts, thats why Rus is always POPING up with all these NEW inventions at different times, when WE say "we bought 1 or 2 of these understand it to mean 1-2000.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
I assure you more than 25,000 (THOUSAND) of these babies have been built, it wont be revieled until WW3 starts, thats why Rus is always POPING up with all these NEW inventions at different times, when WE say "we bought 1 or 2 of these understand it to mean 1-2000.



kid, get out from my thread go bother some one else
, don't derail it to your nutcase visions, in other words Хорош хуйней страдать!



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 07:06 AM
link   
China has already designed and built it's "next gen" APC, a hybrid of russian and chinese technology and supposedly supperior to anything the russians have currently. BMP-3 included






posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 11:27 AM
link   
First of ALL I'm not a KID second what I tell you is ABSOLUTE facts I have inlaws who work and have worked for GRU so I know there not lying to me!!



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucretius
China has already designed and built it's "next gen" APC, a hybrid of russian and chinese technology and supposedly supperior to anything the russians have currently. BMP-3 included




stop dreaming chinaman this is a bmp3 copy with downgraded armour and extended amphibious capability, for taiwan "invasion"
, other then its turret its a piece of paper copy.

russian bmp3 and european CV-90-40 outclasses anything in this class. especially poorly copied chinese replicas



especially this monster



[edit on 17-3-2005 by Hellraiser]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join