In this Tank Chat, David Willey takes a detailed look at a vehicle that has garnered significant interest and controversy - The Russian T-14 Armata. David explores why this vehicle draws so much attention, and how it has taken a radical departure from previous Soviet design philosophy.
Support The Tank Museum & Get great perks:
► Patreon: www.patreon.com/tankmuseum
► KZsection Membership: /
00:00 | Intro
00:47 | Soviet Tank History
09:58 | Armata Family
11:17 | T-14 Features
15:27 | Production
#tankmuseum #t14armata #armata #davidwilley
Жарияланды Күн бұрын
Hi Tank Nuts - let us know your thoughts about this video in the comments below.
It's ridiculous, since it's not a real production tank and why do so many people even care, especially historians, yea not surprised you don't have one, Russia has like maybe 8 total ........🤦
How about radically ridiculous? 😁
Thinly armored turret is a massive mistake, enabling any IFV to achieve a mission kill against it. So far IFV could reastically (disregarding surprise flanking shots) defeat a MBT is with ATGM but not you just need to hit the turret enough times. Firepower wise it is definite world beater because that is simple tech that russia has. Problems arise with quality of electronics.
@D Train show me 15 in a picture at once .....I think they only have 8. This is the same country who repainted markings on nuclear weapons during may day parade........lol if you don't see it, they don't have it. 😁
Never in the field of human conflict has so much been said, by so many, about so few tanks
preach
Maus ? e100? Sgt York? Divad?
More has probably been written about Tiger tanks than all other tanks combined.
-oc4eb original poster said about "so few tanks". There weren't a ton of Tigers or King Tigers, but at least those saw combat on multiple fronts and were made in the hundreds. There are, what, maybe a dozen T-14? And they're all just test beds/prototypes. I agree that there is too much written on the Tiger and King Tiger, but at least there is a track record there.
As a former M1A1 tank commander. I can not count how many holes I would have got stuck in ,if I could have not stuck my head out of the hatch to see the depth of the hole. Don't know how many times I said " Loader how much room do I have on the left side." This layout will work on flat desert terrain , go down narrow trails , defiles, mine lanes good luck.
Even with today's advanced sensors, probably works great to stick your head out and look from time to time.
I think this is a solid point in abstract, but I also think it can be entirely solved through training and good cameras. Once you know your vehicles clearance, you just know. As long as training had a lot of tight clearance situations without ability to g.o.a.l (get out and look) I see it as a non issue.
I think you have probably put your finger on the problem. Video might seem like a good idea but might just not be good enough to work when someone is shooting at you.
McDonnell surely you most want cameras when someone is shooting at you. The loader won't be available to stick their head out at that point, even if they were stupid enough to want to.
gros mitho
making yourself dependent from countries you may potentially go to war with for parts to build your tanks is just pure genius.
Selling advanced military equipment componentry to countries you may go to war with is also genius. But then we've come to expect nothing less from the French.
I'm French. Don't worry the weapon we sell to our customers, are not as efficient as the real ones we have.
@B M The Americans were selling oil to Japan before Pearl Harbor. I refuse to believe they didn't suspect a war was gonna happen (intelligence department).
BOT your channel has no content.
It's not like it was their decision - it's not easy to establish high-tech industry, especially if your country is so corrupt that tryiing to throw money at the project just fills someone's pockets along the way instead. But even at much lower levels of corruption you can see serious issues Western countries have with supply lines for various necessary stuff starting either in China or in countries likely to be on the frontline if a war in South-East Asia breaks out...
Really great video, I appreciated the in-depth dive into Soviet-era tank design philosophy.
So much great information here. Even the brief discussion of the size requirements of the previous tanks has relevance on what is happening on the battlefield that no one mentions. It isn't easy to find 5'3" tankers today. Tanks for the great video!
there is some confusion about the T-95, since multiple different prototypes were called that, but the actual predecessor to the T-14 was called the Object 195, which also had the crew in the hull, the X-shaped diesel engine and other similarities, although it did have even more advanced features like a 152mm smoothbore cannon, a 30mm autocannon and radar. you can find a couple of pictures of it online. Russia has had real problems with the cost and production of the T-14, so it's not surprising it lacks some features of the predecessor, which would further complicate the production and cost more. they will most likely stick to mainly producing the T-90M instead of the T-14 anyway. I would like to add that the X-shaped diesel in Object 195 and T-14 is not based on a WW2 German diesel engine, which had for example its pistons at an different angle compared to the Russian one, 16 cylinders for a total of 36.6 liters and it was air-cooled. the Russian one on the other hand has 12 cylinders for total of about 35 liters and it is liquid-cooled with an intercooler among other major differences like compression ratio and cylinder bore. the main similarities are the X-shape, both having twin turbochargers and that both engines were built for tanks, but the German engine was not the only X-shaped engine ever built nor the first one, so the claim is dubious in my opinion, although I will admit that X-shaped engines are rare. if you are still in doubt, you can look at schematics and pictures of both and compare them.
