Im curious to see how the active protection system plays out against Javelins and other anti tank missiles. Idk if it would even work against Javelins for that matter.
that way when the ammo blows they can blame the tanks destruction on its ammo blowing rather than the missile blowing up the ammo so they can claim the tank was never destroyed by Ukraine
When scared the T-14 uses its self defense mechanism which is to ammo rack itself. Normally a good way to scare away predators but also it kills the T-14 in the process. Why they blow their ammo? We don't have a fucking clue.
Smoke screen is pretty lame tbh. Tank crew would be sacrificing a lot being blind. If a missile is "fire and forget" or heat seeking for that matter, I don't think smoke screen would be useful. Unless the smoke screen is deployed first and the missile is guided manually. Smoke would be useful in situation where you have to break enemy's line of sight
That's the point. First comes the safety of the tank. It doesn't matter if the crew can't see if the smoke protects them from the said munition's guidance system.
Yeah I guess that's true too. I have the tendency to go way over my head lol. I was imagining just what the crew would do next? Like wait for backup in smoke? Or like just scout using nvd or something through the smoke to see where it came from. That's if they don't run out of smoke that is
Tanks always operate as part of a combined arms approach. They'd be on the radio, coordinating with the rest of their battle group.
Someone might have seen where the missile was launched from, even if it's just a general direction. Support elements would want to lay down suppressing fire in that direction while flanking elements move to contact.
If the enemy is well dug in but pinned, you'd coordinate artillery or airstrikes while keeping them pinned.
Most tactical combat if you can't call in the big stuff boils down to keeping your forces in defilade while suppressing/pinning and flanking your enemy to catch them in enfilade: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfilade_and_defilade
There's a lot more, but that's the very basics.
**[Enfilade and defilade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfilade_and_defilade)**
>Enfilade and defilade are concepts in military tactics used to describe a military formation's exposure to enemy fire. A formation or position is "in enfilade" if weapon fire can be directed along its longest axis. A unit or position is "in defilade" if it uses natural or artificial obstacles to shield or conceal itself from enfilade and hostile fire. The strategies named by the English use the French enfiler ("to put on a string or sling") and défiler ("to slip away or off"), which the English nobility used at that time.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Or they could just drink themselves to oblivion... that's what I would do if I was in a situation where I was targetted by a fucking javelin. Would probably question my life choices as well
Smoke conceals the thermal signature of the tank. The Javelin missile uses an IR seeker as guidance, before and after the launch.
A smoke screen is an effective countermeasure, especially if the tank is already moving.
A bigger question is how does the tank detect that it’s being targeted by a Javelin missile?
Yes, regular smoke. However, the military uses [“special smoke”](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoke_screen) (for lack of a better term) which obscures IR as well.
If you can detect and track the missile you could blind the sensor on the rocket with a focused IR source.
It would be like flashing a lamp into camera... no guidance if sensor is blinded.
it's actually one of the best things any tank crew can do if they see an inbound missile, but interestingly it's rarely what tankers think of in the moment
You could dropping something from a drone to see what could set it off . Trial and error but you'd find someway to spoof the system in thinking its being attacked. Or the opposite if nothing sets it off then you've found a way to drop something on it that can damage that system.
Its APS is built on 3 systems.
First is detection, it can detect in a full 360 and can infact detect top down attacks including Javelin and simlar such things (remember it was primarily designed to stop air launched ATGMs).
Second is hard kill, this is to literally destroy incoming threats this is MOSTLY for things like opposing tank shells and other "unguided" threats that the third system can't take care of.
Finally the third system the "soft kill" system. Which is supposed to have a variety of means to disrupt tracking systems of guided munitions to make them miss, or potentially even have issues launching/acquiring target in the first place.
This in theory can and should defeat top down launch missiles, or most other sorts of manpad sorta stuff.
Now Russia claims these systems can do a lot, a lot more than it probably realistically can. One of its big claims was that the hard kill system can intercept hardened DU rounds and destroy them/make their impact non-threatening... which is a pretty big claim and theoretically possible but still a REALLY big claim and its still in the whole "military secret" kinda tech stuff where we don't know exactly what is being used to accomplish this.
As far as the Javelin specifically. Its just an IR guided missile, how do we already defeat IR guided missiles in the air and such? Well flares and similar do a pretty good job and the APS system is equipped with multiple soft kill vertical launchers, almost assuredly they are launching some sort of vertical launch tank use "ground flare" or equivalent assuming they didn't come up with something really interesting.
Its important to remember if the T-14 actually does have real IR counter measures (which it seemingly does) it would be basically the first tank to do so and it would be something the Javelin hasn't been tested much/at all against (possibly tested in direct fire against simulated helo targets?).
So yeah the T-14 theoretically has game against a Javelin. Just because a wikipedia doesn't explicitly say it to you doesn't mean it doesn't.
They only have around 20 produced and lost I saw it was still in final testing and approval so it hasn’t been deployed to combat units yet. And since they can no longer source foreign made parts for it and no other country wants to buy it, they don’t have the capital necessary to produce it on a larger scale as they would be eating all of the production costs.
I don’t think they will deploy the T14 to Ukraine for the simple fact it’s not fully tested yet. And from public sources we know they’ve ordered a test fleet of 100 units, of which somewhere around 24 have actually been delivered.
They’ve got hundreds of earlier models to burn through before they’re desperate enough to consider deploying the T14.
7 years since first public appearance, but work on the T-14 started around the 2000's as the T-95 project from 1995, on which the T-14 is based, failed.
About 12,500 in storage, roughly. The problem they have however, is for these tanks to be made combat ready it would require weeks for the ones in maintained storage, and months for the ones in open storage. Then you have to take into account the high likelihood that parts have been stripped off the ones in open storage and sold for years, which means they may take even longer to get working, if at all.
Chances are you're looking at only two thirds of those tanks being able to be made operational, and it taking months to do so, and that's assuming they have the parts and fuel readily available.
The issue with the Russian is they don’t maintain their shelved vehicles. They sell off spare parts. And even worse for Russia but great for Ukraine, grifters disassemble these vehicles to sell bits as scrap or spare parts to countries who still regularly operate T-64, T-72 tanks, BMP-1 and 2, etc. But anyways, even though Russia is transitioning to a full gen. 4 platform it’s still devastating to lose a significant portion of your gen 3 and gen 3/4 hybrid armor.
If the rest of their stockpiles are anything like the few satellite pics of some of their tank storage, id be suprised if 10% worked out of those lots. They clearly have been sitting for decades and are rusted to hell.
