Can the SVO give a second chance to the T-95 and Black Eagle tanks

A few weeks ago, the Russian media reported that Black Eagle tanks equipped with 152 mm caliber guns would allegedly be sent to the NVO zone to hunt Leopards. However, this information did not receive confirmation, proving, apparently, not a very smart April Fool's joke. But what could be changed on the battlefield by promising armored vehicles that were not put into production for the sake of Armata?

As you know, there are two directions in tank building - with diesel and gas turbine engines, which have their own advantages and disadvantages. Only two countries in the world, the US and Russia, have technology serial production of gas turbine power plants for tanks, which provide heavy armored vehicles with high speed and dynamics, the ability to quickly start up in harsh climatic conditions such as the Arctic, but at the same time they are very capricious in operation somewhere in the desert. The Americans have the Abrams, while we have the T-80 and T-80U family of tanks.

"Black Eagle" / "Object 640"

What is special about Black Eagle? This is a modernized version of the T-80U, which was supposed to surpass the Abrams, Leclerc, Leopard-2 and Challenger-2 in terms of its performance characteristics. From its predecessor, the "Object 640" inherited an improved undercarriage, which would simplify its mass production. The hull is lengthened, the turret is noticeably enlarged, and its armor has been improved. In the stowed position, the gunner and tank commander are located in the hull and in the turret, and in the combat seat of the crew they are transferred below the level of the turret shoulder strap. With a mass of only 48 tons, the Black Eagle was equipped with a gas turbine power plant with a capacity of 1500 liters. with., which increased its specific power to the level of 30 liters. With. / t., significantly better than Western competitors of the 3rd generation.

What interests us most is the armament of the tank. "Object 640" was to be equipped with a 125-mm cannon, a 7,62-mm machine gun coaxial with it and a remote anti-aircraft gun with a 12,7-mm Kord machine gun. However, according to a number of sources, it was structurally possible to install a larger-caliber gun - from 135 mm to 152 mm. In other words, this would turn the Black Eagle into a real "killer of Leopards and other Abrams."

In the realities of the NMD in Ukraine, a tank carrying such a large-caliber gun could demolish entire buildings turned by the enemy into defensive fortifications with a few shots. A big plus of this project would be the actual transition of Russian artillery to 152 mm caliber shells due to the emerging "shell hunger" in the 122 mm segment.

Unfortunately, the promising tank, developed in the "dashing nineties" by the Omsk Design Bureau of Transport Engineering, was not useful to the country and did not go into production. It was promised that the developments on the Black Eagle would be used in the Armata platform.

T-95/"Object 195"

Another unrealized promising project of domestic tank building can be considered "Object 195", which was worked on by JSC "Scientific and Production Corporation "Uralvagonzavod" named after F. E. Dzerzhinsky" from 1999 to 2010. It was preceded by the Soviet Improvement-88 program, which involved changing the layout of the armored vehicle in order to reduce visibility and improve crew safety. To do this, the gun had to be placed in a small uninhabited tower, and the crew, reduced to two people, in a special armored capsule, separated from it and from the automatic loading mechanism. The weight of a Soviet tank with a noticeably reduced silhouette on the battlefield was to be 55 tons.

Can the SVO give a second chance to the T-95 and Black Eagle tanks

These ideas were embodied in the "Object 195". During its development, the so-called carriage layout was used. The armament of the T-95 was a 152 mm 2A83 gun with a new automatic loader, an auxiliary 30 mm 2A42 automatic cannon and a 12,7 mm Kord machine gun in a remote-controlled turret. The fire control system was supposed to be equipped with a thermal imager, a laser rangefinder and a radar, as well as a "friend or foe" recognition system. The engine was supposed to have a power of 1500 to 1650 liters. With. depending on modification. The crew of the T-95 would have been only two people, sheltered in an armored capsule in the bow.

Unfortunately, the "Object 195", like the "Object 640", did not go into the series, since it was recognized as "morally obsolete". Instead, the rate of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation was made on the more promising platform "Armata". What do we have in the bottom line as of the second half of April 2023?

There are a couple of dozens of T-14 "Armata", which so far are not really used in the assaults of Ukrainian fortified areas. There are hundreds of really good T-90M "Proryv" tanks suitable for serial production, which are our main hope for a breakthrough in the NWO. In reality, all the hardships of a large-scale armed conflict are being pulled by the age-old T-72s of various modifications, as well as the old T-62Ms being modernized and sent to the front, and the very ancient T-55s. This conflict, alas, is likely to last for a long time, so why not really think about giving tanks with a 152 mm gun a second chance? There will be more than enough work ahead of them.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir Tuzakov (Vladimir Tuzakov) April 24 2023 12: 01
    Such an MBT with a powerful cannon is suitable only for urban combat, for breaking down fortifications, etc. In the field, on the contrary, it will become vulnerable due to a reduced rate of fire, with sufficient capabilities of the 125 mm cannon. The right decision, about the failure of the 152 mm gun for mass MBT. Small batches need to be released "Black Eagle" for the specificity of urban combat. and other tasks. And to determine either a 30 mm gun or Kord, of course, with the current security, a 30 mm gun is preferable. A crew of two is insufficient in terms of the distribution of functions: driving through difficult terrain, tracking the battlefield and general actions and hitting designated targets with fire - everything is functional for three crew members. By removing one member, one of the functions will be performed defectively and insufficiently, which will lead to a decrease in the combat capability of the MBT. Of course, in the future, the entire crew will be replaced with remote control, and later with AI control.
    1. sgrabik Offline sgrabik
      sgrabik (Sergei) April 24 2023 14: 46
      I agree, but for assault operations, when taking especially fortified areas and in an urban environment, a caliber of 152 mm is much more preferable and necessary, recently there was information that a tank was being developed for urban battles and storming buildings, it is here that a gun with a caliber of 152 mm would be the best possible, including with guided projectiles similar to the Krasnopol projectiles.
      1. Paul3390 Offline Paul3390
        Paul3390 (Paul) April 24 2023 21: 36
        when taking especially fortified areas and in an urban environment

        For such tasks, a high-ballistics gun with a long barrel is clearly unnecessary. Moreover, smoothbore. Why - if the distance of the battle in the city is a maximum of a kilometer? Here something like the ISU-152 cannon would fit. There is no need to accelerate the projectile to high speeds, the main thing is to make it explode more deliciously. This means a relatively short rifled barrel.
    2. Paul3390 Offline Paul3390
      Paul3390 (Paul) April 24 2023 21: 41
      on the failure of 152 mm guns for mass MBT

      As I understand it, the main plug was the possible portable ammunition. With such a caliber, you can’t shove a lot of shells into a tank. Again, AZ - in the carousel such fools apparently already fit with great interference. .and the ammunition itself - there were none like this before, which means that you can’t count on old stocks.
    3. Rico1977 Offline Rico1977
      Rico1977 (Alexander) April 27 2023 21: 35
      Agree. Well, either make an SU with a 152 gun, to reduce the cost. Like in a war. Such a caliber zhahnet - and the house develops. In urban battles and against protected armored vehicles such as the Challenger, Leclerc or Abrams, this is an indispensable thing. St. John's wort. But the general battle was fought by 34ka - fast, moderately fortified, rapid-fire. really irreplaceable. Now the t-72 is 34ka, but there is no powerful St. John's wort.
  2. Eduard Aplombov (Eduard Aplombov) April 24 2023 12: 18
    tanks are certainly good, but in my opinion the trend in the war is moving a little in the other direction
    the efficiency of the tank is low compared to the means to destroy it, from drones to ATGMs
    very soon there will be unmanned vehicles against tanks much smaller and cheaper to operate
    we have accumulated huge stocks of these machines, they will still fight in Papuan, but after their own and a possible war with NATO, their use will be limited
    for this reason, in my opinion, they sharpen and sharpen the armature and are in no hurry to put it into operation
    attach at least a 200 mm cannon to a tank, it becomes too vulnerable to modern weapons
    1. sgrabik Offline sgrabik
      sgrabik (Sergei) April 24 2023 14: 56
      And they also said about artillery that it would have practically outlived itself and would be much less used in modern wars, but time shows that this is not the case and that this was clearly rushed, the situation is approximately the same with tanks, of course they will change, evolve, autonomous vehicles will appear, controlled remotely, and later endowed with artificial intelligence, but tanks in one form or another will remain in service for a very, very long time.
      1. Eduard Aplombov (Eduard Aplombov) April 24 2023 15: 55
        of course they will remain, but tank battles have already gone down in history, the tank is operated more precisely
        and new means will come to combat heavy equipment and keeping tanks in huge quantities will become expensive and unprofitable due to their quick defeat, left, shot, spotted from a height, a drone flew out and there is no tank, the cost of its defeat compared to the price of a tank is huge as well as the rest of the technology
        artillery is one thing, its range of destruction is increasing and increasing, and the tank is involved in almost the thick of the battle, almost all weapons get it
        not tomorrow, of course, but the experience of this war will be taken into account all over the world and new weapons are just around the corner
        the tank will be improved and the number of tanks in modern armies will decrease significantly
  3. Nelton Offline Nelton
    Nelton (Oleg) April 24 2023 16: 36
    so why not really think about giving a second chance to tanks with a 152 mm gun?