"But by the time this film is released it may well be that this tank is in actual combat"- the most optimistic statement of the year. Bravo!
Entered combat a few months ago
claimed to be in combat a few month ago. so far only claims.
@D Train we don't bring those to parades
@D Train Very good point. I concur.
@D Train At least the British Army would never have a 40 mile long trafic jam in the combat zone. So there are some advantages to never having enough of anything.
The sad thing is that many ideas for the tank seem quite good. I like the armored gunner sights, and the hard kill system "if it works".
It kind of seems like that car homer simpson designed...
As an old retired Armored Cav guy, I found this to be a great informative video. Well worth the watch if one is knowledgeable or interested in armor, it’s development, and the practical issues affecting its production and employment. Thanks Tank Museum.
Were you ever stationed in Korea? 2/72?
: W.A.A.P.F.T.A.D No, I was never stationed there. I went TDY once for a planning conference, but that is my only experience in Korea.
Former 19E1/2 from 348th ACAV (ARNG) here. Represent!
_> I found this to be a great informative video._ I find you gullible.
perfectly irrelevant
Thank you, very good summary. New to me was the length of the APFSDS penetrator. I had understood that in previous tanks the ammunition was two-parted, thus limiting the length of the penetrator and thus it's effectiveness
I had the opportunity to try and get in a T-72 once. I'm 6-2 and it was the same as impossible.
By Soviet standards you would probably be prohibited from joining the military. 6-2 in the USSR was like 7-0 in America right now.
innit that's B.s. where did you get that info?
Karcha the soviets were short. And i doubt he can be anything except a regular infantryman. I don't think there is a Soviet vehicle that can handle someone that tall.
innit most bmp btr can fit 2m tall guys. It's just uncomfortable in general. VDV(airborne units usually tall, big guys)
I'm 6'4", and after trying to fit into the commanders hatch of a T-72 I'm convinced that all Soviet tankers were 5' or shorter 😳
Not one in the museum...yet. :3 Also I wonder how that tank will look with a cope cage.
I feel like any footage of the T-14 should come with the disclaimer “Not actual game footage” 😂
The best way to discern real footage is to determine whether the turret is spinning wildly. If it is, it's real footage.
is a dual use vehicle. Tank and Helicopter all in one.
@Awm Joeyjoejoe eeking out a few extra centimeters in the turret-tossing challenge
Isn't it amazing what one can power with clockwork?
If it's stuck then it's a T14
So happy for these videos, the weekend has never begun before I can log off and enjoy your informational pieces. Keep up the good work! Big fan!
i love the quality and narration on this channel, always feels like i'm watching a good documentation on tv
The ballistic shape of Soviet tank turrets appeared to be perfect for a ballistic trajectory
Another absolutely fantastic report! Your research seems to be top notch, the footage highlights the oral presentation perfectly.
For some reason the T-14 always reminds me of a full-scale G.I.Joe's Mobat.
T-14 has highly effective stealth coating. It's never been seen on the battlefield.
T-14 is the most expensive ricer tank of all time.
lmfaoooo🤣🤣
Hahahah
Evidence!?!? 😂😂😂
Daaaammmmmmnnnnn
is that really the tank in the background? It's amazingly small and a feat of engineering to fit 3 crewmembers inside of it. That alone is revolutionary. I do worry about its ability to traverse gaps larger than a shallow puddle.
There is a little known feature where a second rotor blade will come out of the back of the turret. The turret then spins quickly enough to generate the lift necessary for the tank to fly.
As usual a wonderful "chat" and David you always come across as so knowledgeable and a joy to listen to. Why is it that most footage of this tank seems to show it spinning its turret?. Has anyone seen those hard kill tubes working?. I cannot see how they cover the tank and work. Trophy looks like it is the right place but this does not.