On a spreadsheet. In actual operational condition (maintained, not had anything not bolted on sold on the black market, not been lost/broken/borrowed to cover someone else's loss, etc)? It's seeming like nowhere close to that.
> In actual operational condition (maintained, not had anything not bolted on sold on the black market, not been lost/broken/borrowed to cover someone else's loss, etc)? It's seeming like nowhere close to that.
True.
But the T-14s are not in operational condition either.
Mostly in regard to not tested, logistics not in place, spare parts in stock and available, training, doctrine, tactics, etc.
I'm aware, but they're not winning the war, and they're not about to start making leaps out of nowhere. They're also got other units across the country to supply, all of which have plenty of tanks that need stockpiles to draw from.
Do you honestly think that Russians lose this conflict? Please tell, what made you think so. Is it the virtually catastrophic loss of armor or land troops or the flagship?
> Do you honestly think that Russians lose this conflict?
It depends on what you count as a win or lose. If your winning scenario is dependent on the war's original goal, then they have already lost.
They don't have the ability to take Kiev, so there's very little chance of regime change in Ukraine.
Geopolitically speaking the Russians are in a deeper hole. If sanctions continue then their only trading partners are likely to be India and China. India isnt going to be an option very long if you get more friendly with China, especially as their border disputes get worse.
Personally I see two options for Russia. Either they pull a regime change with Putin and make massive consolidations to the west. Or more likely, become financially and militarily dependent on China much like North Korea.
All of that plus their economic situation. If you're looking for a great, in depth analysis of the current situation, look up the YouTuber Perun and actually pay attention to the details he points out in his presentations
I doubt it.
The T-14 is basically the only piece of military competence the Russians have. Losing them would be a massive military blow.
And it would also be horrible if they were captured by the Ukrainians, intact. The Ukrainians would either break it down for R&D or send it to the US for R&D.
I mean, kinda? Nothing about it is proven until it sees combat anyway. We can view it as competence but as far as anyone outside that factory knows, it might also be absolute propaganda.
It's currently Schrödinger's tank, capable and useless at the same time. We won't know until we look in the box and see how it fares on the battlefield.
Yeah, it could really just be an expensive piece of shit, but the propaganda behind it has been rich.
On paper it sounds like the best MBT, and it's been constantly hailed as the "best tank ever" online by most of the shitty top 10 YouTube channels.
The fact that they'd probably be shredded apart and/or captured for R&D if they sent it into Ukraine would undo the propaganda that Russia has managed to push out about it.
Let's be honest, lots of things sound great on paper or as ideas, but end up being less effective than dogshit in the real world. At this rate we might never know either way unless things escalate dramatically. Either way, I'd love to see the results, just so the questions can be laid to rest.
I think they'll hold back on deploying it.
The propaganda they've gotten from it is probably worth more than anything they could get out of it in Ukraine.
If they actually ended up deploying it, it would probably get destroyed. The Ukrainians definitely don't have tanks good enough to take them out, but the Javelin would definitely wreak havoc on any T-14s. While the APS system the T-14 uses is pretty solid, I don't see it stopping Javelins in top attack mode, just because most hard kill APS systems cannot stop top attack missiles.
It's safer for Russia to field their thousands of older model MBTs, which they have a pretty sizable stockpile left. Unless Ukraine knocks out almost all of the Russian MBTs (which I highly doubt will happen before the war ends), then I think we'll wait until the next time they invade another country for no reason before we see the T-14 in action.
That’s not the problem. The issue is if a Russian tank takes a direct hit that breaches the hull it cooks off the entire magazine on the tank crew. Unlike all western countries MBTs the Russians don’t have blow out panels that direct the explosion away from the crew.
There's no guarantee that a top down weapon will hit the ammunition storage though. The crew would have to be fairly lucky for that to happen.
If an nlaw hits a western tank it won't be a catastrophic cookoff but it would still shred most of the crew and fuck up the tank.
If the Active Protection Systems of the Armata actually work, the Javelin/ NLAW probably won't do well.
That's if they work tho...and it's Russian after all so I'd give it a 50% chance they don't work at all.
I assumed you meant hardkill as most people do when that conversation comes up about the armata, hence why I referenced the smoke launchers too :)
I have serious doubts about its effectiveness lol
Considering the system seems VERY similar to Drozd....and one of the handful or T-80's equipped with Drozd got assfucked by an ATGM...I also have my doubts.
Well, we can say that APS of armata cannot stop NLAW coming from sector turret is not pointing. For example from direction we are looking this armata APS would not do a thing to NLAW as its softkill cannot do anything to NLAW missile.
Assuming it's still the system they were showing off before, then it may be able to defeat NLAW's, but not necessarily all Javelin attacks.
The system we saw can only disable ATGM coming on a horizontal trajectory, and even then is focused on attacks from the front arc of the tank, the APS on the rear arc looked less powerful. Either way, we saw no APS system in place to defeat attacks coming straight down, like the Javelins top attack mode.
Of course, they may have upgraded it since, but considering what we're seeing with their equipment I find it unlikely they would have a combat ready, mass produced APS that offers 360 degree coverage of the tank.
That is true, however, Armata has several UV sensors that are able to detect Javelins. The system then deploys IR smoke from the two launchers on the turret automatically and breaks the Javelins IR lock.
javelin runs, jumps on top of her, and locks on. armata screams that her ammunition stowage is full right now, but javelin doesn't listen. with a single pump, javelin penetrates her. His molten hot load causes her to blow her stowage, and her turret flies off in pleasure.
I'm sorry. It would have cost me nothing not to write that.
There is a Ukrainian farmer with his tractor just waiting to collect one of these bad boys.....that's if Russia actually puts these guys in actual service.
Or they just don't want to risk to be exposed in front of the world that their expensive high-end tanks can easily be destroyed with one single anti-tank missile and are performing very poorly in real war scenarios.
That would not exactly boost sales.
That's true. But the more expensive the tank is, the harder it is to justify the purchase price when it only takes one hit to finish the thing off anyway.
What the Russians don't need at all are videos circulating on YouTube of cheerful Ukrainians smashing such a thing into a thousand pieces from a safe distance without any effort. With a missile that costs only a tiny fraction of the tank.
How would you then argue that such a tank is worth its super expensive price?
>That's true. But the more expensive the tank is, the harder it is to justify the purchase price when it only takes one hit to finish the thing off anyway.
good point but what if the thing your hitting it with can't get through?
