Well you are probably right that they don't have hundreds of them..but lets be honest I'm from the Netherlands, when i was in the military 1990-1992...we had roughly 950 main battle tanks...now we own zero...we lease 18 from Germany Most of the European countries dont have that much state of the art mbt's as well..
@@stalkyjohnson4081 I wonder if in 20 years there will still be a Russia which is able to build it or if this country will have been broken apart by then.
First off, they don't even have 20 operational T-14s. I won't even start elaboraring why they'd be so ineffective if that rank was anything more than a unicorn.
Forget the amount because these tanks are formidable just like the Abrams being sent. It will be interesting to see these two tanks pitted against one another.
@@matthewdievendorf9609 No, it'd not be wise to just forget numbers here. This is not the battle of Golan Heights; the war is taking place in a mine-laden bush. I'm curious about performance too, granted, but I don't think that's so important here.
Actually, this tank has much better electronics and newer radars than the old Moskva cruiser did. I know it sounds crazy to think that a tank has better electronics and equipment than an entire cruiser, but keep in mind that the Moskva was over 40 years old, with very old radars from the 1980's (it was never upgraded at all)... Meanwhile the Aramta at least has the newest and most modern AESA radars, that can intercept even APFSDS (KE) rounds over 1700 m/s..
@@TheMrReee Leopard 2s were also destroyed in Syria and also modern Abrams were also destroyed in Iraq and Afganistan meaning the weaker Abrams that Ukraine is getting will burn even easier
@@stalkyjohnson4081 Let's wait and see fella, once your Oligarchy overlords are overthrown, maybe Russia will be able to catch up with the rest of the world?
@@mrcleanit4760 That’s a valid point, though we know these units never arrived to the warfront or we would’ve saw confirmation by now, there are sensors and cameras everywhere.
Good luck with this plan. Send a bunch of prototype tanks out to do battle with the most successful anti-tank weapons in the world, manned by the most motivated enemy you could imagine. Should be educational.
Number one its not a prototype number 2 its extremely hard to kill the crw in it since they are all sitting together in a armoured box located in the front of the armata
@@NordicArrow and pigs can fly. Where are they going to get parts from???? T55 are entering battlefield because T14 is in production. Russian trolls united
Am just saying what heard in the news am no expert on them bud i know the t-14 is crap and might be worse then there old tanks china tested them and nothing works on them thats why they declined the deal with russia they did not want them after they where tested
_"similar to Trphy"_ No, not at all. It's a completely different system alltogether. It doesn't have _"rotatable"_ lauinchers with 360° cover like the Trophy does, Armata only has fixed _"tubes"_
@@zeffy._440 No the fixed tubes on the turret only cover 180°on a flat trajectory but it leaves the other 180° back side completely unprotected, although it can rotate the turret in the directoion of the threat (assuming the threat is a slow flying missile and not an APFSDS dart), and it is completely useless against Top-attack missiles such as the Javlin which attacks from a higher angle. But at least it has smoke grneade launchers at the top of turret roof (with a 360°) that are activated when a Javelin missile comes closer, so the smoke grneades obscure the vision of the seeker head of the missile, to blind the missile. So this perhaps the part of the Active Defense Sysen with a 360° cover but only in Soft-kill modus. Which is still better than nothing I guess. Overall the T14 still has the best crew protection, much better than any other tanks in the world right now. But then again it isn't even in active service yet anyway...
They use a notoriously bad engine from a WWII German tank. These will break down and be captured. Russia doesn't have the engineering capability to make a new engine, so they said: "Should we use the engine from T-72?" "No, let's do something different" "Okay, we use the other engine" *uses engine from WWII*
@@gypsonny2 You watched LazerPig or some other hypetrain moron and think you're a specialist or smth lol? This engine, while based on the older designs, was altered so much throughout years that it doesn't resemble the old basis in the slightest. Do your own research
@@evaneleven6521 No, this APS can not kill Javelins, as the "tubes" are only fixed to intercept horizontal attacks (direct attack). But against Javelin it can only create a smoke screan, to confuse the Javelin.. which is still better than nothing, as the Javelin relies on thermal optic detection, which can be disturbed by the smoke grenade
@@stalkyjohnson4081 Abrams is a battle hardned tank which took part in multiple wars. The reason t-14 is invisible is that its like su-57 - they dont go to war. Try again, russian nazi appologizer.
@@zeffy._440 and Russian tanks don't attack right at front lines but acts more like artillery and that's the reason why Ukronazis gets killed not knowing where the Russians really were.
You forgot the bit about the Russian army trying to reject accepting them for combat as they are not out of testing phase & notorious for breaking down. They also have no spare parts for them. Also 20 is the entire Russian stock & most are prototypes.
If this was ever the case that T-14 armatas were deployed to Ukraine, the only true disadvantage i see is parts replacement incase things go down on it. Other than that, if the crews are very well trained in these, with infantry support, these will take alot to stop.