While the sourcing for this is dubious, according to the Chinese media the APS detection system doesn't actually work. Russia tried to sell it to China but the detection system requires the crew to sight the missile first. Its soft kill systems are also just smoke.
👻🚀🔍 It's intriguing to hear about the highly effective stealth coating of the T-14 Armata tank, especially considering its alleged absence from the battlefield. The concept of stealth technology in armored vehicles raises questions about its potential advantages and limitations in real combat scenarios. It would be fascinating to explore the capabilities and actual performance of the T-14 Armata to determine if it lives up to the claims surrounding its stealth features. 🤔💥🛡
Well, probably there are actually thousands of them but they are literally invisible to the naked eye.
M1 tanker here from the 80's. I am not sold on unmanned turrets. It sure was nice for the Commander and loader to stick their heads out for maneuvering, map reading, just knowing what was going on. You are not always engaged, so their are plenty of times you can safely ride like that. I know there is GPS one, but I'd not rely on that too much. You gotta have mad map skills to be a great tanker.
Yup. A great many things seem plausible, sensible and even desireable on paper, until they collide with reality.
Really because last I checked GPS was exactly why the coalition won against Saddam.
Fistit was one of many reasons.
Fist Right on. Just saying that map reading is still important, as there are a number of situations where it might nit be available. And if ur lost, ur not in the fight.
Also, the law of unintended consequences. I can imagine when those fancy cameras fail, you'll see someone riding on top of the turret so can see what's up, and not run over your infantry! With a long commo cord stretched and tangled😁😁. I hope the at least weld a hook on top to hang onto.
The tiny plastic model of it on the side really illustrate it's role in the grand scheme of things so far.
Just needs more ERA, ERA solves everything. I installed some ERA before my exams, got A* in all of them. Installed some on my dog and it turned into a wolf
Tsk
Lol 😂❤
Just wait for those F16 ERA variants in the hands of the Ukraine air forces. It will be glorious
i installed some ERA on my Rav4, it turned into a hangarship, currently docked in oslo, look it up.
Professional and excellent presentation. Facts and analysis makes this a brilliant and informative video.
No one really knows how it performs in battle, the only thing we know for sure is his fearsome parking brake so T 14 is capable to block a vital supply road for hours!!
@D Train Russia relies on foreign electronics for their tanks and jets. Now that those avenues have dried up the Russians are really hurting. Oh, and the parts for their jets rely on foreign countries and companies for their parts as well. They don't have the internal structure to make their own electronics for their vehicles and their maintenance crews, from all I have seen, are poorly trained. They are having to bring back retired jet pilots for their air force and they have sent the people who train pilots to the front lines as well so they are seriously lacking in pilot training. And then you have the HUGE elephant in the room of all of the corruption in the Russian military. There have literally been Millions and Millions of dollars stolen from projects up and down the line.
1970 No, it does not. Don't lie.
@D Train "oh dear! " lmao, next troll level: when somebody pointed that russians 100% depends on "wester" tech in their mil-tech, just copy random bs about Ukraine economisc. "The rationale that Russia is reliant on Western electronics is also deeply flawed." Yeap "deeply flawed", that is why russia has no own facilities for heavy equipment, jets, rockets and other hight-tech stuff. Even russian vital economic sector - gas and oil mining totally based on foreign tech. That's how mammoths die. In our case - very stupid and aggressive mammoth.
@D Train seems you need more spaces between sentences. Which kind of facts? Imagine a factory. This factory made just nails. But the machine that made nails was made in other country. What happened if this country will stop maintance of this machine, stop sell spare parts and consumables? Hope it's enough clear for you. It's how thing works around the world. Globalisation. And yeap, since this point - lots of this "machines" that used in russia were made in EU, Japan and USA. As you said - this is basics. P.S. you free to use your native language 😉
We know, if its maintained anything like the other tanks in Russia, then its most likely going to end up breaking down if it hasn't had a jack in the box turret
Its stealth capability in Ukraine is amazing. You never see it
Most factual look at this tank I've seen, along with The Chieftain.
Very interesting hearing the development history of Cold War Russian tanks. Helps a lot with understanding how the T14 came about.
Agreed, it was a great primer
You mean, didn't come about.
Lazerpig does a great breakdown or rather rips apart the T14... its a great watch.
Galloway Lazerpig is satirist. Unfortunatly a lot of the outrageous stuff he says is funny but not true. For instance the claim that the T-14 used a copy of the Porsche Tiger Ferdinand Engines. He does reveal genuine information but you don't know what is hyperbole or fact.
