New Details on Russia’s T-95 Tank Emerge

[roberthammer 582]

http://defensetech.org/2011/03/18/new-details-on-russias-t-95-tank-emerge/

The T-95 speculations from military blog:

----------------------------

Here some publicity known and speculative facts about the T-95 tank program:

- Tank weight is nearly ~55 tonnes. It's larger and heavier than T-72/T-80/T-90 series but it have significantly less size(LBH) and weight compared to modern Western design (M1/Leo2/Leclerc etc.).

- Maximum speed up to 80 kmh.

- Crew(3) in armored capsule.

- The ammunition storage, crew section(capsule), and fuel storage are separated from each other with armored walls. High survivability.

- An unprecedented level of situational awareness for crew, net-centric integration

- Auxiliary 30 mm automatic gun, two MGs

- Munitions inside the hull in "circular-type" storage

- Few types of munitions for main(152mm) gun:

long range barrel-launched ATGMs;

rounds with a DU penetrator;

HE / antipersonnel rounds;

barrel-launched SAM missiles (9M311 152mm SAM missile). It's presumable that guidance for tank's surface-to-air missiles could be provided by mobile SAM vehicles(which are radar equipped) in tank unit;

- tactical nuclear munitions;

-Titanium parts in construction of the tank (weight reduction)

-New generation of active protection systems of both "soft kill" and "hard kill" types to protect tanks from various types of anti-tank weapons. Simply the successors of "Arena" and "Shtora" APS .

- Advanced composite armor, built in ERA armor (last gen of 'Relikt" or something newer)

- 1500hp diesel engine

----------------------------

What do you think? :cool:

[ArmAriffic 10]

Meh the M1A3 is going to pwn this

[NoRailgunner 0]

Last time I heard they have slowed or stopped any work on this project. Guess the demand on modular vehicles or components is much higher than on developing new MBT's from scratch. Maybe in the future the traditional MBT's will disappear from battlefields like battlecruisers did from naval warfare.

[Inkompetent 0]

Most reasonable take on a new tank I've seen yet, and looks like a probable basis for a new tank. Most other designs shown have been so... special I don't think Russia would ever afford to finish them.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

That looks like a very distinctive profile there... interesting, I love Russian armour. May it never reach Australia's shores in an enemy's hands.

[Perforator 10]

152mm = BOSS

Holding ground against a wave of T-95's would seriously shatter my nerves.

[spooky lynx 73]

As I know, this is not T-95 itself, this is one of the concepts, and the final version will look differently.

[st_dux 26]

Gee, this will be really great the next time there's an epic tank battle. Oh wait, that will never happen again.

[maturin 12]

I thought this was canceled.

[Tonci87 163]

You can bet that this will be a terrifying beast if they ever produce it.

I just hope that croatia finally forks some cash together to produce the M-95 Degman

[Hans Ludwig 0]

Tanks have gone the way of the battleship. That's why the Pentagon has drastically cut building more and opted for refurbishing their existing inventory of M1 Abrams.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

'Tis a sad truth.

Aircraft > Ships

Aircraft > Infantry

Aircraft > Armored Vehicles

Atleast when it comes to funding anyways.

Hell, eventually it will be:

Unmanned Aircraft > Everything

[dm 9]

Until you need to actually control that terrain. Then you need boots on the ground. And that'll never change.

[spooky lynx 73]

Aircraft > Ships

Aircraft > Infantry

Aircraft > Armored Vehicles

True, when EU or NATO-style army fights some bananistan armed forces who own 60-80's era hardware and can't even manage it properly.

In other ways things can turn like

Aircraft > fake armored vehicles

SAMs > Aircraft

Infantry > Downed pilot and its rescue crew

ECM > Aircraft

Enemy aircraft > Aircraft etc.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Until you need to actually control that terrain. Then you need boots on the ground. And that'll never change.

This.

[PELHAM 10]

Yes but how many will they actually build? People often say how wonderful Russian hardware is such as:

MI-28 Havoc - 37 in operation as of February 2011

Ka-50 15 in operation as of late (2010)

Ka-52 8 in operation as of late (2010)

US Army 727 AH-64s (107 AH-64As, and 620 AH-64Ds) in use as of January 2011.

I'm sure they are very good quality but they can't afford to build them and they don't have many customers......

[dm 9]

Yes but how many will they actually build? People often say how wonderful Russian hardware is such as:

MI-28 Havoc - 37 in operation as of February 2011

Ka-50 15 in operation as of late (2010)

Ka-52 8 in operation as of late (2010)

US Army 727 AH-64s (107 AH-64As, and 620 AH-64Ds) in use as of January 2011.

I'm sure they are very good quality but they can't afford to build them and they don't have many customers......

I quite like the "irony" in that.

During the Cold War, the West was terrified of the sheer numbers of vehicles and equipment the Soviets had, these days the US outnumbers modern Russian equipment to a similar scale...

[Tonci87 163]

Yes but how many will they actually build? People often say how wonderful Russian hardware is such as:

MI-28 Havoc - 37 in operation as of February 2011

Ka-50 15 in operation as of late (2010)

Ka-52 8 in operation as of late (2010)

US Army 727 AH-64s (107 AH-64As, and 620 AH-64Ds) in use as of January 2011.

I'm sure they are very good quality but they can't afford to build them and they don't have many customers......

You have to consider that russia has many more of them stored in hangars.

If it says that there are only 37 in operation, then this means we have those 37 for active duty, but we have a unknown number stored in hangars ready for service within a few days if it should be necessary.

[dm 9]

You have to consider that russia has many more of them stored in hangars.

If it says that there are only 37 in operation, then this means we have those 37 for active duty, but we have a unknown number stored in hangars ready for service within a few days if it should be necessary.

Chuckles.

Nope. These brand new systems have literally only been built in handfuls.

Yes, they hav 1000's of older generation aircraft in storage, but to fantasise that they have "plenty ready for service" hidden away in hangars is just ludicrous.

[roberthammer 582]

Those Numbers are ONLY Active! Keep in that in your mind

Who thinks the whole Russian have only 8 Ka52 - he is ludicrous

US is in the War/s still - thats why are those many Apaches active

Edited June 24, 2011 by RobertHammer

[Tonci87 163]

Oh and by the way: NEVER believe official russian numbers!

[roberthammer 582]

Oh and by the way: NEVER believe official russian numbers!

Indeed

[dm 9]

Given that serial production only started in 2008, and that the Russain Air Force only started recieving those aircraft this year, anyone that thinks they've got 100's of them stashed in secret hangars must be the joker ;)

[Tonci87 163]

And who thinks that there were only so few Helicopters produced is the real joker ^^

When they say that they have 8 operational, you can bet that they have the same number stashed somewhere and that they continue to produce.

[dm 9]

So that would bring the sum total to 16 then...

I'm not disputing that the 8 number is wrong (infact it is known to be, at least 12 have been identified with "unique" bort numbers - although it is not unheard of for these to be re-painted)

What I am disputing is the notion that they have secretly built 100's of them, and have them secretly stashed away in hangars that no one is aware of (same goes for all the other modern tech). There has just been no money for it the last decade. (Although it would appear that despite this, a modernisation program has been underway for a year or two)

The T-95, topic of this thread, has been cancelled due to lack of money, and every other army is doing the same - majpr projects cancelled, smaller life-extension plans put in place instead.

If you want to continue on with the "russia strong!11!!1!!" fantasies, please do. But just consider that the entire planet (with the exception of China) is in a very shitty place for defence spending right now...