Is it time for the US to get a new tank?

None of the armor estimates are worth anything outside of what is given officially, like with the newer T-90s, or what is found in declassified documents.

Whether by Russians or USAsians or Europeans.

Yeah gonna call bullshit on most of those russian numbers,

940-1180mm vs heat... Gets pend by an RPG7 that has up top 600mm pen

You got a source for that? Most recent news I could find with a cursory search was an article from February 2018 citing an initial order for two battalions of tanks starting production in 2020 with "hundreds" of tanks going to be produced.

thediplomat.com/2018/02/russia-orders-2-t-14-armata-tank-battalions/

South America or Central?

Look up what size a Russian battalion is, and it includes T-15 and T-16.

And Abrams gers fried by Malyutka.

ria.ru/defense_safety/20160906/1476182016.html

Yeah, I think I'll pass on a Jow Forums no-name's "analytics", thanks.

AT-3 could from the side.

Not the front, on any model. It was made to withstand AT-5 on the front. Gradual improvements were obviously made with newer ATGMs in mind. In ODS, HA could withstand Hellfire on the front, which is ~900mm after ERA.

AT-14 should get though the front of most of the models (or any tank).

>maximum speed 42mph

Topkek who the fuck made this? That’s an arbitrary figure set so guys don’t burn the turbine and treads so fast, or hektik skidz the thing.

IIRC the Abrams can hit like 70mph on road without the governor throttling the turbine.

>ria.ru/defense_safety/20160906/1476182016.html
>The Russian Defense Ministry has concluded a contract with Uralvagonzavod for the supply of an experimental lot from more than one hundred T-14 Armata tanks (via google translate)

So you've got a year and a half old article claiming an initial batch of more than one hundred tanks being delivered through 2025 and the two month old article I linked claiming initial serial production in 2020. As much as I'd love to see the Russians bungling tank production like they do with their airforce this seems a little like wishful thinking.

Armata offers little over the T-90 for all intents.

The increased frontal hull protection just means new ammo needs to be made.

A T-90 with a higher pressure gun and drive improvements (increased reverse speed) would be better for a country that has all the gear ready to make them.

I'd say if anything the next tank should use 155mm gun, as to both make use of the plethora of types of 155mm shells, and to develop new shells.
>pure tank rounds
>APFSDS
A caseless design, it fires a 50mm depleted uranium sabot at 2000MPS.
>155mm "Lance" Tube launched fire and forget missle.
A "super" Javelin, with the range of over 10km.
Other types of shell would require two stage loading.

They already do have double digit numbers of them, and they're already worth a damn.
Problems with them include getting enough funding to properly test them (not their base capabilities) and buying enough of them to be relevant to the 1500 Abrams we've got.

Basically, that "max speed" is limited to keep fuel consumption reasonable, and to keep "Joe" from tearing shit up hooning around in a 70 ton tank.

A T-90A still took a hit by a TOW and looked there are YT videos of that in syria.

With an economy this awful, how many armata's can you produce?

I mean even RUssia itself says it'll have less than 100 by 2020.

Attached: Fucking Italy.png (327x523, 24K)

Do debt next.

M1a2 wont be at a disadvantage if the T-14 was to use its 100km AESA radar and shoot it with Invar-M because the Jews helped them get a Trophy system. But the Afghanit is said to even stop KEP rounds. Vatniks will feel like gods in the battlefield.

>nominal
Discarded.

>this sad vatnik damage control

I am the you on top.

>abrams 71 tons (imperial)
>armata 48 tonnes (metric)
Go home Al Gore

Attached: Poland.jpg (247x300, 73K)

huh? you think there's going to be tank v tank? ATGMs and drones will eat tanks alive. Tank crews are on suicide missions on a real 21st century battlefield.

Russia literally cant make debt, because no one wants to lend them money in big amounts, the ruble is too unstable so banks in Russia dont lend much, also they fear that russian state mafia will just cut them down, if they ever demand the money back.

>knows he can't win argument
>LOOOL stupid vatnik let meh repost on reddit XDDDD

>thinks he can still impress anyone with his vatnik bullshit
>starts babbling something about reddit

>because no one wants to lend them money in big amounts
Russian Eurobonds were so hot that the UK government had to intervene to slow down lenders.

>Things that never happened the way you want to make them sound

what exactly would be the benefit? the M1A2SEPv3 is about all we need, and apparently the M1A3 is soon™.
it's not worth the money or time to build basically the same damn thing.

>Invar-M
gun launched atgm is never a good idea

None. Its obviously a prop, it even looks like one.

Russia made it to scare America into making a new tank and ditch the old Abrams thereby making us spend more money on what is most likely a wooden parade float.

Anyone have that anti Russia hat cartoon where the hat with the red nose says it’s time America pay the bills and etc but in reality he’s unconscious on the floor drunk?

Isn't high-speed fuel economy the big advantage of the Abrams' turbine? I'd always heard that it pretty much ran at a constant speed and the downside was high fuel consumption when stopped compared to diesels.

wasn't it established in the early Iraq war that super fast tanks only work if your gas trucks can keep up? combined arms patrol stuff doesn't really need speed, but it does need mine resistance. this thing is way lighter, no way its any better at that.

also, wasn't the whole three man crew thing established as not enough back in WW2 with the french? driver, gunner, commander leaves out a loader assent, which I assume means they are still using auto loaders? wasn't that deemed to be actually slower and less flexible then the American one at a time system?

