Ok, there’s a couple of things that really caught my eye – again – when scanning trough these posts. So I comment some of the discussed topics now… >>By searching on the web you can't make the conclusion that the T-90 is the best in the world witch i doubt. That might well be the case, but searching on the web don’t actually make anyone a pro in this area. Information generally available are provided by nationalist sources (producers, users etc.) and are overview style stuff, not going really into the business. Web is usefull, but full of half-truths, errors, wrong or biased conclusions and so on…so be careful with it. >>Several research company's have already proven that the Leopard2A6 is the best all-round tank available till now and that the M1A2 takes second place and the Type 90 (Japan) takes 3th so don't try to make your own statement about what is the best tank in the world! Several research companies? Ok, well they must know…pretty absurd phrase. >>The other error I see is that people tend to forget older marks of very successful tanks that are still in service. I would take a Merkava 3 or an M1A1 over a platoon of T-80 or T-90 any day of the week. I would too…except on that day when I’m fired with modern ATGM, then I would take one T90 over a platoon of M1A1’s or Merkava 3…oh yes and the day when I had to overrun some infantry positions…or the day when I’ve got to make my way through that marsh forest…oh well, should it always be so simple… >>No they aren't T-95 is called Black Eagle Did you get that from the internet too? Well, you must know. What is the Patton called my friend? Isn’t it the M1? Those two got more to do with each other than T95 and Black Eagle, giving a little hint… With Merkava discussion >>Not to mention the ability to carry 8 soldiers… BMP1 had also ability to carry 8 soldiers and had a main gun capable of penetrating even frontal armour of MBT’s back then. But still they don’t seem to be used in a same way? Think a little while, why? DU ammo, not actually American wonder weapon or patent anyhow, as many other countries use DU ammunition (Russians, for example, built first 125mm DU rounds over decade ago). Engine power is obviously important factor in tank’s maneuverability. Power-to-weight ratio tells much more about the real mobility, though. But that’s not all, not at all. PtW-ratio gives a good clue about what approximate class a certain vehicle would fall to with it’s mobility, but if a good survey is about to be made, there’s dozens of more general and equipment unique points affecting very much on the overall result. It’s well possible that seemingly slightly worse tank in mobility (worse PtW-ratio) could beat it’s seemingly better contestor hands down in real mobility.

The Black Eagle is based off a T-80 design. The T-95 is a conceptual design which may or may not have been produced. Black Eagle: http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/armor.vif2.ru/Tanks/ T-95: http://www.ciar.org/ttk/mbt/armor.vif2.ru/Tanks/

Isn't the M1 called Abrams? I don't know what you mean,but T-95 is called Black Eagle by..... well i think every country because little to no information is known about this ''tank'' Ive heard that the Black Eagle is a T-80U version but thats not the case,T-95 is called Black Eagle the only thing ive READ about it on the WEB is that it has no crew in the turret,commander is next to the driver and gunner is right behind the driver. What is the minimum weight if you want to call a tank a MBT. The leclerc is a MBT right? (Main Battle Tank) It isn't a medium tank,i think the minimum weight is 50 Tons and its not allowed to go over a max weight of 70Ton I don't think any tank is getting near this weight except the Leopard2S (Swedisch tank(strv122?))and the Leopard2A6EX- EX>Export?...NO EX is just a prototype leopard,the've put all the things on it that a tank can handle. Ive READ on the WEB to that the M1A2SEP is slightly more advanced in its FC system than the Leopard2A6 BUT the Leopard2A6EX is more advanced than the SEP version,its strainge that they haven't put the Leopard2S (strv122) in the top 10 because this tank has almost all the things the Leopard2A6EX has,this (Leopard2S) is the most advanced tank in the world I THINK because i don't know for sure. People that are in the army are saying it is.

The Black Eagle is the T-80UM2. It is based of it's chasis with heavy modification to the turret and autoloader, there are a few pictures of it. There is significantly more info about this tank then the T-95 The T-95 is a main battle tank with a unmanned turret with a 152mm smoothbore gun. There are no pictures of this tank and only a few conceptual drawings.

>>I would too…except on that day when I’m fired with modern ATGM, then I would take one T90 over a platoon of M1A1’s or Merkava 3…<< Well, to each their own. Personally, given the choice between a second rate tank with inferior passive armor, inferior optics, a pop-top carousel ammunition system guaranteeing my death if my add on ERA and active defense system don't stop the missile versus a modern western tank with superior passive armor, superior survivability features, superior sensors to detect the enemy with, superior communications gear, etc etc etc., I'll still take the western tank in favor of the T-80 or T-90 every time. >>oh yes and the day when I had to overrun some infantry positions…or the day when I’ve got to make my way through that marsh forest…oh well, should it always be so simple…<< And what's the comparative ground pressure of a T-90 and an M1 series tank?

