The T-14 Armata is equipped with an unmanned turret and all the crew is located at the front of the hull. The new unmanned remote turret of Aramata T-14 would be equipped with a new generation of 125mm 2A82-1M smoothbore gun with an automatic loader and 32 rounds ready to use.
The main gun can fire also new laser-guided missile with a range from 7 to 12 km. The T-14 Armata carries a total of 45 rounds. According to some Russian sources, the T-14 Armata could be armed in the future with a new 152mm cannon.
Russia’s Armata tank will outmatch the Abrams and all current western tanks with better active armor and triple range anti-tank missiles.
Some western analysts take comfort in the fact that Russia’s economy is terrible and they are currently only making about 120 Armata tanks per year. However, if Russia could dedicate about $12 billion, they probably could afford 2200 Aramata tanks. Russia could probably upgrade its thousands of older T-90 tanks with new laser guided missile and the active armor systems for about $1.5 to 3 billion.
Russia is in talks with India to upgrade nearly 1000 T-90 tanks. Russia could develop more extensive upgrades for their own older tanks.
The Armata tank is equipped with the Afganit active protection system, which uses a combination of sensors and kinetic energy projectiles to knock down incoming rocket propelled grenades, antitank missiles, and subcaliber projectiles. The tank also features an anti-detection aerosol disperser, a new explosive reactive armor nicknamed “Malachite,” slat armor covering the engine spaces and even an electronic countermine system to prevent antitank mines from detonating.
Those sensors and weapons systems and the laser guided missiles could be placed onto older tanks.
Some Armata innovations would not be transferrable to older tanks. Armata armor is a composite incorporating a new steel alloy known as 44C-SV-W, developed by the JSC Institute of Steel—also known as the NII Stali Institute for Protection—in Moscow. The new steel, made via electroslag melting, is apparently lighter than traditional steel, shaving “hundreds of kilograms” off the vehicle weight.
The USA M1 Abrams’ M256 120-millimeter smoothbore gun has a maximum effective range between 3 km (1.86 miles) and 4 km (2.48 miles). In military parlance, the Armata could very well “out-stick” the M1 by a factor of three, comfortably destroying American tanks before the latter can get within engagement range.
In real-world war situations, though, there are rarely situations where two objects at ground level are visible to one another at seven and a half miles. Hedges, trees, buildings, elevation changes, and other terrain features all conspire to block visibility at ground level. Outside of the plains of Kansas, the Russian steppes, and the Sinai desert, there are seldom places where two objects are visible at even three or four miles.
Even if an Armata does manage to lock onto an Abrams at extreme ranges, the American tank isn’t helpless. The Abrams’ armor, reinforced with a layer of depleted uranium and now reactive armor, is widely considered the best in the world. Reactive armor is particularly useful against the shaped charge warhead on the Sprinter. Also, the Army is planning to install active protection systems (APS) on the Abrams. An APS upgrade would consist of outward-facing radar antennas scanning for incoming threats in all directions. One detected, APS launches interceptors to and detect and kill incoming rockets and missiles.
The Armata is a new and innovative tank. USA analysts note that many of the Armata’s advanced survivability features are drawn from the Israeli Merkava series. The Russian seem to have advanced the state-of-the-art in terms of reactive armor and active protection. If the Russian Afghanit active protection system works as advertised, the Armata could prove to be a serious problem for the West if it were ever produced in numbers. However, most Western analysts—government and private sector—are dubious about Russian claims that their APS can defeat kinetic energy rounds.
However, even if the Armata was as dangerous as the British report claims, Russia is not likely to be able to afford the expensive new machine in the huge quantities. Using the British reports own numbers—120 Armata tanks produced per year