T-95 baby

[xinhui]

Ïåðñïåêòèâíûé òàíê Ò-95

that is a 152mm bad ass

[cr9527]

Ïåðñïåêòèâíûé òàíê Ò-95

that is a 152mm bad ass

Is this for real? If the turret is penetrated, even a bit, it could send the turret flying sky high...

[1979]

Is this for real? If the turret is penetrated, even a bit, it could send the turret flying sky high...

photoshop.

[Skywatcher]

It might be the turret without its modular armor (I'm assuming that its armor scheme is modular).

[xinhui]

photoshop.

There are more photos here

Ïåðñïåêòèâíûé òàíê Ò-95

[dave lukins]

The barrel looks too big for the square shaped turret. Smooth bore 152mm..interesting. I would like to see it's ability on the ranges.

[Zampolit]

There are more photos here

Ïåðñïåêòèâíûé òàíê Ò-95

The article is entitled as "Thoughts on probable outlook of the perspective Russian MBT", which is self-explanatory.

[Nightowl]

photoshop.

Looks more like a prototype to me. They tried upgunning the Leopard 2 to 140mm, the thing looked rediculous.

[1979]

Looks more like a prototype to me. They tried upgunning the Leopard 2 to 140mm, the thing looked rediculous.

You would need to ask someone with a better command of the russian language than me.
Макет as far as I know does not translate that way.

[USSWisconsin]

It reminds me of the 18" - 20" gun battleship designs, too big to be practical - too many trade offs; ROF, # of rounds, weight, cost, reliability. Do MBT's really need a bigger gun? Aren't existing first tier 12-13 cm projectiles able to defeat enemy tanks at practical ranges now?

[BD1]

You would need to ask someone with a better command of the russian language than me.
Макет as far as I know does not translate that way.

maket = mock-up

[T_igger_cs_30]

It reminds me of the 18" - 20" gun battleship designs, too big to be practical - too many trade offs; ROF, # of rounds, weight, cost, reliability. Do MBT's really need a bigger gun? Aren't existing first tier 12-13 cm projectiles able to defeat enemy tanks at practical ranges now?

Have not really looked into this at all looked at the photo and laughed, yes MBT's as far as I am concerned USSW, are pretty well there now in regards to weight-protection-speed relations, there is a lot of specualtion today that the MBT (Main Battle Tank) has seen its day, and moving back to medium armour will suffice given the advanced nature of ATGW now. Even on the conventional battle fied. ......... Personally I do not buy into that.............. I am sure its a cost factor pushng these thoughts.

[Stitch]

The barrel looks too big for the square shaped turret. Smooth bore 152mm..interesting. I would like to see it's ability on the ranges.

It seems to me it would be more productive in the long run to increase MV, not the bore; a 120-125mm is about right, especially since we're mostly using APFSDS rounds anyway, but increasing the MV would make the projectile more accurate AND more effective. As Wisconsin said, we've pretty much already hit the wall in terms of round size; any bigger, and the trade-offs won't be worth it.

[T_igger_cs_30]

Stitch - response

increasing the MV would make the projectile more accurate AND more effective.

OK Stitch, but how do you make 100% hit ratio with 120mm APFSDS anymore accurate?
Increased MV is not needed with this nature of ammunition or system.

[bigross86]

With new systems like the Trophy APS, the MBT is far from long gone