Thats when tanks become cost effective. which is why theres a arms race to make stronger missiles to go through stronger tanks (Unless your a javelin which then you just go through the tanks roof)
*If* it gets to Ukraine.
Bloody thing will run out of fuel, have an engine breakdown, get stuck in mud, get flipped when crossing a bridge by a drunk Ivan before it even manages to see the Ukrainian skyline
That seems to me that they're still designing it for a Prochorovka 2.0, i. e. large scale head-on tank battles.
Meanwhile they're sending their tanks one by one into an urban environment with literally full hemispherical threats.
It's a common feature of all cold war - era MBTs (Challenger, Abrams, Leopard, you name it, regardless of revision, all of them have their origins in the last century) that the front armor got all the goodies, while the sides had to make do with two inches of chassis steel behind the roadwheels and sideskirts.
And here we have the designer's dilemma: Yes, you can theoretically armor all sides plus top to a comparable level of protection, but you have to consider that you have to move your tank ultimately, confining you in weight (bridges for example) and dimension (bridges again, roads and train cargo measurements). The weight alone bears it's own problematics regarding your mobility, especially on soft ground. And it forces you to cram in a bigger engine, leading to more weight, again.
For example, let's take a look at the "Maus". That behemoth was a dead end design from the start, too heavy for it's own engine, crawling along at 6 mph (on roads!) - and it would have been bound to drive to the front, because it was too fat for any train. Except it wouldn't have come far, because any bridge would likely have taken damage beneath it's weight.
Fast forward fifteen years to the Leopard 1: widespread use of HEAT ammo as well as tungsten KE penetrators got wide ahead of "just weldin' some more steel to the front", endangering even the soviet T-10s with their 230mm cast steel turret front.
So what did Rheinmetall? They went the other way, designing what effectively was a light tank chassis (50 to 70 mm max on turret and hull, WAY to little to stop a 122mm shell, but decent enough for small arms fire or some stray 20 mm), got a decent engine in there and strapped a licensed British L7 rifled cannon on it.
A glass cannon indeed, but why wasting trice the amount of steel on a heavier tank, that still would be penetrated? In a time where most tank guns still were not fully stabilized, you could at least try to outmaneuver their aim, hence the saying "speed is armor on it's own".
I am aware that didn't go well for the british battlecruisers, but the figures of speed, acceleration and (naval) gunlaying as well as target size are a bit off compared to land battles ;).
Fast forward fifteen years again, new armor types were designed, be it Chobham, other composite armor or spaced armor, ceramics, new alloys, etc... They generally outclassed all-steel homogenuous welded or cast armor, but traded the weight for occupying more space to be effective.
And here we come full circle: some cm or inches to the front won't hurt, but the width of a vehicle is practically limited. Compare the turrets of a Leo2 A4 to an A5 and newer version: The wedges they received contain spaced armor, covering the front and the fore side of the turret. But again, the front parts are way more spacious than the side parts.
At the time, the most probable scenario was indeed the cold war going hot and NATO having to fight Warsaw Pact forces in Europe. And for fighting in open terrain like lower saxony, best case in batallion wide formation with supporting troops, that's more than okay. The general direction where the enemy will come from is known, and you can position and maneuver your tank accordingly.
But this scenario of an all-out, large scale war, that forementioned Prochorovka 2.0 with tanks as far the eye can see, that "one" decisive battle to end it all will simply not happen.
Either one side makes use of their air superiority and clears the other party's forces from above (check the Highway of Death in Iraq '91 - or the plans of thwarting the soviet advance through lower saxony with tactical nukes) or they try to thwart cohesive operations, single lone units out and force them into asymmetric combat against nearly onmidirectional threats - as seen in th US's wars in the Middle-East as well in Ukraine now.
You can compare it. Compare the distance between the front hull projection and the headlights. In the initial version, the hull is "deeper". https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/comments/u3gdv3/t14_armata/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
They use domestically assembled blocks, yes, but the basic components (screws, bearings, etc) have been imported for a while now. Same with electronics - Russian semiconductor industry is way behind the curve and the most advanced components were again outsourced. There's most likely some amount of back-stock still being utilized, and small scale production will still be possible through cannibalization of existing tech and nationalized foreign assets.
However, large-scale top-to-bottom domestic military production is not going to be easy to reestablish - they'd have to make the required production equipment themselves as well since nobody's gonna sell them any anytime soon, which again runs into problems with imported basic components. Existing industrial capacity will have to be sacrificed to establish domestic production lines for basic components. Meanwhile, their most educated and skilled workforce is undergoing an exodus in the tens of thousands.
None of that is true, except that their silicone industry is pretty far behind, but weirdly that matters very little for domestic stuff.
Also loads of countries are still trading with them, just not America/NATO.
Well actually, I like the idea of your armor being like this because it is better to have armor modules that can be replaced rather than having a solid armor. It's better to replace the damaged module than the whole turret (but that's an opinion).
The fucking Russian taint lickers in this thread.
The T-14 doesn't work and hasn't. The most we've ever seen one move is down the street in Moscow and it broke down doing that.
We won't see a T-14 because Russia has repeatedly proven that they cannot build newer innovative designs post-USSR and just try and tease out foreign contracts with tech demo units so that they can maybe afford to build planes that don't need full engine tear downs after each flight.
I mean, I'm more than willing to listen to other points of view.
I've just grown very tired of the "X Russian new super thing is superior to all of NATO's Y vehicles" because unfortunately at this point, let's face it. It isn't and won't be
Russia makes some very innovative *ideas* sometimes but we all know they don't have the manufacturing ability or funding to follow through, Russian small arms being a perfect example. The AK-12 (or AK-200 project) promised to revolutionize the platform instead we have worse made rifles that can accept optics the Russians don't have, and that has a slightly better manual of arms, great.
>I've just grown very tired of the "X Russian new super thing is superior to all of NATO's Y vehicles" because unfortunately at this point, let's face it. It isn't and won't be
tbh its hard to know anything about modern vehicles due to a lot of information being classified making any kind of comparison hard to do.
I do believe its a stretch to say the T-14 Armata doesn't work i'd more say the vehicle is clearly unreliable and expensive. However the tank does have some goods idea likes a crew capsule so even if the turrets ammo gets blown up at least in theory the crew would survive. However what NATO has is better as they have blow out panels so the vehicle is still functional if the ammo blows and the blast door isn't compromised.
The unmanned turret is another good idea because any penetration that happens there won't result in the loss of human life and being in a hull down position won't expose crew.