The T14 seems like a good tank (on Paper) but Russia doesn´t seem to have the capabilities to produce and maintain them in a substaincial number.
As a design concept of putting the crew in one highly protected area low as possible makes a lot of sense, but in order to get away with that you do need some serious high tech and the question is simply one of cost, what is cheaper a higher risk of loosing crew or a vastly more expensive combat machine in procurement and operation.
The issue not addressed is the most important component in any tank. The crew, their morale and training.
Those are currently being ground to dust in Ukraine.
Man they went from the leader in tank technology to this
Excellent Russian Tank review. It’s a keeper to watch again.👌👏👏👏👏👏
You'd think a fume extractor would still be valuable to prevent long term fouling even if it's not needed as urgently in an unmanned turret.
The mechanic who has to open the turret needs a gas mask. Just like with oversee containers.
Not if the survivality of your tank in the battlefield is under one hour.
Also corrosion could be an issy.
It may be that the breech and or the entire turret assembly is in some way hermetically sealed, and kept at a high enough positive pressure that the breech opening doesn’t let in much smoke(that can easily be handled by filtration). Could also be that it’s not really an actual “meant to be fielded” tank and so there simply hasn’t been a fume extractor added to the design yet.
Dont need one when one will get provided when it gets penned.
Imagine the price of a captured T14. Great Vid Mr Willey
Whatever the price of scrap steel is times the weight of it.
Imagine the price of an uncaptured one.
Worth it's weight in tin
Well, considering there's probably a tank museum that could use a Panther engine, there's got to be some intrinsic value to it, there.
Yeah, the Russians are also looking forward to capture one.
How it's sold - Ultimate tank for the modern battlefield What it is - Decent tank for the 90s
I read that there are/were, only half a dozen completed vehicles, so even if they were any good, would they make any difference to anything?
Good to hear that the T-14 is receiving more critical (if still largely speculative) analysis these days as I’ve had enough of interminable Wikipedia-educated WoT players insisting that a tank _yet to be combat proven_ can still somehow be the absolute bestest in the world like evaaaaarrrrr, etc. 😁
Nah, its kinda same thing related to almost any MBT in the world: despite barely having combat situations, any tank X is claimed to be the best because of Y, Z and ... . Even M1 Abrams which probably has the top score of the battlefield hours could and should be percieved critically because it hasn't got any real resistance in fight, percing obsolete Iraq tanks from great distance in mostly flat desert land with great air support. How it would show itself in hupothetical conflict in urbanized area against modern opponents - we can only guess.
"Nah, its kinda same thing related to almost any MBT in the world:" Not really. The rest have actually been seen in numbers in battle. " it hasn't got any real resistance in fight," That's more doctrine than design. US doctrine is combined forces. If you find yourself alone in an M1, countless things have gone wrong before anyone has had a chance to shoot at you.
MBT's aren't made for MOUT combat. Any MBT is vulnerable in a urban environment where it's main gun is just about useless as engagement ranges can be measured in dozens of meters.
Pretty much whats going on in Syria
ow it would show itself in hupothetical conflict in urbanized area against modern opponents - we can only guess. That would be a tactical failure. Is the M1 Abrams designed for city assault? Not really, street fighting is the Akilles heal of all armour. Having the right tool for the job, and knowing the limitations and best use of all your tools, is vital.
This is a paper tank I suspect. Looks good in the parade though! Thank you Tank Museum. You're presentations are the best.
True.
The 14 stands for the number of units that will be produced.
21 have been produced, more in the future
*Numbers of the functioning ones
200 "more in the future 🤡" Explain how you think that is possible.
Ness Speedwerkz Well Russian MOD claimed to be starting mass production 200 units per year. If that happens is yet to be seen. However we likely will see it used in the coming weeks or months in combat. It isn't surprising we haven't seen them used yet. Russia doesn't want to risk them being captured. However if any large Ukrainian offensive does happen using western tanks, expect the possibility of T-14 being used for the first time.
Very good summary analysis where you hold out ambiguities but at the same time make assessments.
Extremally interesting video. I was wondering about the T-14's relevance in todays world.
It's super relevant in terms of what crew protection should be like and how information centric it should be. How the crew is, what they see and how they function is what the future should be for a tank. All the other stuff is just general technicities every tank faces.
