Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Russian tank "Black Eagle" ("object 640")

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    15 Nov 07
    Location
    Russia, Nizhny Novgorod
    Posts
    109

    Russian tank "Black Eagle" ("object 640")

    Have you ever heard about it? If yes then what do you think?
    I don't have any sourse in English, but there are some in Russian:
    Объект 640 "Черный орел"
    Танк Черный орел Объект 640

    it seems to be very strong
    Last edited by foxhound_nn; 22 Dec 07, at 22:12.

  2. #2

    Military Professional
    Military Professional S2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    10,828

    foxhound_nn Reply

    Doesn't your own nation prefer the T-95?
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    15 Nov 07
    Location
    Russia, Nizhny Novgorod
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by S-2 View Post
    Doesn't your own nation prefer the T-95?
    T-95 is Black Eagle (strange, but i didn't know that Black Eagle was named T-95, I get to know this just now in the internet)

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    12 Jun 07
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,297
    It's not. The Black Eagle's supposed designation is T-80UM2 (after the Bars which was T-80UM1). It was created by Omsk Transmash. The T-95 is a whole new design with a low-silouette turret, 152mm main gun, and it's supposedly a design for the Nizhniy Tagil tank plant. It has preference ever since T-80 production was effectively halted. Both plan to have certain similar features, except the shape of the turret, and apparently main gun.

    Anyways people here have heard of both. Both projects remain highly controversial. For example the T-95 was supposed to be publicly demonstrated this year, but I have yet to see it. And the Black Eagle has supposedly been complete since 2006 and not put into production.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    15 Nov 07
    Location
    Russia, Nizhny Novgorod
    Posts
    109
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    It's not. The Black Eagle's supposed designation is T-80UM2 (after the Bars which was T-80UM1). It was created by Omsk Transmash. The T-95 is a whole new design with a low-silouette turret, 152mm main gun, and it's supposedly a design for the Nizhniy Tagil tank plant. It has preference ever since T-80 production was effectively halted. Both plan to have certain similar features, except the shape of the turret, and apparently main gun.

    Anyways people here have heard of both. Both projects remain highly controversial. For example the T-95 was supposed to be publicly demonstrated this year, but I have yet to see it. And the Black Eagle has supposedly been complete since 2006 and not put into production.
    Feanor, where did you get this information? "BlackEagle" is a codename of the newest russian tank first time shown in 97. It was made on the basis of T-80 but almost doesn't have any common with it. I know it for about 4 years. But only now i get to know that it's T-95.

    by the way: in English T-95 Black Eagle
    Last edited by foxhound_nn; 23 Dec 07, at 00:13.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    15 Nov 07
    Location
    Russia, Nizhny Novgorod
    Posts
    109
    ...there are too twisted information in the internet... just compare
    T-95 Black Eagle
    T-80 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    But once again, i've seen that BlackEagle is T95 just now, so it's likely to be incorrect information (but in many russian sites)...... so i'm able to admit that T-95 isn't BlackEagle...

    But still what do you think of BlackEagle?

    ps does anybody have at least photos of T-95?
    Last edited by foxhound_nn; 23 Dec 07, at 00:01.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    12 Jun 07
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,297
    It's Object 195 that's the T-95 design. Trust me I was very interested in the two tanks for a while. They are two different tanks. One is a continuation of the T-64 - T-80 line, and the other of the T-55 - T62 - T-72 - T-90 line.

    T-95 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Russian T-95 Tank, short video - Military Pictures - Air Force Army Navy Missiles

    Nizhny Tagil MBT

  8. #8
    WAB BOUNCER Senior Contributor Stan187's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 06
    Posts
    2,617
    Vasiliy Fofanov's Modern Russian Armour Page

    Look at Black Eagle section on Vasiliy Fofanov's site.
    In Iran people belive pepsi stands for pay each penny save israel. -urmomma158
    The Russian Navy is still a threat, but only to those unlucky enough to be Russian sailors.-highsea

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    12 Jun 07
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,297
    One of my links is to it

  10. #10
    Regular
    Join Date
    16 Jul 07
    Location
    St. Louis, MO
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor View Post
    Trust me I was very interested in the two tanks for a while. They are two different tanks.
    I can say the same. So you can trust Feanor, he's right. I don't know how many times I've had to tell people the T-95 and Black Eagle are not the same thing.

  11. #11
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,918
    And as far as real life is concerned both projects are dead. Russia inked a deal with THALES for the Catherine MP Thermal systesm for at least 100 T-90's given yearly purchases by the Russian Army we won't see the T-95 enter serial production before 2010 if at all.

    Personally I think the design just has to many flaws to be viable.

    Take the crew out of the turret- greatly reduce situational awareness

    Give it a bigger gun- reduced ammo

    No crew in turret- longer and harder to reload

    All three men in front hull- increased mine vulnerability, and what about emergancy egress?

    Only a 3 man crew- they are already doing a 4 man job and the complexity and difficulty just went up but there are still only 24 hours in a day.

    Cost- big Russian army- small budget for purchases= not fielded in force.

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    12 Jun 07
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    2,297
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    And as far as real life is concerned both projects are dead. Russia inked a deal with THALES for the Catherine MP Thermal systesm for at least 100 T-90's given yearly purchases by the Russian Army we won't see the T-95 enter serial production before 2010 if at all.
    The federal arms program envisions deploying at least 1400 T-90s by 2015. So I would expect to see the size of the purchases increase over the next few years.

    Personally I think the design just has to many flaws to be viable.

    Take the crew out of the turret- greatly reduce situational awareness
    If the information they receive is via sensors, cameras, and other electronics rather then through peep holes in the armor, does it matter if the monitor displaying the info is in the turret or in the hull?

    Give it a bigger gun- reduced ammo
    I personally agree with that one. I don't understand why they're obsessed with a 152mm gun.... first it was supposed to end up on the BE, now supposedly the T-95......

    No crew in turret- longer and harder to reload
    Auto-loader.

    All three men in front hull- increased mine vulnerability, and what about emergancy egress?
    Each crew member is meant to be in a single armored capsule. There is no single internal space in the tank.

    Only a 3 man crew- they are already doing a 4 man job and the complexity and difficulty just went up but there are still only 24 hours in a day.

    Cost- big Russian army- small budget for purchases= not fielded in force.
    Overall you're probably right. The design is head of it's time. Each change on it's own doesn't necessarily mean a bad thing, but overall it doesn't seem like they're going to be able to turn it into a single functioning tank. The technology isn't up to date with the ambitions of the tank designers.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Best Tank of WWII
    By Wraith601 in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 673
    Last Post: 06 Jun 16,, 16:13
  2. Analysis: Chechnya
    By Ironduke in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 29 Jul 08,, 00:30
  3. Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments
    By oneman28 in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 23 Jun 08,, 06:49
  4. Russia on the march - again
    By Ray in forum Europe and Russia
    Replies: 312
    Last Post: 14 Feb 08,, 23:18
  5. US Armor - A Russian Point of View
    By Shek in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 25 Apr 05,, 22:50

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •