Tanks/Vehicles T95E1 Medium Tank

[SteelWings55 752]

The T95 Medium Tank  Series

 

"The T95 was a series of prototype tanks from the mid-1950s and early 1960s. It incorporated many high-tech features that appeared in later vehicles. Among these innovations was siliceous-cored armor, a precursor to modern composite armors. The T95 also featured the T53 OPTAR rangefinder mounted on the right track, which used an intense beam of IR light to calculate range - but it was not a laser rangefinder like those on modern vehicles and was seriously effected by mist and rain. The intended turret was to be armed with the 90mm gun T208, which was a smoothbore weapon firing APFSDS rounds and was mounted rigidly in the turret."

 

T95E1 tank with the T208 Smoothbore hypervelocity gun

 

"There were a number of different prototypes made during the development cycle with several combinations of turret and hull. Those with the normal T54E2 turret predominated as the turret was in production for the M48 series and could easily be mounted on the different hulls for testing."

 

Produced variants :

[spoiler]

The vehicles produced were as follows;

• 9B1043: T95 1st pilot, sent to APG, later converted to a T95E8 - chassis no. 4
  9B1044: T95 2nd pilot, sent to Knox, later converted to a T95E8 - chassis no 7
  9B1045: T95 3rd pilot, as four vanilla T95s were built - chassis no 8
  9B1046: T95 4th pilot, Retained at Detroit, later fitted with variable height suspension and Integrated Fighting Compartment turret - chassis no 9
  9B1047: T95E1 pilot, sent to APG, later fitted with M48A2 turret - chassis no. 5
  9B1048: T95E2 1st pilot with M48 turret, sent to APG, later converted to a T95E5 - chassis no. 1 9B1049: T95E2 2nd pilot with M48 turret, sent to Knox - chassis no. 3 9B1050: T95E3 1st pilot, sent to Yuma, later converted to a T95E8 and fitted with a variable height suspension, now range target at Camp Grayling, MI? - chassis no. 2
  9B1051: T95E3 2nd pilot, sent to Knox, later converted to a T95E8 and fitted with a variable height suspension and M60E2 turret - chassis no. 6
  9B1052: T95E8, later fitted with an Integrated Fighting Compartment turret armed with a 120mm Delta gun
  9B1053: T95E8
  9B1054: T95E8
  9B1055: T95E8
  9B2027: T118 Combat Engineer Vehicle variant, later fitted with a variable height suspension and M48 turret.
  9B2028: T118 CEV
  9B2029: T118 CEV
  9B2030: T95 built for, but not fitted with AVLB. Later fitted with a friction/hydropneumatic variable height suspension & M48 turret at APG.

[/spoiler]

 

Variants in the series :

[spoiler]

T95 ~ original experimental version with ranging IR light.
T95E1 ~ Fitted with M48E2 turret & disc roadwheels.
T95E1 [Variant 1] ~ Fitted with T95E3 suspension.
T95E2 ~ Fitted with T54E2 turret and 105mm gun.
T95E3 ~ T95 fitted with Friction Hydro-pneumatic Suspension System and 105mm gun.
T95E4 ~ T95 fitted with Solar gas turbine engine.
T95E5 ~ Mock-up with T54E2 turret.
T95E6 ~ Armed with 120mm gun.
T95E7 ~ Mock-up with T54E2 turret.
T95E8 ~ Mock-up with T54E2 turret.
T95E9 ~ Armed with 120mm gun.
T95E10 ~ Mock-up with T54E2 turret.
T95E11 ~ Armed with 120mm gun.
T95E12 ~ Armed with 120mm gun.
T95E13 ~ Armed with 152mm gun.
T95 Model 1966 ~ Fitted with controlled suspension & M60 cupola.
T95 Model 1967 ~ Fitted with variable height suspension & M60E2 turret.

[/spoiler]

 

The T95 series of tanks were started because of the ever increasing need to make the tanks better armored , with better firepower but it in the same time cost effective to field , and provided good crew protection.