Excellent presentation; as usual. I would sum up the T-14 capabilities, with the repeated phrase, "According to them ( russia )". That says it all; the masters of OVER HYPE!! And tooting your own horn.
Spot on! Russia has overhyped Napoleon in 1812 and Hitler in 1945.
1 Damn straight. I am sure if you read "their" take on the history of 1812 and 1941 - 45 ( Don't forget, THEY were allies in 1939'40 ) They will say talk about about how Napoleon and Hitler were defeated with the help of the T-14 tank😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆
Oh, so you have your version of history where Napoleon and Hitler were not defeated by Russia? How cute! Anyway, you can always personally try to repeat their "success" instead of writing stupid comments on KZsection.
Every nation overhypes their own gear. It's nothing exclusive to Russia.
"We do not have a T-14 in the museum here" Well its okay, the russian army has none either 😀 (yes I know they have it in negligible numbers and with questionable readiness)
ha, ha , beauty ;;
Lol
Excellent
Oh yeah! A turret spin clip within the first minute. I was hoping for one the moment the video started and it didn't take long for you guys to deliver.
Only thing we know for sure is that the turret rotates
The most valuable part of the Russian T14 Armoda is the tow pintles and the 500 miles counts being towed
Custom designed to be towed by Ukrainian tractors!
I did a project on this tank for a writing unit I had to complete. This was before I really knew anything about tanks or armoured warfare in general. Cracks me up how little I knew and embarassing.
Don't be embarrassed. Info on this tank has been hard to dig up until recently.
Always have to start building your knowledge base somewhere, no shame in that.
For those who might missed the first minutes of the video, it was mentioned that some of the info here, taken from various internet sources, maybe propaganda. One of these is the notion (mentioned by Lazerpig) that the Armata uses an engine derived/inspired/copied from a German engine. I tried to find evidence but I only found one website that seems to be dubious.
yeah.. better watch redeffect videos. more accurate
I think LazerPig is a source now...
a very wrong source
KZsectionrs are not a source, but yes, its bogus claims on top of that
@D Trainlazerpig is a youtuber and openly admit his bias. This does not mean he willfully shares misinformation but does mean he make different choices in sourcing and presentation.
This is the best video ever!!! It's about a tank that doesn't exist from a state that won't exist soon.
A question occurred part way through this video, when talking about how many soviet vehicles were set up for fording rivers it made me wonder about the comparative composition of logistics and engineering vehicles (bridge layers, recovery, etc) in Soviet/Russian and NATO militaries. I have seen enough clips of BMPs being swamped trying to swim across a calm body of water to have serious concerns about driving metal box into water and coming out the other side.
Thanks for providing the most reliable information on armored weapons systems available anywhere. It's interesting that supply chain issues seem to be the tank's Achilles heel. The decision to cancel production of the tank probably signals that a number of these technologies were too big of a stretch, and the likelihood of getting them all to work with domestically available equipment was slim.
Reliable untill they talked abt the engine….
Chieftain has also spoken about the ever present issue of ergonomics as well. Good that they are in a nice little protected tub. However, commander cannot poke his head out to have a look around, which is still the best way of getting situational awareness. They are reliant on a very small number of optics to see outside the tank, disable those with something as simple as paint and they are buggered. Given the ambushes that Ukraine seem to be able to set for the Russian tank crews, this would be my least favourite tank to go into battle with. I think even the T54/55 might be better, the extra crewman for logistics and maintenance would be a bonus for a start. It will be interesting to see how the Challenger and Leopard tanks fair in this "modern" warfare as well.
Its called corruption, not supply chain issues 😂
Having 3 different MBTs in service with the largest country in the world is going to run into supply chain issues nothing shocking. Corruption is another whole issue.
Also from Russia, the tank can also levitate and is capable of invisbility.
After serving in the armoured infantry I can't fathom the crew not being able to poke there head up and take a physical look at the battle picture. I totally agree it breaks alot of basic design philosophy.
The ambushed Chally shows you the danger of relying on electronic sights and cameras alone. A few paint bombs and paint sprayers and you're now blind and panicking! A low tech solution to a high tech problem!
The main impression I got from all the T14 promo videos I've seen, is that its turret spins. I think they got that point across sufficiently lol..
But does it fly? That is the real question!
you see they have invented a new way of driving the tank which utilizes springs which need to be wound up by the turrets rotation and its the most reliable way to power it because the engine is only needed to produce a lot of noise and not for drivong it because obviously they would have tried to copy maybe a newer engine design like a turbine but its too quiet and they need the noise because otherwise they can find their tanks because glonass doesnt work and they need the engine for smoke
Great recap of Soviet/Russian armored development!
