I was looking at a Russian Military site when I found a mysterious 5th Generation tank called the Balck Eagle, the site claimed that it would be better and more well equiped than the M1A2 . Could that be possible and what are the specifications and abilities of the Black Eagle tank ?
Black Eagle Tank and M1A2 Comparison
- Thread starter Francis
- Start date
- Status
FutureTank
Banned Member
This is a 4th Generation tank known as Project 640 designed in the late 90s. It uses some T-80 systems, but also many new systems. The internal layout of the fighting compartment is different perhaps reflecting design philosophy used in the NATO tanks.
There is not much information available as yet, and many different suggestions have been made about what the BE's capabilities are, but few have been confirmaed, and though the tank is expected to be the next Russian tank, there is currently no budget to purchase any, and T-90 continues to be supplied to the Russian forces.
There is not much information available as yet, and many different suggestions have been made about what the BE's capabilities are, but few have been confirmaed, and though the tank is expected to be the next Russian tank, there is currently no budget to purchase any, and T-90 continues to be supplied to the Russian forces.
For something to be 'better' it must exist first. BE seems like an interesting development of the T-80 and a definite improvement on paper. Even at projected 50 tonns it's still lighter than Western counterparts it's supposed to match allegedly.
It's a step in right direction, but like many other things in Russia when it comes to new equipment, it has been shelved indefinitely. The company in Omsk that proposed the design went bankrupt in 2002.
Read about Black Eagle here.
It's a step in right direction, but like many other things in Russia when it comes to new equipment, it has been shelved indefinitely. The company in Omsk that proposed the design went bankrupt in 2002.
Read about Black Eagle here.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #4
Do you think it will ever enter service? or is this the end of the Black Eagle tank
FutureTank
Banned Member
The company that produced the design went into a complex merger and the project has not been heard of much in the last couple of years.
As Feofanov's site suggests, the T-95 has ostensibly been selected as the next Russian tank by the Russian Defence Minister Ivanov.
The situation is confusing
The thing you have to realise about many of Russian military sites (and I don't think this is an over-generalisation) is that they are incredibly patriotic, and love to point out the supposed superiority of Russian equipment compared to Western, and particularly American, equipment. It's best to take their claims with a grain of salt.
The Black Eagle is a concept tank, nothing more. Giving the state of Russian military funding I think it most unlikely the Black Eagle will get into production any time soon, or even that they'll have enough money to iron out the inevitable bugs.
I have my doubts about the Black Eagle's superiority over the Abrams because it's based on the T-80, which suffers the usual Russian problems of lack of armour and a gun that has difficulty penetrating an Abrams from the front at over 1000m. By contrast an Abrams can hit a T-80 with a sabot round from any range and blow it apart. All modern Russian tanks have this problem, from the T-72 to the new T-90. No matter how effective the new fire control, thermal sights, communications, active countermeasures and all the rest are on the Black Eagle, it really needs another 20 to 30 tons of improved Chobham armour over a T-80 to compete with an M1A2. That's in my personal opinon, of course!
The Black Eagle will not be Russia`s next generation tank, they were trying to see if they could get any buyers for it on the world market with no current takers at the present time.
The M1A1 series tank can effectively engage the Black Eagle out to 2000 meters with M829A2 Du penetrators, beyond that range is questionable.
The M829A3 is a different matter though.
If Russia uses it`s latest DU penetrator on a M1A1, it will punch it out at over 1600 meters. A M1A1 heavy or M1A2 is a different matter that I cannot go into.
The M1A1 series tank can effectively engage the Black Eagle out to 2000 meters with M829A2 Du penetrators, beyond that range is questionable.
The M829A3 is a different matter though.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #8
Eckherl where did you get that information?
admin: please avoid back to back posts - try and merge them together where possible.
very disappionting
admin: please avoid back to back posts - try and merge them together where possible.
Last edited by a moderator:
here's a very old chart. I had post it few times but I cant find where i posted.
Hope it gives some help to your research.
http://btupload.com/link.php?ref=7c5e742d31
Chart is in .gif and out of limit. So i uploaded here. Just click download and you will have the chart saved and ready to view.
Hope it gives some help to your research.
http://btupload.com/link.php?ref=7c5e742d31
Chart is in .gif and out of limit. So i uploaded here. Just click download and you will have the chart saved and ready to view.
