Tanks of the world

A thread intended to summarize all types of tanks currently in production or in developement.
Please add information about additional tanks in the following style:
"Nation-Name-Weight-Enginepower-Gun caliber-Armor type
-additional information-"

Tons refers to metric tons.
Category1: Tanks in production/latest active tank models
Germany-Leopard-2A6-62tons-1500shp-120mm-Chobham style, spaced.
Category2: Tanks in developement
Category2-1: Confirmed developement
(Mark Rumored details with an "R")
Russia-T95-50tons"R"-1250shp"R"-152mm"R"-Ceramic, electric"R"
India-Tank X-47tons-?-Arjunta gun-Ceramic+ERA
Category2-2: Rumored developement
Israel-Merkava5->65tons"R"-?-?-?


---
I'll include all tanks mentioned by others in the list above. Hopefully we'll have a complete listing of todays tanks in the end.

[edit on 28-4-2007 by DaSeitz]

[edit on 28-4-2007 by DaSeitz]

Originally posted by DaSeitz
A thread intended to summarize all types of tanks currently in production or in developement.
Please add information about additional tanks in the following style:
"Nation-Name-Weight-Enginepower-Gun caliber-Armor type
-additional information-"

Tons refers to metric tons.
Category1: Tanks in production/latest active tank models
Germany-Leopard-2A6-62tons-1500shp-120mm-Chobham style, spaced.
Category2: Tanks in developement
Category2-1: Confirmed developement
(Mark Rumored details with an "R")
Russia-T95-50tons"R"-1250shp"R"-140mm"R"-Ceramic, electric"R"
Category2-2: Rumored developement
Israel-Merkava5->65tons"R"-?-?-?

---
I'll include all tanks mentioned by others in the list above. Hopefully we'll have a complete listing of todays tanks in the end.

hey daseitz hasn't germany developed a 140mm gun , i read it somewhere , also t-95 cannon is 152 mm not 140 mm

another tank in development(indian tank)
tank X (47 tons , ERA,ceramic armour)-combines arjuna tank firepoweer and T-72 chassis


[edit on 28-4-2007 by vK_man]

There was a test Leopard2 with 140mm cannon but it did not enter serial production. The T95 gun data is based only on rumors, some say 140, some say 152, do you have a reliable source for 152mm?

Originally posted by DaSeitz
There was a test Leopard2 with 140mm cannon but it did not enter serial production. The T95 gun data is based only on rumors, some say 140, some say 152, do you have a reliable source for 152mm?

this is from federation of american scientists:

The primary armament is reportedly a 152mm smoothbore gun / ATGM launcher with an ammunition load of at least 40 rounds, which may be placed in an unmanned gun pod on top of the hull to lower the silhouette and increase survivability. The new design also places far greater emphasis on crew protection than in previous Russian tank designs through a unitary armored pod inside the hull
www.fas.org...

initially t-95 was called Uralvagonzavod Main Battle Tank

some more tanks

type 99(chinese )
:

en.wikipedia.org...

al khalid (pakistan):



en.wikipedia.org...

type 96(chinese):



en.wikipedia.org...


ariete(italy):




en.wikipedia.org...

Challenger 2 is arguably the best MBT in production in the world today.
Chobham armour and 62.5 tonnes with a 1200hp Perkins multi fuel Diesel.

The M-1 A1 Abrahms is of similar ability, but has a fuel thirsty and dust vulnerable gas turbine engine.

You do not want to ignore the T-80 / T-95 tanks either. They have a 152 mm gun able to fire the laser guided Kornet AT-14 laser guided missile with a range up to 5.5 km using the ID22 laser designator. Each 8kg missile round able to fire from a gun barrel, costs US$75,000 each.

Kornet warheads include tandem heat, DPU penetrator, or Fuel Air Explosive.

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Challenger 2 is arguably the best MBT in production in the world today.
Chobham armour and 62.5 tonnes with a 1200hp Perkins multi fuel Diesel.

The M-1 A1 Abrahms is of similar ability, but has a fuel thirsty and dust vulnerable gas turbine engine.

You do not want to ignore the T-80 / T-95 tanks either. They have a 152 mm gun able to fire the laser guided Kornet AT-14 laser guided missile with a range up to 5.5 km using the ID22 laser designator. Each 8kg missile round able to fire from a gun barrel, costs US$75,000 each.