    It seems to me that they are releasing the T-90 - and let them release it, so to speak, this is an average technological level.

    At the "high" technological level, it is necessary to concentrate on drones, and not scatter on conditionally promising tanks.
    A T-62 with good target designation from several drones will be more effective and not impersonate as much as some thread of Armata, on the active radar of which all the adversary’s UAVs will fly like mosquitoes into the light.

    well, for the mobilization part, the simplest, here are the parts to produce -
    prefabricated dugouts, pillboxes, etc.
    Any plant of metal structures or a reinforced concrete plant (in a reinforced concrete version) can master it.

    But I didn’t graduate from the Red Banner Academies, there was no one to knock the nonsense about UAVs out of my head ...
  4. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) April 24 2023 19: 13
    The stump is clear, it cannot.
    We simply don't have them.
    and no production capacity.

    And the museum ones - let them stand there. Like a memory.
    1. Monster_Fat Offline Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat (What's the difference) April 25 2023 08: 29
      "Maybe, can't, loves, doesn't love" .... Such a funny daisy turns out ... lol
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. Pavel57 Offline Pavel57
    Pavel57 (Paul) April 25 2023 16: 51
    During a long war, putting new models of tanks into series is a dubious undertaking. At the height of the Second World War, the T-43 did not go into production due to fear of a decrease in output. At the end of the war, new T-44s and IS-3s appeared, which already participated in other battles.
  7. Pembo Offline Pembo
    Pembo April 25 2023 19: 20
    Now, if you don’t design from scratch, but put a 152mm gun into an existing tank. Reduce the charge, shorten the barrel. And use it as an assault weapon.
  8. boriz Offline boriz
    boriz (boriz) April 25 2023 21: 15
    Horses are not changed at the crossing. Best the enemy of the good.
    In this regard, it is useful to recall the situation in fighter aviation at the beginning of the Great Patriotic War.
    Before the war, the Polikarpov design bureau (I16, I153) was defeated, he was deprived of the backbone of the design bureau and a large serial plant (while he was in Germany, he got acquainted with production and selected the most promising models of military equipment). Instead of well-used I16, I153 (and promising I180 and I185), new "young and promising" designers (then "effective managers") promised new fighters with stunning performance. Behind each new design bureau was a member of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks, hence the secret of "success" (the defeat of Polikarpov's design bureau, which lost its "roof" in the person of Yezhov).
    I will not delve into the numbers, but at the end of September 1942. commander of the 1st Air Army (Stalingrad) Khudyakov sent a letter to Stalin with a request to restore the production of I16 and I153. Again: at the end of September 1942.
    It was no longer possible to do so. It would be necessary to sharply reduce the current production of fighters, which has just begun to recover after the evacuation of enterprises.
    It is difficult to count how many lives of pilots cost the ambitions of politicians who climbed to where they did not understand anything.
    Therefore, no sudden movements are necessary. Serial production is not drill training, the "round - march" teams do not roll.
    The T90 is a great tank. In terms of performance characteristics, perhaps the best in the world. Production is fine.
    The enemy will not have new tanks in the foreseeable future. With mass production of existing ones - problems.
    Let it be.
  9. Vladimir R. Offline Vladimir R.
    Vladimir R. (Vladimir Russian) April 26 2023 07: 18
    The Black Eagle tank no longer exists. How much can you chew on this fantastic theme?
  10. Pafnuty Pakhomovich (Pafnuty Pakhomovich) April 27 2023 18: 23
    I apologize for digressing from the topic, but let me remind readers what experts said about the (today's praised) BMPT "Terminator" 10 years ago.

    My personal opinion is that a machine like the Terminator is dubious. Simply because it does not have any advantages that are significant over the main battle tank. Neither in terms of the fire control system, nor in terms of the capabilities of conducting reconnaissance, surveillance and target designation, nor in terms of the capabilities of their weapons. Therefore, I say that finding a place for the Terminator in battle order is problematic ”- Murakhovsky, Viktor Ivanovich, member of the Expert Council of the Collegium of the Military-Industrial Commission of the Russian Federation, reserve colonel.

    According to the magazine The National Interest, the Russian army does not need the Terminator, as it already has an arsenal of effective combat armored vehicles, the earlier publication noted the following shortcomings: a large crew, lack of a fire control system, protection of the Ataka launchers, as well as high cost.

    Perhaps another 10 years will pass and experts will change their minds about the "Object 640".