Russia's new T-95 MBT

Discussion in 'Tanks, planes & ships' started by Yeoman_dai, Mar 18, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Good thing we got rid of our tanks, they'd be mince!
  2. Tanks are a thing of the past nowadays unless you have air superiority.
  3. That was pretty much the situation in WWII. Air superiority, or the enemy having no serious air to ground capability anyway. I think tanks will be an important part of any integrated ground force for a while yet.
  4. True but in the past air power had to actually see the tank to hit it. These days a tank can be destroyed from miles away.
  5. This 152? Smooth bore or rifled?

    I guess its smoothbore, capable of firing some kind of APFSDS round with a slim penetrator, or even a munition capable of terminal guidance from the the tank itself.

    Do modern smoothbore guns have greater punch but less accuracy? The accuracy problem being addressed by fin stabilisation or terminal guidance? Kind of defies obsolescence if you think about it?
  6. True, but aircraft can also be destroyed from miles away by some air defence systems. Oh the joy of progress.
  7. And aircraft can't always fly. Tanks don't have to worry about weather
  8. But who is better at destroying tanks? Another tank? Infantry with ATGW in defense? Or air power.

    An article I read a few years ago said that the Russian military realised after Afghanistan that their MBT-led philosophy for taking on NATO would have been quickly blunted by infantry using MILAN or similar. Such a realisation was one of the reasons ending the cold war. If the Ivan is going to invest in armour again, somebody didn't get the memo or they have forgotten what they learned in Afghanistan. Not a typical Russian trait. Maybe this behemoth is mostly intended for the export market.
  9. Oh look another rehash of a T-80, itself a re design of the T-64. Good enough designs in their day but is it still made of steel or a composite? But as stated before useless unless you have air superiority, only usefull for squashing civilians in a civil war.
  10. I didn't think of that.

    Anyway, tanks are gay.
  11. Rubbish. How could 12 MILAN posts stop a Russian Armoured regiment or even more fantastically, cause the Soviets to decide not to invade Germany? I call bollocks made up by infanteers. MILAN+Chieftain+TOW+arty+mines yes. MILAN by itself, no way.

    Best thing to kill tanks, are tanks if you discount air-power. Gulf War I and Telic proved this beyond doubt. Just like it proved air power, once air SUPREMACY (very different to air superiority) had been established was the true bane of armour.
  12. This chap made them seem waaaaay cool!

  13. Until he died in one! :)
  14. Tanks are pish, never to be seen again.