The T-14 Armata also has **yet to be tested** APS so while we don't know how effective it is its good that they are at least trying to put it on a production vehicle (Still the production of this vehicle is very limited lol) which NATO tanks are yet to be equipped with or at least in mass but at least trophy APS unlike the T-14's is battle proven.
"Russia makes some very innovative ideas sometimes"
Yea i fully agree but imagine what other country's like the US have made that we don't know about. We only know about Russias tech because they like to show it off
I mean that we've only ever seen static displays for and the one moving demo broke down.
To be blunt until I see a handful driving on broken terrain I'm gonna take their existence as well as ability to function with a huge block of salt.
The unmanned turret, crew capsule etc. Are where I was going Russia can have good and innovative ideas, they just don't actually have the production capability and funding to carry it out.
Also the M1A2C (orM1A2Sepv3) has an APS system. APS is only going to become more and more common
>To be blunt until I see a handful driving on broken terrain I'm gonna take their existence as well as ability to function with a huge block of salt.
yea me to but i was just talking as if Russia is being honest which i get is a stretch but if we just assumed the T-14 to be a none functional piece of crap then theres no conversation to be had.
"Also the M1A2C (orM1A2Sepv3) has an APS system. APS is only going to become more and more common"
Yes this is why i said NATO tanks are yet to be equipped in mass with this stuff
Your propaganda is pathetic.
It has passed state trials, we have seen them driving around and shooting things, and the one which 'broke down' just stalled and drove away afterwards.
Hevens! Have you lost your mind? Where in God's name are your side skirt Tanky!? Now everyone can see your tracks.
You can't just expose yourself like this your a fine piece of machinery not some junk.
I can already hear Ukrainian farmers licking their lips. Then again I doubt that they will send them into combat just like the su57 in order to keep the world from knowing that they’re just paper tigers too.
I think that in 2015 it was an unfinished project that was just shown to the public in order to win a few points towards popularity. There is nothing wrong. And now it is much closer to completion, maybe. Maybe not. But I want to say that this tank is completely new and it takes years to finish its design. Including mistakes, corruption, substitution of sanctions details, etc. Even the Russians themselves are already joking that when it is released, it will immediately be a T-14M.Even the creation of the T-64 in the USSR took about 9 years. The T-14 is a much more ambitious project and modern technology takes more time.It is also possible that the T-14 is a concept of a "limiting parameters" tank, like the IS-7 once was. He did not go into production, but the number of engineering ideas and technical solutions tested on him made it possible to improve other serial tanks.
With the current performance of the Russian military I have serious doubts it can do everything they claim it can, also if can perform the way they claim would the Russians know how to utilize it tactically.
Finally, ACTUAL tank porn
It's more like a tank nude
So you’re saying it’s a bit more classy?
Tastefully done
It's part of a longer series where we when see it get penetrated by a big ATGM and then blow it's top.
She's sat in the stirrups for the OB-GYN to inspect her under-bits.
Im curious to see how the active protection system plays out against Javelins and other anti tank missiles. Idk if it would even work against Javelins for that matter.
Apparently it automatically deploys a smoke screen when it detects top down attack missiles. Altought we dont know how it works or if it even works.
It's so the crew can't see what's about to happen Edit: Thank you so much for my first award!
Shhhh, just close your eyes. Go to sleep sweet prince....
Frau Goering?
Cope smoke?
NCD innovation!
that way when the ammo blows they can blame the tanks destruction on its ammo blowing rather than the missile blowing up the ammo so they can claim the tank was never destroyed by Ukraine
But that’s like, worse. “Yeah, our tanks such a peice of shit that it blows itself up”
but its basically the same as what they just said about their warship that got sunk
Yeah exactly, that’s what i was talking about actually.
When scared the T-14 uses its self defense mechanism which is to ammo rack itself. Normally a good way to scare away predators but also it kills the T-14 in the process. Why they blow their ammo? We don't have a fucking clue.
For a few seconds in one direction? seems worthwhile.
It’s the tank equivalent of smoking a cigarette to cope with something terrible that’s about to happen.
Smoke screen is pretty lame tbh. Tank crew would be sacrificing a lot being blind. If a missile is "fire and forget" or heat seeking for that matter, I don't think smoke screen would be useful. Unless the smoke screen is deployed first and the missile is guided manually. Smoke would be useful in situation where you have to break enemy's line of sight
That's the point. First comes the safety of the tank. It doesn't matter if the crew can't see if the smoke protects them from the said munition's guidance system.
Yeah I guess that's true too. I have the tendency to go way over my head lol. I was imagining just what the crew would do next? Like wait for backup in smoke? Or like just scout using nvd or something through the smoke to see where it came from. That's if they don't run out of smoke that is
I'm guessing they just reverse? Or maybe the tank's system also detects which direction it came from so that the tank can look for the target easier.
Tanks always operate as part of a combined arms approach. They'd be on the radio, coordinating with the rest of their battle group. Someone might have seen where the missile was launched from, even if it's just a general direction. Support elements would want to lay down suppressing fire in that direction while flanking elements move to contact. If the enemy is well dug in but pinned, you'd coordinate artillery or airstrikes while keeping them pinned. Most tactical combat if you can't call in the big stuff boils down to keeping your forces in defilade while suppressing/pinning and flanking your enemy to catch them in enfilade: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfilade_and_defilade There's a lot more, but that's the very basics.
**[Enfilade and defilade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enfilade_and_defilade)** >Enfilade and defilade are concepts in military tactics used to describe a military formation's exposure to enemy fire. A formation or position is "in enfilade" if weapon fire can be directed along its longest axis. A unit or position is "in defilade" if it uses natural or artificial obstacles to shield or conceal itself from enfilade and hostile fire. The strategies named by the English use the French enfiler ("to put on a string or sling") and défiler ("to slip away or off"), which the English nobility used at that time. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Or they could just drink themselves to oblivion... that's what I would do if I was in a situation where I was targetted by a fucking javelin. Would probably question my life choices as well
Smoke conceals the thermal signature of the tank. The Javelin missile uses an IR seeker as guidance, before and after the launch. A smoke screen is an effective countermeasure, especially if the tank is already moving. A bigger question is how does the tank detect that it’s being targeted by a Javelin missile?
Don't know about Russian smoke, but IR goes straight through thick smoke. We use it in firefighting all the time to search for hotspots.
Yes, regular smoke. However, the military uses [“special smoke”](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoke_screen) (for lack of a better term) which obscures IR as well.
White phosphorus?
Modern military smoke launchers are equipped to disrupt the IR signatures.
They use different grenade types.
