?OK fellas, I think you?re missing something here.

The Nizhny Tagil MBT (T-95) is a clean sheet design, don?t assume anything about this MBT, that is not obvious or not acknowledged by it?s builders; they aren?t keeping this vehicle?s specifications and performance discreet, without good reason. Likewise, nobody has been allowed to get to close to the Black Eagle demonstrator, probably for the same reason, you might just hear the engine sounds a little different.

In Mr. Fofanov?s webpage on the T-95 link size=2>, there is an interesting reference: a ?unique drivetrain suspension system is being tested on this tank?. It is unlikely this late in development, it is simply being tested and is more likely a component of the integrated engine, drivetrain and suspension, originally proposed for inclusion in the Chiorny Oriol development program, for the Next Generation MBT of the Russian Army and as we all know, the T-80 chassis is the original development chassis for Chiorny Oriol.

If you can find it; in issue #28 of Rozvourezhenie?s electronic magazine ?Military Parade?, there is an early article on the T-80UM1 BARS Tank. In this article, mention is made of the shift to hydrostatic drives, but more interestingly, is a one liner that pre-announces an update of the power plant from 1,250 hp gas turbine to 1,400 hp heavy duty engine. Given the timing of this article and the confusion in Rosvorouzhenia at the time over the company?s future, both these items probably made it into the original article by mistake. If you wonder that the entries are still in the text of the article, it is simple; remove them and people might start to ask why and what it was all about in the first place.

With regards this entry, a heavy duty engine is a diesel engine. When was the last time you heard of replacement of a gas turbine power plant by a higher horsepower, yet reliable diesel engine, within the same restrictive envelope as the 50 tonne chassis limitation of this Russian tank class?

Now what all this means, is that it is highly probable Russia is developing at least two very advanced MBTs, one, based on an updated T-80U chassis as more suited to mass production, whilst the other, the T-95 is considerably more demanding of manufacture, but vastly more capable as a tank destroyer. Although export versions of the T-80 chassis, including the T-80UM1 BARS Tank and Black Eagle, are likely to have conventional power plants and drivelines, subsequent variants for the Russian Army are more likely to have the more advanced 1,400 horsepower heavy duty engine and drive-train in common with the T-95, which is also likely to be in common with a next generation, Self Propelled Artillery unit. The whole to operate as Fast Attack Squadrons.

Perhaps the nearer term availability of these units, is one of the reasons President Putin was comfortable in withdrawing from the CFE protocol.

If you need a little more convincing, think about this. In the T-95, we now have a tank with the crew, gun mounting, auto-loader and ammunition, shoehorned into the chassis with an engine and drivetrain, that certainly won?t be any less powerful than alternative MBTs of the Russian Army. Given the constraints related to all this gear now being within the chassis, there is considerably less space than would normally be available for the power plant of this MBT. Something has to be greatly different.

I?ve noted in at least one article on the T-95, conjecture that the drive is diesel electric. The engine known to have been under consideration and subsequently proposed for development within Chiorny Oriol, is a direct acting hydraulic machine, so many parts and sub systems are removed by going down this path, that the resulting machinery suite of an MBT is less complex, much lighter, more robust and reliable and above all else, has a much higher power density; rivaling or exceeding that of a gas turbine and its gear set. Moreover, a hydraulic motor is typically ¼ the weight of an equivalent electric motor and in this game, power to weight is just about everything. Additionally, hydraulic motors are operationally more flexible and far more robust in a hostile environment, than are electric motors.

It should also be mentioned, with the adoption of this new format engine, there is no hydraulic pump in the system, the engine is the pump; so we have a lighter engine, competing with an engine and generator, on the basis of both weight and space. Sorry, no contest.

OK, now this is where this really gets interesting. The predicted automotive performance of this integrated system, is that an MBT so powered, will not only have higher horsepower, but have at least three times the un-refueled range of a contemporary diesel powered variant, for the same fuel load and for emergency purposes, will be able to apply power to the sprocket motors, considerably in excess of the rated engine horsepower.  

