Russia’s T-14 Armata armor will be well protected from all modern and even the upcoming models of anti-tank missiles.
Russia’s 3rd-generation battle tank armor will be impenetrable for all existing and upcoming anti-tank missiles with a caliber of 120 mm, according to the company-developer of the tank, ‘NII Stal’.
The developers note that the T-14 Armata will be even protected from rocket launchers and anti-tank missiles with a caliber of up to 150 mm.
Should You Go All In On Water Like Michael Burry?
Water investments? Michael Burry was one of the first institutional investors to bet against the US subprime mortgage market in the mid-2000s, and today he’s concentrating all of his investment efforts on one commodity: water. Burry’s focus on water has attracted plenty of attention to the commodity in the investment community but trying to profit Read More
The T-14 Armata will also feature an advanced version of explosive reactive armor (ERA), which is able to withstand all commonly used NATO’s anti-tank missiles, according to a source at a top Russian military equipment company, which produces armor for Russian advanced tanks, as reported by Jane’s.
According to the source at the Russian Tractor Plants, the intimidating tank will feature an ERA system that was upgraded to the new high-end level and has “no known world equivalents.”
“The new ERA can resist anti-tank gun shells adopted by NATO countries, including the state-of-the-art APFSDS DM53 and DM63 developed by Rheinmetall [and] anti-tank ground missiles with high-explosive anti-tank warheads,” the source told Jane’s.
It is also known that the tank sports counter-mine defenses and features a set of HD videos cameras, which will allow the Armata operators to have a 360-degree view around the tank.
Armata tank will survive any attack from U.S. weapons
The Russian media reported that the Armata tank will be able to survive any attack from a U.S. Apache helicopter, a four-blade, twin-turboshaft attack helicopter with a tailwheel-type landing gear arrangement.
However, after the conducted review of the tank, the U.S. Army’s Foreign Military Studies Office dismissed such allegations and concluded that the Armata’s Afganit system would protect only from “shaped-charged grenades, antitank missiles, and subcaliber projectiles.”
The T-14 Armata is undoubtedly one of the most advanced and impenetrable tanks in the history. The cutting-edge tank model has already attracted the attention of India and China. Russian President Vladimir Putin has vowed that Russia would buy 2,300 T-14 Armata tanks by 2020, while the estimated cost for them is more than $7 million apiece.
The tank features an unmanned tank turret with a 125mm gun, which is able to fire 10 shots per minute thanks to its automatic charging system. The tank’s crew is securely protected by an armored capsule.
However, it is important to note that large deliveries of the tank will start in 2017 and 2018, while its competitor, Leopard 2A7, is already being delivered to NATO members’ armies.
NATO vs Russia war: Whose hardware is more powerful?
Self-propelled howitzer ‘Coalition-SB’, which is the newest Russian military development and was most recently presented at the May 9 Victory Day parade in Moscow, can be countered with the U.S. M109A6 ‘Paladin’ howitzer, which features a 155mm gun and has been produced since 1953. There is also the German PzH2000 howitzer, which outmatches the Paladin.
Small arms of the Russian military are constantly updated. During the next couple of years, Russia’s army will be provided with AK-12, developed in the 2000s. The weapon is designed for ammo of 5,45mm or 7,62mm caliber.
The Americans can counter the Russian AK-12 with their M-16 rifle of 5,45 caliber, developed in the 1960s. Its latest modification M16A4 was introduced for arming in the 1990s.
Russia clearly outmatches the U.S. in terms of warplanes. The U.S. fifth-generation fighter jet F-35, which will become operational in the U.S. army this year, are slower and has a much lower flying range, compared to the Russian SU-35.
Russia’s strategic missile bomber TU-160 outmatches the American analogue B-1 Lancer in pretty much everything, including the flying range of about 7,500 miles, while the TU-160 has a flying range of 8,700 miles.
When comparing the MI-38 ‘Night Hunter’ and the AH-64 ‘Apache’ attack helicopters, it is important to note that both machines are equipped with 30mm guns and anti-tank missiles. However, the Russian helicopter is much better armed and has a more powerful gun.
The MI-38 helicopter features a powerful 2?42 gun, which targets infantry combat vehicle and has the initial speed of the armor-piercing composite shot of 1120 meters per second. The AH-64 ‘Apache’ gun is much weaker: its M230 Chain Gun shots at a shorter distance and has the speed of only 792 meter per second.
Russia can deploy 100,000 soldiers in 24 hours
As for the anti-aircraft defense, the two countries are somewhat equal. Russia has the S-300 anti-aircraft missile system, while the Americans can counter it with its Patriot anti-aircraft missile system. However, the latter has a shorter distance of shooting at aerial targets. And let’s not forget about the Russia’s new S-400 ‘Triumph’ system, which is about to be delivered to the Russian military.
The U.S. and NATO have the indisputable dominance in the number of aircraft carriers. The only Russian airborne cruiser ‘Admiral Kuznetsov’, which can carry 52 warplanes, will not be able to counter all Western aircraft carriers. The American Nimitz-class aircraft carriers can carry up to 90 aircraft, while the newest Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier is able to carry more than 75 warplanes.
According to the recent data of Global Firepower, which ranks the world’s most powerful armies, Russian military forces ranked the second, surpassing the tremendous Chinese army and losing to the U.S. forces.
NATO’s most recent military drills showed that the Western forces need a month in order to deploy military groups comprising of 30,000 soldiers, while Russia managed to deploy up to 100,000 soldiers in 24 hours during its ‘surprise exercises’. That fact alone has prompted NATO to plan more military drills as well as look at the eastern big-bear-country as what it was looked at when the Alliance was created – the enemy.