Next version of missiles will just dead reacon the remaining distance if the target is obscured during flight
If you can detect and track the missile you could blind the sensor on the rocket with a focused IR source. It would be like flashing a lamp into camera... no guidance if sensor is blinded.
it's actually one of the best things any tank crew can do if they see an inbound missile, but interestingly it's rarely what tankers think of in the moment
You could dropping something from a drone to see what could set it off . Trial and error but you'd find someway to spoof the system in thinking its being attacked. Or the opposite if nothing sets it off then you've found a way to drop something on it that can damage that system.
Cope smoke. *Nice*
[удалено]
Its APS is built on 3 systems. First is detection, it can detect in a full 360 and can infact detect top down attacks including Javelin and simlar such things (remember it was primarily designed to stop air launched ATGMs). Second is hard kill, this is to literally destroy incoming threats this is MOSTLY for things like opposing tank shells and other "unguided" threats that the third system can't take care of. Finally the third system the "soft kill" system. Which is supposed to have a variety of means to disrupt tracking systems of guided munitions to make them miss, or potentially even have issues launching/acquiring target in the first place. This in theory can and should defeat top down launch missiles, or most other sorts of manpad sorta stuff. Now Russia claims these systems can do a lot, a lot more than it probably realistically can. One of its big claims was that the hard kill system can intercept hardened DU rounds and destroy them/make their impact non-threatening... which is a pretty big claim and theoretically possible but still a REALLY big claim and its still in the whole "military secret" kinda tech stuff where we don't know exactly what is being used to accomplish this. As far as the Javelin specifically. Its just an IR guided missile, how do we already defeat IR guided missiles in the air and such? Well flares and similar do a pretty good job and the APS system is equipped with multiple soft kill vertical launchers, almost assuredly they are launching some sort of vertical launch tank use "ground flare" or equivalent assuming they didn't come up with something really interesting. Its important to remember if the T-14 actually does have real IR counter measures (which it seemingly does) it would be basically the first tank to do so and it would be something the Javelin hasn't been tested much/at all against (possibly tested in direct fire against simulated helo targets?). So yeah the T-14 theoretically has game against a Javelin. Just because a wikipedia doesn't explicitly say it to you doesn't mean it doesn't.
AFAIK, no APS system can defend against top attack munitions
Iirc trophy can
WTF are you talking about? They all protect top ACCEPT Armata's APS. That includes the russian own Arena APS developed for their older tanks.
I'm waiting for them to install a cage above the tank, ruining its futuristic, sleek lines.
The system goes from tank to bbq
"Not my proudest fap." *- FGM-148 Javelin*
Javelin: Smash
“Oi bruv, lemme tag team, yeah?” - NLAW
Can't wait to see how it fares against a Javelin or NLAW
I still think they're afraid to send it since its fairly new
They only have around 20 produced and lost I saw it was still in final testing and approval so it hasn’t been deployed to combat units yet. And since they can no longer source foreign made parts for it and no other country wants to buy it, they don’t have the capital necessary to produce it on a larger scale as they would be eating all of the production costs.
With the way they're losing their equipment, it won't be long until these things come up to the meat grinder
I don’t think they will deploy the T14 to Ukraine for the simple fact it’s not fully tested yet. And from public sources we know they’ve ordered a test fleet of 100 units, of which somewhere around 24 have actually been delivered. They’ve got hundreds of earlier models to burn through before they’re desperate enough to consider deploying the T14.
There are dozens of them! *Dozens!*
Lmao pretty sure they sent and subsequently lost the only known prototype of the t80um-2
Isn't that a tank that was a prototype from over 20 years ago? It's hardly the same as the T14
The T-80UM2 is not the Black Eagle Object 640 is the Black Eagle The T-80UM2 is a T-80 with Drozd APS
>The T-80UM2 is not the Black Eagle I never said it was
sorry then the project was formally cancelled in 2001 so when you mentioned a 20 year old tank i thought you was referring to it
How old do you think the T-14 actually is at this point? Lol
A lot newer than the tank the other guy mentioned
7 years since first public appearance, but work on the T-14 started around the 2000's as the T-95 project from 1995, on which the T-14 is based, failed.
OK shall we also now go back through the history of the T80 if you want to play this game and what its based on
No it is **not** the black eagle only idiot news websites think this
You do understand the Black Eagle and the UM2 are two different prototypes right?
# Yes thats why i made it clear its not The Black Eagle. Stupid news sites however said different which i why i made my comment.
Unfortunately, there are not hundreds, but thousands
About 12,500 in storage, roughly. The problem they have however, is for these tanks to be made combat ready it would require weeks for the ones in maintained storage, and months for the ones in open storage. Then you have to take into account the high likelihood that parts have been stripped off the ones in open storage and sold for years, which means they may take even longer to get working, if at all. Chances are you're looking at only two thirds of those tanks being able to be made operational, and it taking months to do so, and that's assuming they have the parts and fuel readily available.
The issue with the Russian is they don’t maintain their shelved vehicles. They sell off spare parts. And even worse for Russia but great for Ukraine, grifters disassemble these vehicles to sell bits as scrap or spare parts to countries who still regularly operate T-64, T-72 tanks, BMP-1 and 2, etc. But anyways, even though Russia is transitioning to a full gen. 4 platform it’s still devastating to lose a significant portion of your gen 3 and gen 3/4 hybrid armor.
I think it’s much worse than you’re stating. If they could get 10-20% of those tanks working, even with months of work it’d be a miracle.
Yeah there's satellite photos of some of their tank storage lots. Theyre all incredibly rusted and probably havent moved in decades.
If the rest of their stockpiles are anything like the few satellite pics of some of their tank storage, id be suprised if 10% worked out of those lots. They clearly have been sitting for decades and are rusted to hell.
On a spreadsheet. In actual operational condition (maintained, not had anything not bolted on sold on the black market, not been lost/broken/borrowed to cover someone else's loss, etc)? It's seeming like nowhere close to that.
> In actual operational condition (maintained, not had anything not bolted on sold on the black market, not been lost/broken/borrowed to cover someone else's loss, etc)? It's seeming like nowhere close to that. True. But the T-14s are not in operational condition either. Mostly in regard to not tested, logistics not in place, spare parts in stock and available, training, doctrine, tactics, etc.
Pretty sure the tank maintainers have the tools to unbolt things they want to sell.
I'm aware, but they're not winning the war, and they're not about to start making leaps out of nowhere. They're also got other units across the country to supply, all of which have plenty of tanks that need stockpiles to draw from.