>voiceover in fucking robot voice
WHY DO PEOPLE DO THIS IS MAKES YOUR VIDEO COMPLETELY UNWATCHABLE

The WWII issue of two man turret was that the commander being also the gunner lead to an unmanageable workload

nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-tells-aides-not-talk-publicly-about-russia-policy-moves-n861256

>Two officials said Trump told Putin during a phone call last week after Putin's re-election: "If you want to have an arms race we can do that, but I'll win." Trump added that he hoped that Putin’s comments were just election rhetoric and bragged that he’d just secured a $700 billion defense budget, the largest the U.S. has ever had, he said, according to one of the officials.

Russia BTFO

Because if they spoke in their real voices the thick Russian accents would be obvious.

Eh the Abrams is fine with what they've been upgrading it with past couple years.

Probably going need a new tank in a decade though.

The only thing that really is puzzling to me is why the USA does not have a trophy system, either bought from Israel or a new one developed by the USA itself, for its tanks.

yes we need a tank more suited for urban warfare, clearly the Americans have mastered shithole fighting

Nah, conventional war is a thing of the past. Drone tanks, maybe.

There you go.

Attached: 1453076646001.jpg (531x640, 59K)

they'd shelved if for long in favor of domestic quick kill system

Attached: 12022015.png (530x530, 283K)

PPP is more accurate in these cases to account for local production costs. Especially since Russia is sanctioned.

Landkreuzer P. 1000 "Ratte" should be the new American tank

Attached: Screenshot_20180330-073331.png (1440x2560, 282K)

>hilly terrain

Attached: 1504988534929.jpg (309x163, 7K)

>any terrain

Ahahahaha I love that bastard.
>"If you want to have an arms race we can do that, but I'll win."

Attached: 679.png (550x550, 32K)

Why fix what ain't broke? There's already an upgrade program and the only peer tanks to it are in allied militaries. For all the hubbub about Russian tanks, their combat record over the past several decades is pretty abysmal. Can say "monkey model this" or "monkey model that", but this fact remains. Another fact is that the Russians are still importing thermal sights, rangerfinders, and other complex electronics that they are unable to produce themselves.

Should also be noted that while Russia has around 3x the tanks as the US... only about a thousand, a quarter to a fifth of US numbers of Abrams, are modern. The rest are hardly any better than those old monkey models that the Abrams has slaughtered in two wars already.

You should understand debt first.

>untested tank vs a tank that's bean in service for 39 years

Attached: 1521612002841.png (860x650, 60K)

I doubt most hills could support it's weight , you create a highway as you drive

>muh ppp

Time for Russia to get new apc , navy , attack chopper ect ect ect

Very ambitious military procurement plans for them, honestly. Shame their wallets never seem to be able to satisfy their eyes though.

There are ATGMs missing T-90s and getting destroyed by Trophy's Why the hell do you think the US Army has leased 4 trophy systems?

"You should understand debt first." Apparently no one here does.

they are my favourites

Attached: 1400401472_153215922.jpg (600x601, 78K)

This

>Russia plans to build 100 Armatas by 2020
>Meanwhile the US has over 8,000 active Abrams available for use

Shit we gave Iraqis more than 150 Abrams because we had too many, this is equivalent to the Germans building roughly 500 Tiger IIs while there were almost 40,000 Shermans rolling around.

what is this thing supposed to be, other than russia

>>Meanwhile the US has over 8,000 active Abrams available for use
Why are you not adding T-72s or T-90s?

There's a domestic trophy on the M1A2 SEPv3 and the US bought trophy systems back in 2010 which were then developed into other systems for use on light vehicles L, Strykers, and Bradleys. A system wasn't installed on the Abrams because of electrical issues and fitting it around the CROWS system. Now that the CROWS is smaller and relocated the SEPv3 will have an active kill system.

Looked like it penetrated and injured the gunner, which is why he bailed.

There's no reason to bail otherwise for the gunner.

If it penetrated he is more than likely dead. Saw the guy holding his head sounds like the sign of a concussion having an open hatch on a tank even de-activating shtora.

>Gets pend by an RPG7 that has up top 600mm pen
no T-72B was frontal pen by RPG-7

Well, it worked with the IS-3, so I guess that automatically makes more sense than any claim about the armata's combat capability.

>requires an entire company of engineers to brace trees back upright in your path

>Its obviously a prop
youtube.com/watch?v=NuoAfmmzipg
Amerilard seething.

We at least need to change the turbine engine that we've got in that thing. You can only go drive the thing for 3 hours at a time and once 3 hours is up you need to spend about an hour to clean the damn thing

Just looking at the armata I can't see how it would have very much armour on its turret. It's just too small. Not that there's any crew to protect in there, but the tank could still be disabled by hitting there surely.

>48 tons
Meme tank has meme armor.

Lol.

Attached: vata20-38.jpg (555x837, 100K)