Kornet warheads include tandem heat, DPU penetrator, or Fuel Air Explosive.

i would say the best ones in the beginning of the 21 st century are german leopard 2 and russian T-90 currently...
best ones in 20 th century the british centurion tank and the soviet IS-3
by the t-80 has 125 mm cannon and can fire refleks missile not kornet

Scuse me you're quite right about the Refleks AT-11 and T-80 gun. The same missile/gun also fits the T-90.

I doubt however that the T-90's 125mm 2A46M-5 smooth bore gun will take out the Challenger. It is a lower velocity gun than the Challenger's which has implications for accuracy and penetration.

I personally doubt the T-90 can penetrate the Challenger's armour. Bare in mind the T-90 is just an upgraded T-72 which the Challenger and Abrahms slaughtered in Desert Storm. I have read accounts of M-1 Abrahms struck by 125mm APFSDS warheads which would not penetrate. The Challenger is now improved with reactive armour on top of it's Cobham Mk.2 armour.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by sy.gunson]

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Scuse me you're quite right about the Refleks AT-11 and T-80 gun. The same missile/gun also fits the T-90.

I doubt however that the T-90's 125mm 2A46M-5 smooth bore gun will take out the Challenger. It is a lower velocity gun than the Challenger's which has implications for accuracy and penetration.

I personally doubt the T-90 can penetrate the Challenger's armour. Bare in mind the T-90 is just an upgraded T-72 which the Challenger and Abrahms slaughtered in Desert Storm. I have read accounts of M-1 Abrahms struck by 125mm APFSDS warheads which would not penetrate. The Challenger is now improved with reactive armour on top of it's Cobham Mk.2 armour.

[edit on 3-5-2007 by sy.gunson]

I personally doubt the T-90 can penetrate the Challenger's armour. Bare in mind the T-90 is just an upgraded T-72 which the Challenger and Abrahms slaughtered in Desert Storm

correction , the tanks that Challenger and M1A2 slaughtered were monkey models that had no ERA at ALL ...

Monkey model was the unofficial designation given by the Soviet Military to versions military equipment (armored vehicles, airplanes, missiles) of significantly inferior capability to the original designs and intended only for export
en.wikipedia.org...

The term was popularized in the West by Viktor Suvorov, in Inside the Soviet Army. Suvorov states that the simplified monkey model was designed for massive production in wartime, to replace front-line stocks if a war should last for several weeks. In peacetime, Soviet industry gained experience building both standard and monkey-model variants, the latter being for sale to "to the 'brothers' and 'friends' of the USSR as the very latest equipment available". He also cites the benefit of disinformation when an exported monkey model fell into the hands of Western intelligence, who "naturally gained a completely false impression of the true combat capabilities of the BMP-1 and of Soviet tanks" (Suvorov 1982:215).
en.wikipedia.org...

more on iraqi monkey model t-72 's

A good example of this is the dismal performance of Iraqi T-72 models during the Gulf War and the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. Iraqi T-72 failed to destroy a single M1 tank. On the other hand experts believe that the T-72's 125 mm 2A46 main gun is capable of destroying any modern main battle tank in the world today. This discrepancy can be explained by the fact that the Iraqi operated a mix of monkey models and their own locally produced version, the Lion of Babylon tank, and used substandard ammunition (it has been claimed that in some cases even training ammunition was used) for their guns.

According to Sewell (1998), Russian T-72s are built of superior materials than the eight export models, and T-72A tanks in Chechnya were more survivable than the T-72M and T-72M1 tanks which were easily destroyed by modern US and UK tanks in Iraq.
en.wikipedia.org...

on iraqi T-72 :

I have read accounts of M-1 Abrahms struck by 125mm APFSDS warheads which would not penetrate. The Challenger is now improved with reactive armour on top of it's Cobham Mk.2 armour.

struck by what ??? do you know those rounds were steel rounds that nato and warsaw pact stopped using in the 1970's

In the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi tank units were heavily defeated, although this might have more to do with the poor training and full air supremacy than with any deficiencies of the T-72 itself. Furthermore, while facing the most modern Western tanks, the versions the Iraqi army fielded were out of date at the time. The Iraqi T-72s were downgraded export versions that had not been significantly upgraded over time and were firing inferior ammunition (often with steel penetrators and half-charges of propellant).
en.wikipedia.org...

and yes iraqi t-72 was called the lion of babylon :

The Lion of Babylon tank (Asad Babil) was an Iraqi-built version of the Soviet T-72 MBT (main battle tank), assembled in a factory established in the 1980s near Taji, north of Baghdad.
en.wikipedia.org...