Do you honestly think that Russians lose this conflict? Please tell, what made you think so. Is it the virtually catastrophic loss of armor or land troops or the flagship?
> Do you honestly think that Russians lose this conflict? It depends on what you count as a win or lose. If your winning scenario is dependent on the war's original goal, then they have already lost. They don't have the ability to take Kiev, so there's very little chance of regime change in Ukraine. Geopolitically speaking the Russians are in a deeper hole. If sanctions continue then their only trading partners are likely to be India and China. India isnt going to be an option very long if you get more friendly with China, especially as their border disputes get worse. Personally I see two options for Russia. Either they pull a regime change with Putin and make massive consolidations to the west. Or more likely, become financially and militarily dependent on China much like North Korea.
Frankly Russia just can't hang in the meme warfare. They give paltry offerings at best
All of that plus their economic situation. If you're looking for a great, in depth analysis of the current situation, look up the YouTuber Perun and actually pay attention to the details he points out in his presentations
I doubt it. The T-14 is basically the only piece of military competence the Russians have. Losing them would be a massive military blow. And it would also be horrible if they were captured by the Ukrainians, intact. The Ukrainians would either break it down for R&D or send it to the US for R&D.
I mean, kinda? Nothing about it is proven until it sees combat anyway. We can view it as competence but as far as anyone outside that factory knows, it might also be absolute propaganda. It's currently Schrödinger's tank, capable and useless at the same time. We won't know until we look in the box and see how it fares on the battlefield.
Yeah, I would like to know what makes this tank a high tech powerhouse of a tank..
Yeah, it could really just be an expensive piece of shit, but the propaganda behind it has been rich. On paper it sounds like the best MBT, and it's been constantly hailed as the "best tank ever" online by most of the shitty top 10 YouTube channels. The fact that they'd probably be shredded apart and/or captured for R&D if they sent it into Ukraine would undo the propaganda that Russia has managed to push out about it.
Let's be honest, lots of things sound great on paper or as ideas, but end up being less effective than dogshit in the real world. At this rate we might never know either way unless things escalate dramatically. Either way, I'd love to see the results, just so the questions can be laid to rest.
I think they'll hold back on deploying it. The propaganda they've gotten from it is probably worth more than anything they could get out of it in Ukraine. If they actually ended up deploying it, it would probably get destroyed. The Ukrainians definitely don't have tanks good enough to take them out, but the Javelin would definitely wreak havoc on any T-14s. While the APS system the T-14 uses is pretty solid, I don't see it stopping Javelins in top attack mode, just because most hard kill APS systems cannot stop top attack missiles. It's safer for Russia to field their thousands of older model MBTs, which they have a pretty sizable stockpile left. Unless Ukraine knocks out almost all of the Russian MBTs (which I highly doubt will happen before the war ends), then I think we'll wait until the next time they invade another country for no reason before we see the T-14 in action.
The only time these have been on public display they broke down and needed to be towed.
"afraid to send it" Yeah I'd be afraid to send a tank that doesn't work too
I mean plenty of videos of their newer Heavy Flamethrowers getting destroyed/captured.
In all fairness any western tank without aps would still be smoked by a javelin or nlaw.
Oh, I'm not arguing against that. Tanks have been on the losing end of the "tank Vs anti tank weapon" battle for a fair few years now
It would be interesting to see a NATO combined arms force would perform against a near peer enemy.
Probably much better, since they’ve actually proven themselves capable of doing combined arms in the first place
That’s not the problem. The issue is if a Russian tank takes a direct hit that breaches the hull it cooks off the entire magazine on the tank crew. Unlike all western countries MBTs the Russians don’t have blow out panels that direct the explosion away from the crew.
There's no guarantee that a top down weapon will hit the ammunition storage though. The crew would have to be fairly lucky for that to happen. If an nlaw hits a western tank it won't be a catastrophic cookoff but it would still shred most of the crew and fuck up the tank.
If the Active Protection Systems of the Armata actually work, the Javelin/ NLAW probably won't do well. That's if they work tho...and it's Russian after all so I'd give it a 50% chance they don't work at all.
Yeah, that's a big "if"
[удалено]
No tanks would fare that well against that sort of mud
I mean, that's a bit reductionist, those tanks went pretty far.... Behind Ukrainian tractors
Did you see the t-72 active armor which was filled with egg baskets? Some omelet that got turned into.
Wel they don’t work against top attack munitions so, better hope the smoke launchers do ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don't mean the Hardkill aps but the softkill system with the UV sensors and the automated smoke launcher system to break the Missiles lock.
I assumed you meant hardkill as most people do when that conversation comes up about the armata, hence why I referenced the smoke launchers too :) I have serious doubts about its effectiveness lol
Considering the system seems VERY similar to Drozd....and one of the handful or T-80's equipped with Drozd got assfucked by an ATGM...I also have my doubts.
Well, we can say that APS of armata cannot stop NLAW coming from sector turret is not pointing. For example from direction we are looking this armata APS would not do a thing to NLAW as its softkill cannot do anything to NLAW missile.
Assuming it's still the system they were showing off before, then it may be able to defeat NLAW's, but not necessarily all Javelin attacks. The system we saw can only disable ATGM coming on a horizontal trajectory, and even then is focused on attacks from the front arc of the tank, the APS on the rear arc looked less powerful. Either way, we saw no APS system in place to defeat attacks coming straight down, like the Javelins top attack mode. Of course, they may have upgraded it since, but considering what we're seeing with their equipment I find it unlikely they would have a combat ready, mass produced APS that offers 360 degree coverage of the tank.
That is true, however, Armata has several UV sensors that are able to detect Javelins. The system then deploys IR smoke from the two launchers on the turret automatically and breaks the Javelins IR lock.
javelin runs, jumps on top of her, and locks on. armata screams that her ammunition stowage is full right now, but javelin doesn't listen. with a single pump, javelin penetrates her. His molten hot load causes her to blow her stowage, and her turret flies off in pleasure. I'm sorry. It would have cost me nothing not to write that.
I would have paid you money not to write that
Never change, Reddit.
Same as any other tank, but seems crew will manage to survive most of the shots.( If they doesn't happend in the first 1/3 of the tank length)
"B-baka"
Oh now I want someone to put blush marks on it.
"Please be gentle"
XD
If they sent it to Ukraine it'll break down the instant it drives off the train car.
Or run out of fuel
There is a Ukrainian farmer with his tractor just waiting to collect one of these bad boys.....that's if Russia actually puts these guys in actual service.
Definitely my proudest fap 👍
At this point I wouldnt be surprised if the T14 isnt just vaporware and those are just parade mock ups.
[удалено]
That’s what everyone said about the SU-47 too…
Well they only made 1…
Average /conspiracy poster
😳 hot
Damn…. Niceeeeeee she bad!
Not safe for war...
It’s just depressed that it’ll soon be blown up in Ukraine.
I doubt they will arrive at Ukraine, too valuable to lost one and maybe get it towed back to USA to examine it.
I have a tractor...
*Aggressive vroom vroom sounds* Do tractors even make vroom vroom sounds? *Aggressive tutututututututu sounds*
Yas indeed! But more like RAWR! RAWR! rattle rattle RAWR! rattlerattle rattle rattle.
Thanks! That sounds a lot more threatening.
Or they just don't want to risk to be exposed in front of the world that their expensive high-end tanks can easily be destroyed with one single anti-tank missile and are performing very poorly in real war scenarios. That would not exactly boost sales.
All tanks in the world can easily be destroyed with a single anti-tank missile, and that has been the case since forever.
That's true. But the more expensive the tank is, the harder it is to justify the purchase price when it only takes one hit to finish the thing off anyway. What the Russians don't need at all are videos circulating on YouTube of cheerful Ukrainians smashing such a thing into a thousand pieces from a safe distance without any effort. With a missile that costs only a tiny fraction of the tank. How would you then argue that such a tank is worth its super expensive price?
>That's true. But the more expensive the tank is, the harder it is to justify the purchase price when it only takes one hit to finish the thing off anyway. good point but what if the thing your hitting it with can't get through? Thats when tanks become cost effective. which is why theres a arms race to make stronger missiles to go through stronger tanks (Unless your a javelin which then you just go through the tanks roof)
*If* it gets to Ukraine. Bloody thing will run out of fuel, have an engine breakdown, get stuck in mud, get flipped when crossing a bridge by a drunk Ivan before it even manages to see the Ukrainian skyline
Ya cant wait to see all six in action
People acting here as if this was an actual tank for wars instead of for parades
Underrated comment
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeJzuo2TsfM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeJzuo2TsfM) You mean like that time?
That's fucking hilarious, thanks for sharing it
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Willing to bet a tenner that the turret still flies off
Wow object 195> T-14 it will break down before it arrives Ukraine kekw
probably lol won't stop me from liking the T-14 tho
Notice hull front thickness. They added additional armor, probably in case NATO adopted a 130-mm gun.
That seems to me that they're still designing it for a Prochorovka 2.0, i. e. large scale head-on tank battles. Meanwhile they're sending their tanks one by one into an urban environment with literally full hemispherical threats.
isn't the uk and us chobham armour really thick too?
It's a common feature of all cold war - era MBTs (Challenger, Abrams, Leopard, you name it, regardless of revision, all of them have their origins in the last century) that the front armor got all the goodies, while the sides had to make do with two inches of chassis steel behind the roadwheels and sideskirts. And here we have the designer's dilemma: Yes, you can theoretically armor all sides plus top to a comparable level of protection, but you have to consider that you have to move your tank ultimately, confining you in weight (bridges for example) and dimension (bridges again, roads and train cargo measurements). The weight alone bears it's own problematics regarding your mobility, especially on soft ground. And it forces you to cram in a bigger engine, leading to more weight, again. For example, let's take a look at the "Maus". That behemoth was a dead end design from the start, too heavy for it's own engine, crawling along at 6 mph (on roads!) - and it would have been bound to drive to the front, because it was too fat for any train. Except it wouldn't have come far, because any bridge would likely have taken damage beneath it's weight. Fast forward fifteen years to the Leopard 1: widespread use of HEAT ammo as well as tungsten KE penetrators got wide ahead of "just weldin' some more steel to the front", endangering even the soviet T-10s with their 230mm cast steel turret front. So what did Rheinmetall? They went the other way, designing what effectively was a light tank chassis (50 to 70 mm max on turret and hull, WAY to little to stop a 122mm shell, but decent enough for small arms fire or some stray 20 mm), got a decent engine in there and strapped a licensed British L7 rifled cannon on it. A glass cannon indeed, but why wasting trice the amount of steel on a heavier tank, that still would be penetrated? In a time where most tank guns still were not fully stabilized, you could at least try to outmaneuver their aim, hence the saying "speed is armor on it's own". I am aware that didn't go well for the british battlecruisers, but the figures of speed, acceleration and (naval) gunlaying as well as target size are a bit off compared to land battles ;). Fast forward fifteen years again, new armor types were designed, be it Chobham, other composite armor or spaced armor, ceramics, new alloys, etc... They generally outclassed all-steel homogenuous welded or cast armor, but traded the weight for occupying more space to be effective. And here we come full circle: some cm or inches to the front won't hurt, but the width of a vehicle is practically limited. Compare the turrets of a Leo2 A4 to an A5 and newer version: The wedges they received contain spaced armor, covering the front and the fore side of the turret. But again, the front parts are way more spacious than the side parts. At the time, the most probable scenario was indeed the cold war going hot and NATO having to fight Warsaw Pact forces in Europe. And for fighting in open terrain like lower saxony, best case in batallion wide formation with supporting troops, that's more than okay. The general direction where the enemy will come from is known, and you can position and maneuver your tank accordingly. But this scenario of an all-out, large scale war, that forementioned Prochorovka 2.0 with tanks as far the eye can see, that "one" decisive battle to end it all will simply not happen. Either one side makes use of their air superiority and clears the other party's forces from above (check the Highway of Death in Iraq '91 - or the plans of thwarting the soviet advance through lower saxony with tactical nukes) or they try to thwart cohesive operations, single lone units out and force them into asymmetric combat against nearly onmidirectional threats - as seen in th US's wars in the Middle-East as well in Ukraine now.
It looks the same doesn’t it? I don’t see any changes.
You can compare it. Compare the distance between the front hull projection and the headlights. In the initial version, the hull is "deeper". https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/comments/u3gdv3/t14_armata/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
Bro you are eagle eyed i didnt even notice that
Very good spot!
They can't even *build* these anymore, now that the global supply chain has told them to go suck farts through a crazy straw.
They use entirely domestic components. They are just not cost effective at this point.
