Black Eagle (t-80UM2) pictures.

[Fulcrum]

The latest version of the T-80U being developed is the T-80UM2, which is designed to engage targets while stationary or on the move. It has a new all-welded cast steel turret with ERA on the hull front and turret, an automatic loading system and relocation of the ammunition to the turret bustle for improved survivability. Other improvements include a computerised fire control system, thermal imaging sights for commander and gunner, and the Arena active countermeasures system.

http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE1.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE2.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE3.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE4.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE5.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE6.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE7.jpg
http://www.imageshack.us/files2/BE8.jpg

more pics will be appriciated. woot

[George W. Bush]

What is that leafy green substance I see?

[Fulcrum]

What is that leafy green substance I see?

camouflage? :roll:

[Uninen]

What is that leafy green substance I see?

camouflage? :roll:

Yes, camouflage nets that were at first mounted on the turred to hide its true nature.. which is that the turret is in fact unmanned has full frontal-arc ERA etc.. ;)

[wholagun]

ok so is this things gonna be use by the Russian army or is the army still deciding if they should get it or not. I heard that its too expensive for them now and that its a private company that made the project and not he government.

[Fulcrum]

ok so is this things gonna be use by the Russian army or is the army still deciding if they should get it or not. I heard that its too expensive for them now and that its a private company that made the project and not he government.

this is what i have found:

http://www.sinopa.ee/sor/boraznoe/cterorel/orel01.htm

it say that black eagle tank has been in production for russian army after the year 2000 and that 50 of them were already supposed to be in service in the following two years, and from 2005 350 black eagle tanks will be produced yearly.

[wholagun]

oh nice interesting. I didn't know they were already in production.

[Russian Texan]

ok so is this things gonna be use by the Russian army or is the army still deciding if they should get it or not. I heard that its too expensive for them now and that its a private company that made the project and not he government.

this is what i have found:

http://www.sinopa.ee/sor/boraznoe/cterorel/orel01.htm

it say that black eagle tank has been in production for russian army after the year 2000 and that 50 of them were already supposed to be in service in the following two years, and from 2005 350 black eagle tanks will be produced yearly.

You got it wrong. "Black Eagle" was suppose to go in production back in 2000, but for various reasons (most importanly - absence of orders) it didn't.
If it ever will be built in numbers (so far only 2 were made), it will be for export only. Russian army is waiting for T 95.

The article below is dated back to the March, 2000

Russian Defence Minister Marshal Igor Sergeyev has announced that a radically new main battle tank (MBT) designated the T-95 has been developed in Russia. Sergeyev made his statement after a visit to the Uralvagonzavod plant in the Ural region where he inspected a T-95 prototype. Sergeyev's reference to it as the T-95 suggests the possible fielding of the new MBT as T-series designations are given to operational vehicles. Pilot and developmental vehicles are usually designated by the word obiekt (object) and a number.

The minister said that Uralvagonzavod would get additional funding in 2000, but according to Russian sources this may not be adequate to make the transition from development to production. All of the technical data, outline and configuration features of the T-95 are still secret. However, a Uralvagonzavod representative said the tank is a new design rather than a new variant of an existing MBT. It weighs about 50 tons. Its length and width are believed to be similar to the existing T-72, T-80 and T-90 MBTs.

As predicted by Jane's Defence Weekly, the main feature of the T-95 is its radical configuration with the main armament in a small unmanned turret fed from a newly-designed automatic loader located below the turret (JDW 11 November 1995). Seats for the driver, gunner and commander are in a special armoured capsule, separated by an armoured bulkhead from the automatic loader and turret. This design allows the MBT's silhouette to be reduced, making it less observable on the battlefield and enhancing crew safety. Such a configuration resolves a major dilemma concerning modern MBT design - combining adequate protection with mobility and transportability.

The T-95 MBT is armed with a 135mm gun which is believed to be of the smoothbore type and is fitted with a new fire control system (FCS). Target information is provided via optical, thermal imaging and infra-red channels. The FCS also includes a laser range finder and possibly a radar. The design relies heavily on the FCS as the crew cannot use traditional optical devices to observe the battlefield and aim the gun. The T-95 MBT is not the sole domestic new-generation MBT. The "object 640" (named Black Eagle), developed at the Omsk-based Design Bureau of Transport Machine-building was displayed at an arms exposition in Omsk, Siberia, in 1999. The vehicle features a completely new chassis and turret. Its designers chose a simpler design with the automatic loader and some ammunition is placed in a spacious bustle in the rear part of the manned turret.