The Asad Babil was generally credited as being the most common tank in Iraqi service during the Gulf War (1990-91), but that honor goes, in fact, to the Type 69, produced in China but widely refitted by the Iraqis. Only Republican Guard divisions were equipped with Iraqi-built T-72s.

Much to the distress of Russian armaments designers, many of the failings of the Iraqi armies were blamed upon the original T-72, with little note that the vehicle itself was an Iraqi copy of an older export model, and nowhere near its up-to-date Soviet counterpart in capability.

However, it is worth to remember that the basic purpose of the Iraqi tank force was to act as a deterrent against Iraq's neighbours, not to engage US armored divisions in face to face combat. The Iraqi Government's miscalculations led to the latter scenario
en.wikipedia.org...

the soviets used k-5 ERA on their T-72 after 1985 , read on capability of ERA:

The effectiveness of Kontakt-5 ERA was confirmed by tests run by the German Bundeswehr and the US Army. The Germans confirmed that in tests, the K-5, mounted on older T-72 tanks, 'shattered' their 120mm DM-53 penetrators, and in the US, Jane's IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness confirmed that "When fitted to T-72 tanks, the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which were among the most formidable tank gun projectiles at the time." This is of course, provided that the round strikes the ERA, which only covers 60% of the frontal aspect of the T-72 series tank mounted with it
en.wikipedia.org...

the west is lacking in creating heavy ERA like k-5

I personally doubt the T-90 can penetrate the Challenger's armour

a top attack by the refleks missile is enough to destroy challenger , unless the challenger in future will have active protection system like trophy or Arena or israeli iron fist to defend against missile attacks

[edit on 3-5-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 3-5-2007 by vK_man]

Yes you're right the Challenger does lack a laser detection system necessary to deploy a smoke screen required to confuse a laser guided munition. Such a system could and probably would be fitted in anticipation of a major tank on tank battle

Re the armour issues however, here's the facts:

Challenger 2 has 960mm of mk3 Chobham frontal armour. The Challenger 2 also has a Rafael ERA kit on top of the frontal armour which adds a further 200mmRHA. ERA kits are available for the Challenger 2's turret top.

Reflecks can only penetrate 700mm of armour behind ERA.

The T-90 has a frontal armour of 780mmRHA and the Kontakt-5 EDZ adds another 250mmRHA for a total of 1030mmRHA.

Originally posted by sy.gunson
Yes you're right the Challenger does lack a laser detection system necessary to deploy a smoke screen required to confuse a laser guided munition. Such a system could and probably would be fitted in anticipation of a major tank on tank battle

Re the armour issues however, here's the facts:

Challenger 2 has 960mm of mk3 Chobham frontal armour. The Challenger 2 also has a Rafael ERA kit on top of the frontal armour which adds a further 200mmRHA. ERA kits are available for the Challenger 2's turret top.

Reflecks can only penetrate 700mm of armour behind ERA.

The T-90 has a frontal armour of 780mmRHA and the Kontakt-5 EDZ adds another 250mmRHA for a total of 1030mmRHA.

Reflecks can only penetrate 700mm of armour behind ERA.

in 2006 , a upgrade was made so there has been a significant increase in refleks pentration to 900 mm

The T-90M and the T-90 Bhishma variants can fire the 9M119M Reflex missile, which has semi-automatic laser beam-riding guidance and a hollow-charge HEAT warhead. The missile has an effective range of 100 m to 5000 m, and takes 17.5 seconds to reach maximum range. It can penetrate 900 mm of steel armour,
en.wikipedia.org...

the Kontakt-5 EDZ adds another 250mmRHA for a total of 1030mmRHA.

some sources even say 300-350 mm for k-5 ERA

Yes you're right the Challenger does lack a laser detection system necessary to deploy a smoke screen required to confuse a laser guided munition. Such a system could and probably would be fitted in anticipation of a major tank on tank battle

that sort of system is passive protection like shtora jammers ,

there are active systems also that shoot down RPG's and missiles read:
examples:

The Arena Active Protection System (APS) is an active countermeasure system developed at Russia's Kolomna-based Engineering Design Bureau to protect armoured fighting vehicles from shaped-charge projectiles. It uses a millimeter-wavelength doppler radar to detect incoming warheads, then fires a defensive projectile, timed to detonate immediately above the target and spray it with a stream of splinters thereby defeating the threat.