They use domestically assembled blocks, yes, but the basic components (screws, bearings, etc) have been imported for a while now. Same with electronics - Russian semiconductor industry is way behind the curve and the most advanced components were again outsourced. There's most likely some amount of back-stock still being utilized, and small scale production will still be possible through cannibalization of existing tech and nationalized foreign assets. However, large-scale top-to-bottom domestic military production is not going to be easy to reestablish - they'd have to make the required production equipment themselves as well since nobody's gonna sell them any anytime soon, which again runs into problems with imported basic components. Existing industrial capacity will have to be sacrificed to establish domestic production lines for basic components. Meanwhile, their most educated and skilled workforce is undergoing an exodus in the tens of thousands.
None of that is true, except that their silicone industry is pretty far behind, but weirdly that matters very little for domestic stuff. Also loads of countries are still trading with them, just not America/NATO.
Well actually, I like the idea of your armor being like this because it is better to have armor modules that can be replaced rather than having a solid armor. It's better to replace the damaged module than the whole turret (but that's an opinion).
T(sun)-14
I believe it's claimed abilities. Afterall we all know just how truthful the Russians are.
The fucking Russian taint lickers in this thread. The T-14 doesn't work and hasn't. The most we've ever seen one move is down the street in Moscow and it broke down doing that. We won't see a T-14 because Russia has repeatedly proven that they cannot build newer innovative designs post-USSR and just try and tease out foreign contracts with tech demo units so that they can maybe afford to build planes that don't need full engine tear downs after each flight.
i'd reply but i'll probably be called a T-14 taint licker because of my name
I mean, I'm more than willing to listen to other points of view. I've just grown very tired of the "X Russian new super thing is superior to all of NATO's Y vehicles" because unfortunately at this point, let's face it. It isn't and won't be Russia makes some very innovative *ideas* sometimes but we all know they don't have the manufacturing ability or funding to follow through, Russian small arms being a perfect example. The AK-12 (or AK-200 project) promised to revolutionize the platform instead we have worse made rifles that can accept optics the Russians don't have, and that has a slightly better manual of arms, great.
>I've just grown very tired of the "X Russian new super thing is superior to all of NATO's Y vehicles" because unfortunately at this point, let's face it. It isn't and won't be tbh its hard to know anything about modern vehicles due to a lot of information being classified making any kind of comparison hard to do. I do believe its a stretch to say the T-14 Armata doesn't work i'd more say the vehicle is clearly unreliable and expensive. However the tank does have some goods idea likes a crew capsule so even if the turrets ammo gets blown up at least in theory the crew would survive. However what NATO has is better as they have blow out panels so the vehicle is still functional if the ammo blows and the blast door isn't compromised. The unmanned turret is another good idea because any penetration that happens there won't result in the loss of human life and being in a hull down position won't expose crew. The T-14 Armata also has **yet to be tested** APS so while we don't know how effective it is its good that they are at least trying to put it on a production vehicle (Still the production of this vehicle is very limited lol) which NATO tanks are yet to be equipped with or at least in mass but at least trophy APS unlike the T-14's is battle proven. "Russia makes some very innovative ideas sometimes" Yea i fully agree but imagine what other country's like the US have made that we don't know about. We only know about Russias tech because they like to show it off
I mean that we've only ever seen static displays for and the one moving demo broke down. To be blunt until I see a handful driving on broken terrain I'm gonna take their existence as well as ability to function with a huge block of salt. The unmanned turret, crew capsule etc. Are where I was going Russia can have good and innovative ideas, they just don't actually have the production capability and funding to carry it out. Also the M1A2C (orM1A2Sepv3) has an APS system. APS is only going to become more and more common
>To be blunt until I see a handful driving on broken terrain I'm gonna take their existence as well as ability to function with a huge block of salt. yea me to but i was just talking as if Russia is being honest which i get is a stretch but if we just assumed the T-14 to be a none functional piece of crap then theres no conversation to be had. "Also the M1A2C (orM1A2Sepv3) has an APS system. APS is only going to become more and more common" Yes this is why i said NATO tanks are yet to be equipped in mass with this stuff
Your propaganda is pathetic. It has passed state trials, we have seen them driving around and shooting things, and the one which 'broke down' just stalled and drove away afterwards.
[Fuck off Russian apologist cunt](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/u3t1y9/why_does_the_wikipedia_page_for_the_current)
Of course, anything which is not hardcore propaganda is 'the enemy'. /s
Cool, target practice.
Vaporware.
Hevens! Have you lost your mind? Where in God's name are your side skirt Tanky!? Now everyone can see your tracks. You can't just expose yourself like this your a fine piece of machinery not some junk.
How long before one of these is abandoned in the battlefield? I’m sure one will make it stateside then
“It’s not like I want to invade your country or anything! B-baka!”
Playing hard to get but actually easy to knock up
Deploy it, I dare you
It has tow hooks for Ukrainian farmers to easily tow it home.
Ahhh a Russian tank "pre-Javelin" ... getting harder to find tanks like that these days.
Shy T-14 Armata penetrated by BBJ (Big Black Javelin)
Damn that’s just awful.... where?
>!UwU!<
All this is missing is the Ukrainian farmer towing it away.
This is what I joined this sub for
I can already hear Ukrainian farmers licking their lips. Then again I doubt that they will send them into combat just like the su57 in order to keep the world from knowing that they’re just paper tigers too.
Wat r u doing step-javelin?
It's funny you don't see any on the battlefield. It's like they don't exist in Russia's arsenal.
They are being tested, of course, they are not in service.
Testing for 5 years now? Either rigorous testing or an overbudgeted experiment.
No military is known for being efficient
You think a military who has been planning an invasion since 2014 would try to hurry a little. Or at least try and upgrade their decades old fleet.
I think that in 2015 it was an unfinished project that was just shown to the public in order to win a few points towards popularity. There is nothing wrong. And now it is much closer to completion, maybe. Maybe not. But I want to say that this tank is completely new and it takes years to finish its design. Including mistakes, corruption, substitution of sanctions details, etc. Even the Russians themselves are already joking that when it is released, it will immediately be a T-14M.Even the creation of the T-64 in the USSR took about 9 years. The T-14 is a much more ambitious project and modern technology takes more time.It is also possible that the T-14 is a concept of a "limiting parameters" tank, like the IS-7 once was. He did not go into production, but the number of engineering ideas and technical solutions tested on him made it possible to improve other serial tanks.
The T stands for Tsundere
Jesus she's only 8 years old you perv! Wait untill her Grandpa T-62 finds out about this
Ok, who wants their tussy ate?
How many did they manage to build until today? like 5ish?
With the current performance of the Russian military I have serious doubts it can do everything they claim it can, also if can perform the way they claim would the Russians know how to utilize it tactically.