Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Russia's next-generation T-95 tank

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 23 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
also its great to have another person added to the crew instead of having an auto loader because he or she can help repair the tank.




posted on May, 25 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
i wont be surprised if there is room for a third member, but surely it would be for reasons other than helping repair the tank.

IMO, the people in the tank will only know how to use the tank and its equipment and not how to perform major repairs on the tank.



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 08:26 AM
link   
...and i just saw u mentioned "she" could be part of the tank crew.

I am not too sure if they'll let girls into tanks. IMO they're incapable of such a gritty and harsh job and trouble might airse if the T-95 has only 2 people in it and they are of different sexes



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
...and i just saw u mentioned "she" could be part of the tank crew.

I am not too sure if they'll let girls into tanks. IMO they're incapable of such a gritty and harsh job and trouble might airse if the T-95 has only 2 people in it and they are of different sexes


well look at it this way, in the Air force they are letting two seater pilots where it can be both man and woman pilot or backseater.



posted on May, 25 2005 @ 11:06 AM
link   
Way to have outdated info



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
...and i just saw u mentioned "she" could be part of the tank crew.

I am not too sure if they'll let girls into tanks. IMO they're incapable of such a gritty and harsh job and trouble might airse if the T-95 has only 2 people in it and they are of different sexes


That is unbelieveably sexist - some of the best GC i know are women.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
...and i just saw u mentioned "she" could be part of the tank crew.

I am not too sure if they'll let girls into tanks. IMO they're incapable of such a gritty and harsh job and trouble might airse if the T-95 has only 2 people in it and they are of different sexes


Nothing wrong with having a field matress



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:38 PM
link   
iin combat there is always on in the pipe ....if you load wrong you can either spend the round and hope you haven't spooked/alerted the target or unload/reload, slow in auto loaders.



Originally posted by chinawhite
i think that the commander selects the ammo then it loads.



posted on May, 26 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   
81mm mortar rounds will cause sympathic detonation of era type armor once striped of the explosive armor they are easy marks.





Originally posted by chinawhite

Armour

On vehicle protection, there are two approaches. There are up-armour packages like the Kontakt-5 EDZ. This is the heaviest explosive reactive armour (ERA) currently installed and is often referred to as 2nd generation, heavy-duty, or integral ERA. Where the conventional ERAs are only capable of defeating shaped-charge jets, Kontakt-5 can also defeat APFSDS rounds. With a fitment of Kontakt-5, long-rod penetrators can lose over 30% of their penetration potential and the protected vehicle becomes virtually immune to them (at least as "immune" as a chobham armoured tank). This type of ERA can be easily recognised as it gives the vehicle outfitted with it a distinct 'clam-shell' appearance. So, how would the main gun on an Abrams do against that? Badly, I suspect. Certainly not the “one shot, one kill” ratio that the yanks were used to in the Gulf.


black eagle




im not sure but i think its upgraded t-80


good site
www.salute.co.uk...

[edit on 21-5-2005 by chinawhite]

[edit on 21-5-2005 by chinawhite]



posted on May, 29 2005 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kozzy
Way to have outdated info


Care to add some updated info ???



posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   
There is no updated info...



posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by longbow
Instead they are all focusing on old designs.


I think this is really because other countries don't want to spend the money designing something that might not be useful in the end. They let us waste the money deciding if it is worthwhile or not, and then they just copy the general idea a few years later.



posted on Aug, 24 2005 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by PBscientist

I think this is really because other countries don't want to spend the money designing something that might not be useful in the end. They let us waste the money deciding if it is worthwhile or not, and then they just copy the general idea a few years later.


Well, not only money for projects, but also, people's lives are at risk here.

Generals are sending THEIR men out to the battlefields, risking their lives and limbs. So, its generally, ideal that a general wanted equipment that are trial and tested, so, at least he and his men know their chances and the risk they will be taking.

Sending your troops with new equipment that they might not have experience with before, might cost them to take less calulated risks. To be frank, having your own troops unwilling to move around when ordered is a last thing a general wanted.

back to topic

Do they have any info about the Air defensive properites of this T-95 tanks?
Its seriously lacking for modern day MBTs

[edit on 24-8-2005 by Humster]



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Most of the current FSU tanks supposibly can fire ATGWs out of the gun, meaning it could theoretically intercept helicopters and slow flying aircraft. However, its primary mission is ground supression and fighting other MBTs, thus air defense is allotted to another vehicle.



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
Here is an artist's impression :

external image

FULL SIZED IMAGE



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 01:32 PM
link   
another 3 way view of this new tank :

external image

FULL SIZED IMAGE



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 25 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 08:08 AM
link   
The last photo was of a T-90 on trials, it certainly isnt a new generation tank since its just an upgraded T-72 from the 70's.

The rotating model is the Black Eagle tank, which is a T-80 with a new turret that mimics the western tanks with big turrets and storage in the rear of the turret.

The "future tank' is the T-95 everyone is in the dark around, the one with a remote turret and promises to be the most interesting.

Would certainly allow the Russians to build the ultimate "low profile" tank.



posted on Aug, 28 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Funny, because when I first read the articles, I was actually expecting to come across "Railgun" weaponry and a nuclear power plant in the tank.

I came across the T-95 a while back, but it was fictional, built for some kid's RPG, guess I was looking at the wrong sites.


Shattered OUT...





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join