The dangerous zone is relatively small, 20-30 meters around the tank, allowing for infantry to operate nearby. When the system is triggered, a warning signal is activated, to warn nearby personnel to keep distance or take cover. Although it should be noted that a HEAT projectile hitting any target create shrapnel flying from the impact zone.

Arena was designed partly in response to vulnerabilities of the Russian tanks, discovered during fighting in Chechnya in the 1990s. It is intended to help protect a tank from light anti-tank weapons and ATGMs, including some of those with top attack warheads.

en.wikipedia.org...

the first active protection system was drozd ...

the most advanced is the iron fist system WHICH CAN EVEN DESTROY KINETIC PENETRATORS READ ,

Iron Fist is an active protection system (APS) for medium and light weight armoured fighting vehicles, developed by Israel Military Industries (IMI). The concept was revealed by IMI in 2006 and is expected to enter Israel Defense Forces tests by mid 2007. The system has already been successfully tested against a wide variety of threats, including advanced kinetic tank caliber armor piercing rounds.
en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 3-5-2007 by vK_man]

Challenger2 is currently the best armoured tank in the world.
It's also getting an upgrade for urban combat with in 18months.
Electric armour is also getting tested to defeat ied's and other shaped charges, it's unknown if this will be included in the upgrade, but it is highly likley as a Challenger2's frontal armour was penetrated by a massive shaped charge ied. It is highly likely if it was any other tank it would have been completely destroyed.
I'd also like to point out that ERA is only effective against shaped charge, but not KE(sabot).

For the record let me point out that the overall RHAe levels of the M1A2 Abrams SEP and Challenger 2 are very similar. Both use different types of armor and have their strengths and weaknesses, it really is inappropriate to call one over the other the "best" when the differences in capability are not so definitive, this applies to most western tanks as well. The only thing which you can point out (other than estimates of classified specs) is combat performance and real world experience. ... I think you'll find that in these categories only a select few shine...

[edit on 3-5-2007 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by SKUNK2
Electric armour is also getting tested to defeat ied's and other shaped charges, it's unknown if this will be included in the upgrade, but it is highly likley as a Challenger2's frontal armour was penetrated by a massive shaped charge ied. It is highly likely if it was any other tank it would have been completely destroyed.

In the incident you are referring to the frontal armour was not penetrated, it was the underside of the tank that was hit by the IED. No IED has ever penetrated the front (or side or rear) armour of the Challenger 2 MBT.

This topic is currently being discussed here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by SKUNK2
Challenger2 is currently the best armoured tank in the world.
It's also getting an upgrade for urban combat with in 18months.
Electric armour is also getting tested to defeat ied's and other shaped charges, it's unknown if this will be included in the upgrade, but it is highly likley as a Challenger2's frontal armour was penetrated by a massive shaped charge ied. It is highly likely if it was any other tank it would have been completely destroyed.
I'd also like to point out that ERA is only effective against shaped charge, but not KE(sabot).

I'd also like to point out that ERA is only effective against shaped charge, but not KE(sabot).

incorrect , heavy ERA like k-5 developed by USSR is effective against KE
read :

Introduced on the T-80U tank in 1985, Kontakt-5 is made up of "bricks" of explosive sandwiched between two metal plates. The plates are arranged in such a way as to move sideways rapidly when the explosive detonates. This will force an incoming KE-penetrator or shaped charge jet to cut through more armour than the thickness of the plating itself, since "new" plating is constantly fed into the penetrating body. A KE-penetrator will also be subjected to powerful sideways forces, which might be large enough to cut the rod into two or more pieces. This will significantly reduce the penetrating capabilities of the penetrator, since the penetrating force will be dissipated over a larger volume of armour.

The effectiveness of Kontakt-5 ERA was confirmed by tests run by the German Bundeswehr and the US Army. The Germans confirmed that in tests, the K-5, mounted on older T-72 tanks, 'shattered' their 120mm DM-53 penetrators, and in the US, Jane's IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness confirmed that "When fitted to T-72 tanks, the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which were among the most formidable tank gun projectiles at the time." This is of course, provided that the round strikes the ERA, which only covers 60% of the frontal aspect of the T-72 series tank mounted with it.

en.wikipedia.org...

i already had posted this before also and before blurting out next time , read the p[ost and sources i have given

Originally posted by vK_man
i already had posted this before also and before blurting out next time , read the p[ost and sources i have given

And I suggest to you that you read up on the M829E3 and MRM-KE round, both of which were developed in part to counter the proliferation of ERA. Both rounds have significant improvement incorporated in order to effectively deal with such armor.