Great video! A unique insight into the vehicle being discussed but also the current Russian battlefield situation and tank build / supply situation.
"unique" is one way of saying it, blatant propaganda is another
Do you also still believe in Saddam's WMD? 🤣
What would these corny dudes know about battlefield realities?
Anyone notice how much recoil their tanks have compared to western tanks? The whole tank shakes including the barrel. Compare that to something like the challenger or Abrams. Those are butter smooth! No bias either. I actually went back to double check.
It weighs so much less than a Western tank. Importantly however is that the motion doesn't exceed the allowed threshold until after the projectile leaves the barrel. Accuracy is no affected.
Imagine they start sending out t34s but there is one tank that could be a challenge the is7 it is an absolute monster
The first videos stated all systems and it was mind blowing but it was stated early on that there was little chance all systems would be implemented on the tanks.
Might be implemented But the question is will it be in a functional and reliable way? The US has several revolutionary designs in its history where the new designs were simply a bridge to far.
At 11:23 and 11:35 you can see the vehicle tumble for 0.5+ sec, the stabilizer apparently unable to compensate. Compare that to e.g. a Leo 2A7, even when firing at 9h or 3h
Remote viewing has always been a problem, most recently with the KC-46 remote boom control station. It takes conscious effort to visualize which direction you are looking. A solution might be a "transparent hull", ie a cyclorama of screens surrounding the crew.
I've heard theories of using the F-35's camera system + a headset to allow operators to virtually see out of a vehicle without needing vision blocks or looking outside.
I love how in so many action vids of this tank the turret is spinning. It actually looks like they just wound up the thing and let it go. I have to assume, based on the total lack of sightings of this tank in ANY war zone in the world (they claimed it has been used in Syria, the most public and televised war in history. Try to find a single video of it in action. Ditto Ukraine; I've seen some vids that show it cruising in the country, that could have been shot anywhere.) This is just another parade weapon; looks pretty at shows, can barely perform in the field.
It failed even in a parade. Broke down in a cloud of smoke. The engine is hopelessly bad.
Thats because they cut and paste the footage of the turret to make it seem like its very long, its actually a small fragment displaying the turrets two way stabilization and turret rotation speed. Every armored vehicle is one armor penetrating shell away from being a fireball, its some fascade that "our tanks are so much better"
Well, if there was a video they probably filmed it themselves. I guess they didn't like what they saw or they'd be broadcasting it to the moon and back.
@B Cluett It was promotional material from the arms production company, like Western arms makers make for their tanks, I dont know why everybody is looking into this so hard.
The "turret" is actually a radar unit.
This is a great and informative video.
I think the T14 has a really innovative design. If everything works as intended that is. The many problems that it has make it unlikely to succeed. -the engine must be reliable. If i understand it correctly it was reliable in stationary use like running generators, using it on the move is a completely different thing. -the autoloader must be made reliable. in a T72 the gunner can reach any part of the autoloader and there are few problems he cannot fix with a hammer, a can of oil and a "SUKA BLYAT". In a T14 there is no way to reach the autoloader but to get out and access it from the top, unprotected, under enemy fire. -as mentioned the electronic parts are made out of unobtainium. I believe that the engine controlling sensors might be needed to reach acceptable reliability of the engine, if they cannot be obtained engine reliability might be unreachable. I suspect that a fully automatic autoloader might also need electronics to function. -Training, if the claim is true the T14 that "broke down" before a parade just had the parking brake engaged, and the driver tried to start it without releasing the parking brake. To run such a sophisticated system you need better trained crews. "contract soldiers" rather than conscripts, but the russians want to increase the percentage of professionals in their army anyway. ... All of this is also overshadowed by the one big question: can we believe any of the claims about the T14 ?
The idea of building a platform is sensible, as long as the envisaged vehicles are all similar: as with the CVRT (Scimitar, Scorpion, Saracen and Stormer) line. But surely, as an example, the heavy armour a MBT like the T-14 needs would ludicrous overkill for an APC/IFV.