Also, I think in Military Parade, November/December issue (#30), there was a discussion paper, if I remember correctly, from one of the Russian Tank Design Bureaus, on an Articulated MBT. This would be an even more advanced heavy combat platform and although the article addressed a projected MBT development option, for ?advanced heavy combat vehicles with a high dependency on hydraulic systems?, a singularly telling comment. It appears to be a development of an initial proposal for Advanced Self Propelled Artillery units, with a high degree of commonality with the next generation MBTs, that was originally proposed as a counter to the Crusader System, then under development for the US Army.

The articulated MBT would have a Power Car at each end, with articulated, remotely un-coupled, connections. This would mean that a central un-manned Combat Module, need only contain the gun mount, auto loader and ammunition, something in common with the T-95. Optionally, either Power Car could take command of the combined vehicle, basically depending on which way the vehicle is traveling. The resulting vehicle would have automotive attributes superior to any other platform, whilst the Combat Module has far greater protection, in that projectiles from the front or rear would be more likely to impact upon a Power Car than the Combat Module. In the case of a Power Car being disabled, the remaining Vehicle Commander could simply un-couple the damaged Power Car and the remaining Power Car could then drag the Combat Module clear and a replacement Power Car be connected. It is also proposed these Power Cars carry reserve munitions and ammunition could be automatically transferred to the Combat Module on demand. Additional Power Cars could always be deployed as components of a Fast Attack Force, as both replacement modules or simply for exchange, as the routine reload method for Combat Modules. The Combat Module itself, could be either configured as an MBT or SPA and it?s magazine and load out mechanism be simply a slide out, interchangeable component, allowing very rapid reloading of the power cars at a field depot and interchangeability in configuration, between being a service component of an MBT of SPA.     

What was also proposed was that all larger vehicles of the Russian armed forces, especially APCs and logistics vehicles acting in support of these integrated formations, should also use the same engine as those in the heavy armored units of FAS, either de-rated or with a reduced number of engine cylinders. This would reduce the overall logistics requirements, but more importantly, an armored unit with up to half it?s engine cylinders out of service, due to damage, could still withdraw under it?s own power and the crew scavenge engine cylinders from any logistics vehicle or APC they encounter and be back in combat within the hour. Realistically, APCs could be deployed in combat with one or more spare engine cylinders in ready use canisters, for just such a purpose.

With regards logistics, going down this path, all vehicles become single fluid applications with significantly reduced fuel requirements (1/3^rd), diesel doing the duty of fuel, hydraulic medium and addressing the greatly reduced cooling requirement of the power plant type.

In case anybody thinks this is all conjecture. The above, apart from the specific arrangement of the Articulated MBT, is part of an original proposal to the Russian Military combine, about the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, and is believed to have been under development since that time. It is known that an original evaluation of the power plant and driveline line concept, was funded by the Russian Military and this six month long exercise was headed up by the Russian Engine Research Institute. At the completion of this evaluation, the work was ?still considered highly interesting and apparently applicable to a broad range of applications? and as development funding was in short supply, it was proposed development of the power plant be done within Chiorny Oriol, as funding for this program was guaranteed by the State. Perhaps the Black Eagle demonstration chassis is the original engine development platform for this power plant and driveline, within the Chiorny Oriol program and this may be the reason delegates to demonstrations are not allowed closer than 500m. The engine may just sound very different and create too much conjecture at this point in time.

Interesting, isn?t it. The greatest leap forward in Russian heavy armor development, co-insides with America?s abandonment of the heavy tank as a Future War Fighting asset. In the European theatre of old, the Soviet tank forces were considered one of, if not the greatest military threat to Europe in the then, Soviet arsenal. Consider how much more formidable a threat this will become, as President Putin aligns the Russian state more and more closely with the original Soviet doctrines and rearms with these considerably more capable conventional weapons.

Read and ponder,

Nero?.