Russia's next-generation T-95 tank, page 10

Pages: << 7 8 9 10 11 12 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times

reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 10:35 AM by tomcat ha

I heared the T95 will be modular and because the it is fairly sure it will have noone in the turret it is one heck of a evolution. I wont say revolution because we all knew this was the next step to begin with.

reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 03:32 PM by chinawhite

Originally posted by manson_322
kaktus was developed for black eagle tank , the latest is relikt dynamic armor for upgrade of T-72 and the development of BMPT and T-90A or should i say Relikt heavy ERA(western term for dynamic armor)

They are both the same generation.

Kaktus > T-80 development pathway
Relikt > T-72 development pathway

Although they can be both used on both tanks

Kaktus is the more capable system, improved protection and it is almost 1/3 lighter

reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 04:36 PM by StellarX

Originally posted by SKUNK2
Well, i can't really prove any thing about modern armour, except Dorchester currently offers the best protection.

So prove it?

The Challenger2 with add-on armor packages comes in at a weight of nearly 90,000kg...

Actualy it weights in at around 60 tons as do most tanks that are meant to move somewhere at any type of sustained speed.

All you lot also babble on about things that cannot really be proven! Like specs of modern armour and ammunition, it's secret infomation.

But not secret enough for you to know that the Chal 2 has the best armor?

One thing i do know is that during the invasion in 03 Abrams and Challengers were firing straight through Iraqi armour at 1500m+.

Yeah but what sorta tanks were those and how did the Iraqi's get their hands on them? Do you know any background to that particular situation or are you just spouting off? What happened to DU shots when it came up against some T-72's with updated armor packages? Did they bounce multiple DU shots and hit Abrams tanks with return fire?

Also with out a doubt the T-95 will be a good tank, but i don't think it will be revolutionary, just an evolusion of Russian design philosophy!!! Move fast, hit-hard and(hopefully) don't get hit. Russia's design shows this...

Since your not falling over yourself to dismiss everything Russian this posts gave you a opportunity to clarify your views and do some additional research befoe you put your foot further into your mouth!

Stellar

reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 05:26 PM by SKUNK2

Originally posted by StellarX

Originally posted by SKUNK2
Well, i can't really prove any thing about modern armour, except Dorchester currently offers the best protection.

So prove it? ^^^Reading comprehension FTW

The Challenger2 with add-on armor packages comes in at a weight of nearly 90,000kg...

Actualy it weights in at around 60 tons as do most tanks that are meant to move somewhere at any type of sustained speed.

Reading comprehension??? Actually C2 weigh in at roughly 63,500kg with out added armour, countermeasures and ammunition. With added armour the engine management system is altered to produce more power, mainly torque, a common feature on modern tanks.

All you lot also babble on about things that cannot really be proven! Like specs of modern armour and ammunition, it's secret infomation.

But not secret enough for you to know that the Chal 2 has the best armor?
Im in the British army, 2RTR...

One thing i do know is that during the invasion in 03 Abrams and Challengers were firing straight through Iraqi armour at 1500m+.

Yeah but what sorta tanks were those and how did the Iraqi's get their hands on them? Do you know any background to that particular situation or are you just spouting off? What happened to DU shots when it came up against some T-72's with updated armor packages? Did they bounce multiple DU shots and hit Abrams tanks with return fire?

Ahh yes the T-72's that were fired on by Abrams at over 3km, a MBT should be able to take hits at that sort of range!!! On another note there was an incident where a BMP ko'd an Abrams!

Also with out a doubt the T-95 will be a good tank, but i don't think it will be revolutionary, just an evolusion of Russian design philosophy!!! Move fast, hit-hard and(hopefully) don't get hit. Russia's design shows this...

Since your not falling over yourself to dismiss everything Russian this posts gave you a opportunity to clarify your views and do some additional research befoe you put your foot further into your mouth!

Stellar

Well on the contrary it's not me that has commited this act. Most if not all of the links that people have provided have either been out of date by nearly 15 years, or have been pure speculation.

reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 05:29 PM by SKUNK2

***DOUBLE POST***

MODS PLEASE DELETE

[edit on 25-1-2008 by SKUNK2]

reply posted on 25-1-2008 @ 06:49 PM by chinawhite

Originally posted by SKUNK2
Well, i can't really prove any thing about modern armour, except Dorchester currently offers the best protection.

^^

Oxymoron.

Is that suppose to be proof because you cant prove it?

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 01:06 AM by manson_322

reply to post by chinawhite

from what i am aware kaktus was developed before relikt , and according to forties(the adm) of warfare.ru and even Fofanov , relikt is superior to kaktus ....

do you have a diagram or link comparing kaktus and relikt ???
i am interested in a comparison of these two ...

and yes relikt can also be used in T-80
i am going to compare kaktus and relikt
heres what Vasiliy fofanov had stated on relikt:

Relikt is 5 time better then K-5 against APFSDS. However on real tank ERA - is only the part of whole armor, then the effect of putting Relikt instead K-5 apply will naturally be diminished slightly. With K-5 its effect on the real tank will multiply the capability of a round by coeff 0.81 (APFSDS)-0.5(cummulative), with Relikt - by 0.65 (APFSDS) -0.47 (Cummulative). For example, when M829A2 penetrating capability for steel is 750 mm , it will penetrate only 0.65x750=487mm of T-72 armor with Relikt ERA. Source: NII Stali article
www.niistali.ru...