I'd say that probably depends on envisioned mission profile and environment? In urban combat, for example, I could see protection prioritized over mobility even for this class of vehicle. Let's not forget, the IDF also developed an APC version of the Merkava tank to shuttle troops in and out of the occupied territories. Perhaps as with the BMPT, this kind of thinking might originate from Soviet experience in Afghanistan, where less protected IFVs were at constant risk of being taken out in ambushes.
Very informative and objective. So far the T-14 has been as much of a success on the battlefield as the WWII Maus, looks good on paper and gives the model makers another kit to make.
Russia isn't at war, so why would they rush the development of their newest armour?
_> Very informative and objective._ Just like Saddam's WMD and Ghost of Kiev 😆
SaladExcuse me, Russia is at war. Where do you live in a cave or something.
od Bosne Bosnakca-Ejderha They don't class it as a war, hence why they have not used their tank armies....
Salad because they are destroyed and captured..
The main advantage of the Armata is that this tank is invisible. Nobody saw him on the battlefield. And no one will see.
The T-14 got promoted to a T-34. Saw one in the last Moscow parade.
I love how they only had a SINGLE t-34-85 for the tank section
yknow they do that with every victory parade?
Dude No they dont. This is the first time they only brought a single tank to the [moscow] victory parade, they were usually accompanied by another 30-50 tanks.
Guy from what I heard there was a public backlash last year about having tanks parading instead of being in battle. It’s all PR anyone who really thinks that Russia doesn’t have tanks must be medicated
@joe k No one is seriously suggesting Russia doesnt have any tanks. For the moscow parade their options were to do what they did, pull tanks from the front or cancel the parade in its entirety. IMO the best option would have been the last one but they were all lose-lose situations in their own way.
A few years ago I had read that T-14 could also be operated remotely. The claim was a command tank would control 4 other tanks. Seemed a bit far fetched at the time. Wonder if it can be?
Someday, but definitely not today.
Does the Armata come standard with recovery vehicle, like a HD FlatBed Tow truck?
Most of the electronic parts required should not be an issue. Automotive and military parts need more EMI resistance which older processes are better for. IIRC China should have this capability but the status is unknown; ironically older processes use older production equipment which might be wearing out thus creating a shortage. OTOH rugged processors and solid state displays might be much harder to source.
The t 14 is a true stealth tank, all smoke and mirrors.
The T-14 is the best tank in the world at the survivability onion. Don't be there is #1, and that thing has never been on the battlefield. Perfect score.
Simply an OUTSTANDING VIDEO. By far the best I have seen on the T-14.👍
It doesn't answer its titular question though
watch lazerpig videos about the t14
Lol.
Just like the Su-57, the magic missiles and the invincible war ships... the Armata is so stealthy it transforms into victorian townhouses in Kensington, Yachts in St Tropez and tuition fees for Fashion degrees at Central Saint Martins. Deep behind enemy lines... stealthy!!!
Many are waiting to see how the T-14 performs on the 21st century battlefield.
1 hour. Then it self-destructed.
Hope it is deployed so The Tank Museum can get a copy for display. :) I can just see the display card - 'T-14 found broken-down in Ukraine 2023'.
T-14. Exchanged for a bottle of Vodka and a pack of smokes in Ukraine.
Since they were never put into production and only have prototypes, they probably haven't set up a training program on how to use them. So even for the 20 they have, no one would want to risk going into battle with them since it would be not only hard to figure out, they'd have to work out the kinks--they'd be like test pilots (but with a much lower likelihood of survival). They'd probably be more comfortable with a T-55 or older.
Yeah, in the real world, they have actually been deployed to both Syria and Ukraine
@mnz There is actual video
Salad Where? If that would be the case it would be all over the news . it is not.
Kälber lol, why would it be all over the news?!
This invisible tank design is definitly radical.
good one
The Deputy minister of defense meant to say "There is currently no need to mass produce the T-14, because it doesn't work and we can't afford it"
Or he needs a new yacht
T-90m can fight any existing targets, so you better produce them. Also t-90 is most tested platform, so it incredible reliable
It does work but its very expansive
Marynyuk If he needs a new yacht, he would announce that they will build 3000 T14s and then steal the money for those T14s to buy his own yacht
I mean why build a T-14 really, The US don't build a new tank every time they need an upgrade they just upgrade the Abram to fight modern needs, same can be done with the T-80s and T-90s. And even Britain's "New" Challenger 3 is some Challenger 2s being upgraded and given a new name.
I'm an engineer, not a tanker. But getting into a T-72 after a T-64 feels like travelling bqck in time. I would go as far as to say T-72 feels obsolete in conparison T-80 just feels strange, can't really find other words to explain the feeling.