>>What is the minimum weight if you want to call a tank a MBT. The leclerc is a MBT right? (Main Battle Tank) It isn't a medium tank,i think the minimum weight is 50 Tons and its not allowed to go over a max weight of 70Ton<< Main battle tank, as a term, replaced the idea of seperate medium and heavy tanks, but doesn't really have hard and fast rules for what is or isn't an MBT. Most, if not all, the Soviet tanks were < 50 tons and still get the MBT label. Some people feel (with some justification) that there is some renewed utility in the light/medium/heavy classification scheme, as a 60-69 ton western MBT has rather different capabilities that a 40-50 ton Russian MBT, etc.

hi every armour idols do u still need weight to classfied for a mbt ? i guess no .. due to lesson learn in world war 2 . too many tank press to war front cause many logistics and spare parts problems . so they came out a idea to produce one type of tank for easily relief and logistics operations pervent messy cause by too many operating models .... so the mbt is so call the back bone of every army .due to different tactics and idea of high command and budget cause mbt have different specification for each government

>>I would too…except on that day when I’m fired with modern ATGM, then I would take one T90 over a platoon of M1A1’s or Merkava 3…<< >Well, to each their own. Personally, given the choice between a second rate tank with inferior passive armor, inferior optics, a pop-top carousel ammunition system guaranteeing my death if my add on ERA and active defense system don't stop the missile versus a modern western tank with superior passive armor, superior survivability features, superior sensors to detect the enemy with, superior communications gear, etc etc etc., I'll still take the western tank in favor of the T-80 or T-90 every time.< How vulnerable the Russian tanks are to damage…well I should know it by now after those years. And yes they are. I definitely wouldn’t like to be in a T90 which is penetrated by about anything. And yes, western MBT’s may have better chances (although this isn’t that clear or true in all occasions either) of detecting opposing ATGM’s than soviet ones, which is obviously important if you want to live any longer. But once fired at, what happens. You say that western MBT’s have superior armour to soviet ones. In generally and with direct fire in most occasions yes, with this issue, clearly no. Areas, where ATGM’s are directed against (high angles), are very poorly protected in almost all western MBT’s, only some derivatives of Leopard have taken this issue more seriously into practice recently. Situation ain’t much better with soviet tanks either, but ERA can – in some occasions – grant increased survivability. If we study the penetration of modern ATGM round in three steps, we can properly see what makes russian tanks more immune to ATGM fire (this is among the few surviving points that are clearly in more advanced level with russian than western tanks). First phase is active defense. T-models, properly equipped, have very reasonable chances of defeating incoming missiles before they reach the actual surface of the tank. While M1 for example, is a sitting duck. With modern ATGM accuracy nearing 100%, even more so. In a second phase the penetrator strucks passive armour. I can’t say that ERA+steel-structure of soviet tanks would give good chances against the penetrator, but not less than that of our example M1 either. Even ceramic construction tanks are extremely vulnerable to any at-fire from some angles, yet alone modern ATGM. Third phase is the one where M1 excels. When penetrated with ATGM, M1 crew has better chances to survive than those in Txx. There’s always a chance, that penetration will occur in area, which won’t kill the crew – only put the tank out of action or severely damage it. The chance is there with T-models too, but considerably less so. But anyway, as an infantryman I wouldn’t like to get shot at with rifle even if I’m wearing a high-tech body armour. Bullet can still kill me, and at least affect to my ability to carry on the fight. I’d rather wear no body armour and make sure that no bullet hits my skin at all, if possible. This is true also with tanks. With three modern ATGM’s fired at Txx, the chances are maybe around 50/50 that the vehicle is running unscratched in the field or burn in the field with dead crew. With M1, the chances to are 50/50 that some of the bailed out crew members are running unscratched in the field or the tank burn in the field with a dead crew. Like you said if in soviet tank active defences (and to some degree passive+era) fail, you’re in a one big trouble. In a current western tank, you are in it anyway, any case. >>oh yes and the day when I had to overrun some infantry positions…or the day when I’ve got to make my way through that marsh forest…oh well, should it always be so simple…<< >And what's the comparative ground pressure of a T-90 and an M1 series tank?< Well can’t remember the exact numbers, but anyway in range of some 20-25% in favour of T90 (versus M1A2). But numbers anyhow don’t tell everything.

Its strange that Sweden has a more advanced leopard tha the German and Dutch one,it is a German product so why aren't the German's upgrading there tanks Greece is gonna buy a more modern Leopard than the Dutch and German 1,i think they've already got the new MBT But i have heard that NO other country is gonna get the Rheinmetall 120MM L55 cannon,only Germany and his close ally Netherland have this cannon at the moment

In my opinion the best 10 tanks in the world are in following order: Leopard2 M1A2 Russian T95 Lerclerc Al Khalid MBT 2000 Challenger Merkava T 90 China M1A1 T 72