[edit on 4-5-2007 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by vK_man
i already had posted this before also and before blurting out next time , read the p[ost and sources i have given

And I suggest to you that you read up on the M829E3 and MRM-KE round, both of which were developed in part to counter the proliferation of ERA. Both rounds have significant improvement incorporated in order to effectively deal with such armor.

[edit on 4-5-2007 by WestPoint23]

And I suggest to you that you read up on the M829E3 and

m829E3, okay for that , for that russians already have developed relikt -5 which is twice as effective as k-5 heavy ERA counter the m829e3 so much for the m829e3 arguement,

Newer KE penetrators like the US M829A2 and now M829A3, have been improved to defeat the armor design of Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well; see T-84 and T-90) . The M829A2 was the immediate response, developed in part to take on the new armor bricks. The M829A3 is a further improvement of this as well and designed to fight future armor protection methods. As a response to M829A3 russian army produced new type of ERA, Relikt, most modern russian ERA, which is claimed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5.

en.wikipedia.org...

Relikt ERA is quite different from Konract-5 ERA. It uses a new type of ERA tile (not the standard 4S22), which is much more effective against APFSDS. Besides, it is made of independant modules which can be easily removed or changed when damaged or in the process of vehicle upgrading. As for the shaped-charge jet distruction capabilities, Relikt ERA is as efficient as Kontakt-5 and other known ERA types.

T-72BM (T-72B "Rogatka") - First shown at the 2006 Russian Arms Expo, it is an upgraded T-72B fitted with new fire control system including a gunner's thermal sight, "Nakidka" camouflage kit, new 125mm 2A46M-5 main gun with muzzle reference system, V-92S2 1,000hp diesel engine and new Relikt 3rd generation explosive reactive armour which is claimed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5.
en.wikipedia.org...

MRM-KE round

this is a hypersonic rocket solid tungsten kinetic penetrator right that has a speed of 1,700m/sec ????

for this , currently russians have developed nothing to counter this and is meant to be deployed by 2009-10

anyways ,

in part to counter the proliferation of ERA

proliferation ???? only light ERA has been proliferated...
some nations use heavy ERA like k-5 , those are russia ,india(develop by DRDO by using the technical soln of k-5 and help from russia) , china, pakistan(got the tech via china) and ukraine ,poland (used k-5 for pt-91)




[edit on 4-5-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 4-5-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 4-5-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 4-5-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 4-5-2007 by vK_man]

It'd be good to remember that you should not base the .. duration of a tank's in-combat life.. purely through armour. After-all, even if the absurdly incompetant commander where to face tanks face-on, thereby hitting only the tiled front and side-compartments, there's many more systems still to think about.

Further, RA does have its flaws. For one: Most tank commanders simply recommend striking at tiles wherever they are placed at the joints. It's remarkably easy to dismember a tank through its own explosive armour, as was referenced by U.S. tank commanders in another thread.

The real question, is the superior active defense. I'd think the best way to get hit, it to not be hit at all.
[However, despite Israeli claims, and our own assumptions of them, to think Iron Fist could decapitate a modern SABOT round from the Abrams would be laughable at best. Further, generalizations such as 'twice as effective' mean very little, especially when the referenced armour, as admitted, bears little resemblance to its former-generation. This means that the characteristics are different. It's not simply, 'Tank Armour +5!'.]

Cheers.

I am going to throw in another version of the challenger 2.

The challenger 2 E this is a pimped up version of the challenger 2.

I saw one once but never had the privilage to use it.

See how much info you can find on this little baby.

I will tell you a few things driver has his own machine gun lol! Reverse camera's and thermal imaging system.

Those are to name a few, have a look see if you can find any info on this gem.

The challenger 2 uses a hunter killer system. Whilst the gunner is engaging one target the commander is already on the next he then flick's a switch and the gunner is layed onto the next target instantly! the commander then looks for the next target and so on.




[edit on 4-5-2007 by h3akalee]

"Hunter killer" is not unique. Abrams has had it for years now.

Also correct me if I'm wrong about this:

The Abrams has a very unique armor configuration. Note, this is frontal only.

First line of defense: High quality ERA. Its not Kaktus, but its good.
Second line of defense: High quality Chobbham. Its not dorchester, but its good.
Third line of defense: Ultra dense DU plates. These are unique to the Abrams. DU is one of the most impervious materials know to man.
Last line of defense: Kevlar spall shield. Probably not going to stop a penetrator but it renders HESH effectively useless.