Another review of T-14 here on KZsection emphasized the engine problems. The stationary pump engine didn't work out. Russia then tried to overboost the T-72's engine, leading to reliability issues. They're stuck now. The shape and volume of the power pack space doesn't seem to allow for alternatives. I think it's "dead" without significant hull redesign and some sort of modern engine. Too bad they can't import MTUs anymore.
The T-14 is ready for the museum.
The T-14 Armata shares much in common with the SU-57 super fighter, Kinzhai hypersonic missiles, Mil Mi-28NM attack helicopters, and many other cutting-edge Russian military projects: that is to say, they all look great on paper and that's where they should have stayed.
They seem to be doing just fine obliterating all the stuff NATO is sending!🤣🤣🤣
Brooks when did the t14, su57, kinzhal and mi28nm 'obliterate' nato equipment? last time i checked when the patriot first arrived in ukraine the kinzhal became a target practice.
There is something wrong with that tank. They probably tried it in exercises and crews found that it failed. My guess would be that seeing out by video just doesn't provide acceptable situation awareness.
The concept of the « Armata » series is similar to the Ww2 E series. One thing that attract my attention is the track width. It is much less wider than their previous tanks. Also, the troublesome engine of the Armata, the weakness of the Russian economy to sustain such expensive programs and the lack of an advanced electronic component industry make a sustain production problematic. However, the modern components are here (a special vision display helmet linked to the cameras would be better than flat screens). Now, it will be a test of complexity and cost versus simplicity and ease of production. This new tank is not for a conscript army, unless they have yearly recall periods (French and Char B1!).
Finally someone who is a tank nerd in this sea of memes
One miss-statement is that Russia is the greatest tank producing nation, we keep on forgetting that that was the Soviet Union, and the Russian federation is not the Soviet Union. For one, they are missing the Ukrainians, who were part of that massive industrial state. And many of the other ex Soviet States also contributed mightly to that industrial base. It would be just as accurate for me to say that the Ukrainians created the second most powerful Navy of second half of the 20th century. Given that almost all of the major surface ship combatants were made in Ukrainian territory, mostly with Ukrainian industry, it would be just as accurate. But the reality is that Ukraine could never create such a massive or capable Navy, neither can the Russian federation. Nor can Estonia or Latvia or Lithuania all of which contributed to that capability. The Soviet Union created that mass of tanks, not the Russian federation and the Russian federation never could and never will be able to equal that capability
We should ask ourselves. Would you sit in a NATO tank or Russian rubbish?
@M Berg Today, the elite of NATO armored vehicles is powerless on the Ukrainian front, against the Russian (rubbish) 😁
from how i see it the T-14 is going to have similar fate as T-64 had. very potent and promising innovative design on paper, but in reality so severely plagued by problems growing from its innovations that it just isnt worth the effort, that is until a very similar concept (just like T-72 in its time), much better optimized to be more simple and easy to produce will enter mass production and widespread use, leaving its predecessor to be a museum piece.
Really good presentation, thank you!
In terms of its design, the Armata has some very good ideas behind it. The problem is that in trying to execute these ideas the Russian engineers have fallen afowl of the supply issues, corruption and cronyism that is so prelevant in Russian society. I think it would be likely that the Russian government would want to revive the Armata program but the current design looks like a dead loss. The main issues seems to be that the engine is so unreliable and that its electronics are too dependant on foreign components for a pariah state like Russia to keep production turning over.
Expect to receive a T14 museum piece sometime in the very near future.
Marvel superheroes have already started the mission? )))
The Russians / Soviets tended to stick with designs and then make later variants of it. Crew comfort directly affects the fighting effectiveness of a AFV. I heard the soviets did not start putting heaters for the tank crews in their tanks until the 1970s. May have been the 1960s.
6:32 As a joke, I thought of the crew being restricted to midgets to allow for a greater number of people, but then it actually came up in the video.
Soviet army was army of conscripts. And you can't choose where do you want to serv. They were getting bunch of young man in a room. And officer choosing where to send them. Most people I know, who served in tank unit around 150-160cm high or something like 5'
It's the Keyser Söze of tanks. Nobody knows what it is or even for sure if it's real, but they hear it's pretty scary.
Love the information about tanks. Shame you have to tow the line.
Imagine using a Tiger(P) engine in your top of the line tank...