Which information are you referring to, the tank itself or the ammunition.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #11
The tank itself
You would be surprised what U.S Army Master Gunners can stumble upon.
I was not aware Russia had a DU round in service or development, can you name a source?If Russia uses it`s latest DU penetrator on a M1A1, it will punch it out at over 1600 meters. A M1A1 heavy or M1A2 is a different matter that I cannot go into.
The M1A1 series tank can effectively engage the Black Eagle out to 2000 meters with M829A2 Du penetrators, beyond that range is questionable.
The M829A3 is a different matter though.
Also, where did you get the data on its performance against M1A1? How were they able to obtain sample M1A1 or is this baseless speculation?
Cheers
You were not aware that Russia uses DU penetrators, they have had them in their inventory just a few years short of when NATO started carrying them.
Just a little tid bit: they have no intentions on getting rid of them in the near future, just like the U.S has no intentions of doing away with them either.
A M1A1 is a good tank, but it can be killed, Russia has the capabilities of making tank killer rounds also.
I received my information at the U.S Armor Center.
any figures related to what a non US entity assumes is M1A1 data is assumed and based on supposition.
US policy since GW1 is that no compromised M1's (mobility or outright killed) are left unescorted or unattended until either complete recovery, or totally destroyed by friendly and directed forces. The US used to assign specialist teams to protect damaged assets in GW1
the technology is still regarded as sensitive and classified - so none of the beasts have been left in a recoverable state.
and to be frank - none of the public data as released and available in the public domain re armour "thickness" (per se) is accurate.
@FS Monster
Russia actually had a DU penetrator that could knock out a M1A1 at 1600 meters in the late eighties, that is one of the reasons why the U.S Army started producing the M1A1 heavies.
What is the best way to defeat DU rounds, DU armor plating.
Russia actually had a DU penetrator that could knock out a M1A1 at 1600 meters in the late eighties, that is one of the reasons why the U.S Army started producing the M1A1 heavies.
What is the best way to defeat DU rounds, DU armor plating.
Apparently, you can get it at a "U.S. Army Tank Center"
Of course I am aware such kind of boasting can only be media or somebody else's speculation. To claim such exact numbers such as range and resulting effects of the round on any tank is pointless.
We don't even have a working reference to extrapolate basic, crude estimates, especially Western tanks.
Its easier to start pulling numbers together on issues of range etc of a round. but its much more difficult to start pulling data on ballistic protection.Apparently, you can get it at a "U.S. Army Tank Center"
Of course I am aware such kind of boasting can only be media or somebody else's speculation. To claim such exact numbers such as range and resulting effects of the round on any tank is pointless.
We don't even have a working reference to extrapolate basic, crude estimates, especially Western tanks.
the US has had an advantage due to being able to buy or recover numbers of assets from various conflicts, so Aberdeen is a bit of a gunners paradise if you want to practice on russian or opfor equipment. Healthy extrapolation is possible at a dimension level. (eg if external mass changes then, its possible to start educated guessing) that is not so easy in reverse, as the russians (or chinese) have not been in a position to recover an Abrams (due to prev stated asset protection policy)
penetration stats are also difficult to judge. eg, when KMW were trying to convince the Aust army to go to Leo1 upgraded armour or to buy Leo2's, they were more than willing to conduct tests based on our requirements - but they were insistent that we would not be able to take and analyse the penetrated plates at a metallurgical level. the RHA figures were given as "approximates". Again we had access to russian data as the germans had access to lots of russian platforms - conversely, no Leos have been compromised as surplus platforms are smelted if not retained by the primary purchaser.
Last edited:
Hey - you don`t have to take anything that I say to heart, nothing that I have stated is sensitive or classified.Apparently, you can get it at a "U.S. Army Tank Center"
Of course I am aware such kind of boasting can only be media or somebody else's speculation. To claim such exact numbers such as range and resulting effects of the round on any tank is pointless.
We don't even have a working reference to extrapolate basic, crude estimates, especially Western tanks.
Just like gf0012-aust stated though, you will not find any correct data on armor thinkness or latest generation KE rounds circulating on the web.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #20
where you in the United States Military and where did you serve ?You would be surprised what U.S Army Master Gunners can stumble upon.
- Status