[GazB]

The 135mm gun doesn't exist so I wouldn't read too much into that report. In the Mid 80s some texts anticipated 135mm guns so NATO selected a future 140mm gun as a standard. The reality is that the 135mm gun never existed and that any future calibre increase will likely be bigger than 140mm. Currently more effort is being spent on making existing ammo more effective than lugging around an even bigger gun...

[Operation Ivy]

which is designed to engage targets while stationary or on the move.

WOW :D

[Argyll]

Can the M1A2 and the Challenger 2 not fire on the move as well due to the stabalised gun?

[Nikolas]

Here is that I want to ask.
how the gun charge on move in Abrams?
In that place no automatic system, but gun is stabilized.

[Operation Ivy]

Can the M1A2 and the Challenger 2 not fire on the move as well due to the stabalised gun?

Well ive read that they can fire just as well on the move as they are stabalised,but i doubt it :(

[GazB]

Being able to fire on the move requires two things.

The obvious one is gun stabilisation... and for your information even the ancient T-10 had a fully stabilised main gun, as have all Soviet and Russian tanks made in the last 40 odd years... including a primative system on the late T-34s.

The second thing you need is a FCS that can compute the aim point to hit the target taking into account all the things you need to shot straight like wind direction and strength, air temperature, range to the target, target speed and direction and gun speed and direction, the state of the gun etc etc.

The T-72 had full fire on the move capabiliy after upgrades in the early 80s and the T-64 and T-80s were always fitted with such systems. As the tube launched ATGMs they fire through their main guns are laser beam riding and don't trail control wires they also have a fire on the move anti helo and anti tank capability out to 5km...

[Javehn]

Being able to fire on move requiers a bit more then gun stabilisation , and FCS compute . It's also requiring optics stabilization , sence it's not many fun to fire inside moving shaking tank , while your sight is jumping up and down , and it's also requires very good Master - Slave connection between gun and optic , controlled by one of the FCS Unit - very simplified explanation .
Even the Kirasir had a patent to stabilise gun with it's floating turret . The stabilisation in the direction (and not hight ) isn't accurate , and depence on the Azimuth , and not on target position . Infact , there is only 2 tanks in the world that really have ability to fire on the move , on moving targets . So , i would like to hear more about the capabilities of BE , before concure in which level indeed it can fire on the move.
P.S : Pretty much all tanks this day can hit stationary target on move , from no more then 1500 metters .

Russian ATGM from Kobra to Reflex are pretty much accurate , but have 2 main problems , low speed , and damn high freekin cost . That's one of the reasons "Lahat" Merkava project with US cooperation isn't it use , sence regular shells have same accuracy , much less cost , and much higher speed .

What is good on the tank , is excellent hall construction , and 1500 HP mottor in 48 ton tank , that makes it a race car tank .

[sierraone]

Which are these two tanks that can fire at moving targets while on the move themselves?
By the way, bit off topic but this day and age and the type of warfare we are seeing aren't we spending too much money on super tank technology? We have no enemies left where we need a tank with such capabilities or indeed aircraft with a hi-tech air-to-air combat capability.

[GazB]

Russian ATGM from Kobra to Reflex are pretty much accurate , but have 2 main problems , low speed , and damn high freekin cost .

The Early missiles... like Bastion were relatively slow, but Svir and current missiles travel faster than Mach 2 and have no problem with long range targets.


That's one of the reasons "Lahat" Merkava project with US cooperation isn't it use , sence regular shells have same accuracy , much less cost , and much higher speed .


The Russians weren't trying to redesign the concept of the tank and make a missile armed super tank. Others tried that and failed miserably. The purpose of the tube launched ATGM was to have available a round that could be used in certain circumstances against very long range targets with a very good chance of a kill. A kill at 5km with the Soviet computers and optics in the 70s and 80s just wasn't going to happen. They needed expensive optics and computers to do that. Such things were available but to install them on all their tanks was too expensive so they adopted the policy of high quality and good quality but mass producable tank models. (ie T-64 and T-80 were highq while T-72 was cheap and powerful enough and to be made in large numbers.)
By making the ATGMs compatible with existing tanks they created a much better weapon system. All of a sudden with a simple upgrade any tank in their inventory could kill targets at 4km+ range with a good chance of a kill. The added anti helo capability was a bonus.

If a target was spotted at 1km then APFSDS would be used as it was quicker and cheaper. But a target pops up or appears at 5km and it can be engaged with a Svir with a very good chance of a hit without fitting all the tanks in your inventory with super expensive FCS and optics and other bits and pieces.

The fact that the Black Eagle is widely expected to be fitted with a 150mm or larger gun would suggest more effective ATGMs (HEAT warheads are more effective if they have wider diameters).... potentially even fire and forget weapons with MMW radar guidance or IIR.