It is called multi-purpose not only because it defeats both HEAT-warhead and KE ammunition, but also because it is made as a number of separate modules, which makes it possible to fit the package to any tank types using standard modules and attachment fittings."

The ERA tiles do not detonate when hit by small arms bullets (up to 12.7mm), fragments of 125mm HE rounds or when exposed to incendiary mixtures (napalm).
The ERA kit can be installed and repaired by the Army field repair groups."
www.niistali.ru...
-----------------------------------------
now on kaktus ERA:
Kaktus ERA is a contemporal generation ERA and it's lighter that Relikt (`2.3t). Its kit weights like Contact-V (K-5) with 1.5t, and it intially was intended for T-80 modernisation including the most advanced variant - T-80M2 (Black Eagle). But it dosent got all the features of Relikt like protection against tandem warheads. Thus, at the end the standartisated T-72/T-80 modernisation with Relikt ERA was chosen and is going on now. However, an ERA on Kaktus technology is offered for instalation on the light armored vehicles like BMP-3 and BMP-2 , its characteristics are as follow (according to the developer NII Stali
All-round protection against PG-9S grenades:
- with і 0.8 probability in the areas covered by ERA tiles;
- with і 0.5 probability in the areas covered by grill screens.
No breach of the main armor when hit by AT grenades.
Protection against AP bullets:
- 12.7mm B-32 AP bullets - point-blank;
- 14.5mm B-32 AP bullets - at 50m.
Hull protection against 30mm AP ammunition at firing angles of ±30° at 0m.
Reduction of irretrievable losses of vehicles by a factor of 5
Increase of possibility of vehicle combat efficiency restoration by a factor of 8
Reduction of irretrievable losses of the crew and troops by a factor of 12
Total weight of the kit: 4,150 kg.
- I think, its weight is so big because they use the foam-plastic filler in the boxes to keep buoyancy.

------
this was the comparsion given by Vasily Fofanov on tanknet.org
and it is for me sufficient proof that relikt is superior to kaktus

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 01:45 AM by manson_322

U2U by harlequinn:

NiiStali call it ERA themselves

www.niistali.ru...

nothing about dynamic anything and Nii Stali are the manufacturer.

you are using the english version of the website , now heres the translation from the russian version of this site :

Operating principle of the dynamic protection of 2 generations (built-in or universal version)

This type DZ works both against the cumulative means (KS) and against the armor-piercing sabots (BPS).
The basic problems, which were solved with the creation VDZ:
- to ensure reliable detonation EDZ from BPS, whose speed is insufficient for this:
- to ensure the sufficiently powerful lateral pulse, which makes it possible to destabilize or to destroy core BPS.

These problems were solved by the application of blocks DZ of special construction (cm of ris.y)

The cover of block DZ made of thick high-strength steel with the impact into it of bps generates the flow of the high-speed splinters, which detonate EDZ. Action on BPS of the moving thick cover proves to be sufficient in order to decrease the armor-piercing characteristics of both the cumulative means and BPS.

The installation of the built-in dynamic protection to the tanks increases protivokumulyativnuyu durability 1,5... 1,8 and ensures raising the level of protection from the armor-piercing sabots 1,2... 1,5.

www.niistali.ru...

this is the translation of the russian version of the site dedicated to armor and dynamic protection (western term heavy ERA)
www.niistali.ru...

Harlequinn , i used Babelfish translator for this purpose..
babelfish.altavista.com...

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 02:26 AM by mad scientist

Originally posted by manson_322
you are using the english version of the website , now heres the translation from the russian version of this site :

Not to state the obvious, if this is the offcial english version of their website, then that is exactly what they mean. Simple. Are you saying they can;t express tehmselves properly in English ?
Many languages have different literal english translations, that doesn't mean the literal english is what they mean.

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 05:11 AM by chinawhite

Originally posted by manson_322
this was the comparsion given by Vasily Fofanov on tanknet.org
and it is for me sufficient proof that relikt is superior to kaktus

What comparison?. What "proof" did you quote?

And you are supposed to put "quote" or "external source" (ex) tags around quoted material

With K-5 its effect on the real tank will multiply the capability of a round by coeff 0.81 (APFSDS)-0.5(cummulative), with Relikt - by 0.65 (APFSDS) -0.47 (Cummulative).

You should visit or actually ask Vasily more often.

He mentions that Relikt ERA multiplies the capability of "real" tank armour by 0.65% while he gives the Kaktus ERA a rating of 1.6% ~ 2.0% depending on the angle of the armour

Now, do you understand why Kaktus is the "superior" armour

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 06:37 AM by manson_322

reply to post by chinawhite

seems you did not read my previous entire post,

it's lighter that Relikt (`2.3t). Its kit weights like Contact-V (K-5) with 1.5t, and it intially was intended for T-80 modernisation including the most advanced variant - T-80M2 (Black Eagle). But it dosent got all the features of Relikt like protection against tandem warheads. Thus, at the end the standartisated T-72/T-80 modernisation with Relikt ERA was chosen

(note for you:relikt has enhanced protection against heavier precursor charges of tandem warheads compared to k-5 and kaktus

He mentions that Relikt ERA multiplies the capability of "real" tank armour by 0.65% while he gives the Kaktus ERA a rating of 1.6% ~ 2.0% depending on the angle of the armour

also you are stating the factors not the coefficients , 0.65 is cofficient , factor for relikt is is 1.5-1.6
on relikt:

The kit ensures increase of counter-APFSDS and counter-HEAT protection level of the MBT in the fire angles of ±20° (the hull) and ±35° (the turret).
Counter-APFSDS protection increases by factors of 1.5-1.6;
Counter-HEAT protection increases by a factor of 2.0;
Coverage of the turret and hull surface: 60-68%;
Weight of the kit: 2,300 kgs.

The ERA tiles do not detonate when hit by small arms bullets (up to 12.7mm), fragments of 125mm HE rounds or when exposed to incendiary mixtures (napalm
www.niistali.ru...

also from your source :

It has always been intended to add ERA above the main armor and indeed armor shape lends nicely to this. Let's assume "Kaktus" ERA developed by NII Stali and demonstrated on the recent shows (increase of APFSDS protection up to 1.6 times and HEAT protection up to 2 times)
russianarmor.info...

also you are stating the factors not the coefficients , 0.65 is cofficient , factor for relikt is 1.5-1.6

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 06:39 AM by manson_322

reply to post by mad scientist

what i am saying is that they are using different terminlogy for russian and english versions .....

dynamic protection(DP) for russian

heavy ERA for english version

in my opinion possibly for marketing purposes

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 07:29 AM by Harlequin

Vasilly`s site , which is in english - use the words Heavy ERA and used by him - so whilst there might be 2 sets of words in 2 languages - in english Heavy ERA is the used and very valid term.

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 07:35 AM by manson_322

Originally posted by Harlequin
Vasilly`s site , which is in english - use the words Heavy ERA and used by him - so whilst there might be 2 sets of words in 2 languages - in english Heavy ERA is the used and very valid term.

and btvt / russian versiion of niistali use dynamic protection harlequinn

as i said differeent terminlogies in russian and english

so whilst there might be 2 sets of words in 2 languages - in english Heavy ERA is the used and very valid term.

i never denied that harlequinn

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 07:37 AM by manson_322

SKUNK2 posted:

The Challenger2 with add-on armor packages comes in at a weight of nearly 90,000kg...

WHAT???????????????????????

challenger weighs 90 tons ???????

i thought it was 62 tons??

any sources???

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

reply posted on 26-1-2008 @ 12:29 PM by SKUNK2

Originally posted by manson_322
SKUNK2 posted:

The Challenger2 with add-on armor packages comes in at a weight of nearly 90,000kg...

WHAT???????????????????????

challenger weighs 90 tons ???????

i thought it was 62 tons??

any sources???

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

[edit on 26-1-2008 by manson_322]

I think you should learn how to read mate!
Reading comprehension FTW

reply posted on 27-1-2008 @ 03:44 AM by iskander

reply to post by manson_322

and btvt / russian versiion of niistali use dynamic protection harlequinn

as i said differeent terminlogies in russian and English

I’ve already cover ALL OF THAT in my previous posts.

i never denied that harlequin

manson_322, get used to it, or simply don’t get sucked into it. It’s called a “merry go round”. It’ll just keep on turning and somebody will inevitably vomit.

There’s a post somewhere here on ATS which I can no longer find, in which a member raised an interesting point about all these chronic doubters, deniers and topic derailers.

They are like those monkeys from jumanji, all they do is crap on everything, they don’t contribute squat, insult members that actually correct them with factual information, and they do it all under moderator protection.

reply posted on 27-1-2008 @ 07:06 AM by StellarX

Originally posted by SKUNK2
I think you should learn how to read mate!
Reading comprehension FTW

There is NO WAY you can slap an additional 30 tons on 60 ton design even if the drive train could SOMEHOW , impossibly, be replaced to accomodate such a massive increase. I Wont even mention what that does to the suspension and the tracks if you can go cross country at all!

So as far as i understand the tank still weights in at around 62 tons. Unless you have specific information to the contrary i suggest you pick another topic.

Stellar

reply posted on 27-1-2008 @ 08:07 AM by NGC2736

And here I always thought this was one of the most civil forums on ATS!

Please stay on topic and be nice. After all, it's the learning that counts, not scoring points by putting others down.

Now back to an otherwise interesting thread.

reply posted on 27-1-2008 @ 08:57 AM by James R. Hawkwood

I have got some "new" pictures off the T-95:

i214.photobucket.com...

i214.photobucket.com...

The first one is a very old picture. Propably even from the 90`s off the 20th century. Interesting is that the man that made this picture imagined a howitzer thing when he heard/read that the T-95 was supposed to be turretless.

Second one is a more modern picture but it is also very old.

Here is another nice pic:

i214.photobucket.com...

Its a nice hovercraft tank