 

A bit more on the history of the series :

[spoiler]

https://books.google.hr/books?id=fQ7UcdtVp9UC&pg=PA308&lpg=PA308&dq=T95+medium+tank&source=bl&ots=CQiBANPHFv&sig=hHCVB5yuAs9np63-7518bVbdrlY&hl=hr&sa=X&ei=LpmtVKikBMX6UKXEgKAC&ved=0CIABEOgBMAw#v=onepage&q=T95%20medium%20tank&f=false

 

Tho a french site , did google translate it , and the data for the gun matches the other source , : http://monindependancefinanciere.com/lenciclopedie/seccion-t/t95-medium-tank.php

[/spoiler]

 

More sources :

[spoiler]

http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-tango/tango-numbers-us/t95_series/t95-series.html

http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/pics/t95.html

http://librarum.org/book/30764/303

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T95_Medium_Tank

http://www.com-central.net/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=102119

[/spoiler]

 

 

 

The tank schematic + the armor layout

 

 

So that is for the look of the tank , now to the characteristics :

 

The tank first featured a X-shape 12 cylinder engine , which was later abandoned due to difficulties and unsatisfactory HP output , in favor of a AOI-1195 8 cyl. gasoline engine with an output of 550 hp , giving the tank a maximum speed of 56 km/h . The tank itself weighed around 38.1 to 40 tonnes.

 

Suspension is consisted of five sets of double road wheels with torsion bars . The first and last road wheels are supported by hydraulic shock absorbers . Caterpillar treads , with rubber bushed pins , and the width of the track were either 610mm or 533mm .

 

For armor i was only able to find the effective thickness since it is silica embedded armor  , so its not = RHA .... Hunnicutt "History of the American Main battle Tank Vol.2 Abrams , pages 44 thru 46.

The only real info i found on the armor is that the effective armor of the upper front plate which stands " 4.4inches angled at 60 degrees which equates to around 265mm of effective armor on the upper front plate.

 

The rest seems to be on wiki and while as a source its not reliable , its all i have at the moment so..... :

 

"The majority of the hull is welded, but the front is a single massive casting. The upper part of the forward armor, or glacis, has a thickness of 95 mm and is at an angle of 65 degrees from vertical. The thickness of the roof and floor of the hull around the driver's compartment is 51 and 19 mm respectively; the thicknesses of said areas are 25 and 13 mm, respectively, around the fighting and engine compartments. The thickness of the main side plates vary from 102 mm up front down to 32 mm around the engine.

The cast turret has a ring diameter of 85 inches (the same as the M48). The frontal turret armor is 178 mm, and the sides are 78 mm. The shape of the turret is elongated compared to the M48."

 

The gun was the T208 Smoothbore hypervelocity gun which fired APFSDS-T  (T320 Shot ) ammunition at 1570 m/s and was capable of going thru 127mm of armor angled at 60 degrees at  2000 yards ( 1828 meters ) . The complete shell weighed in at 21.8kg while the tungsten core penetrator with a diameter of 37mm weighed in at 5kg .

 

Shoutout @ Whelmy for providing additional gun performance characteristics :

 

More info on the gun : http://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/196801-some-interesting-us-guns/#entry3778960 , http://librarum.org/book/30764/303

 

What do you think guys ? Should go very nice against the Leopard and T62... when they come ;)

Edited June 1, 2015 by SteelWings55

[Smin1080p 60,444]

Open for discussion  :salute:

[SteelWings55 752]

Sorry for the poll-only thingy , didnt pay attention to it .... so a good addition to fight alongside the M60 against the 62 and Leo ?

[Abgeschossene 10,084]

But.. but.. it's so... uugggllyyy..

 

Meh, better than M60A1 in looks. So what the hell? gib.

 

dat armor tho.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Abgeschossene

[SteelWings55 752]

Some more pics of the T208 90mm gun compared to the T123E1 or more commonly known as the M58 , and some others :

(Second gun on the left)

Edited January 8, 2015 by SteelWings55

[SuperTechmarine 1,575]

It looks like a fine addition...Eventually. Plenty of data, lots of produced pilots, realistically feasible in the game. I'm all for it, but the M60A1 should have priority. It shouldn't be game-breaking if it's tiered high enough (T-62 or T-64).

Edited January 8, 2015 by SuperTechmarine

[Platnumsniper 423]

Just No

[SteelWings55 752]

Just No

 

Care to explain ?

[Captain_Puppies 37]

I don't see how people can vote no for this. Do they not realize that if something like this is noy added then the Americans are going to get decimated? The Germans will have the Leopard 1 and Gaijin has already admitted to be adding in the t-62 for Russia. If America doesn't get this then they will need a lot of lube for the xxx rap that will happen to them. This would be an effective counter to the T-62.

Major +1 from me

Edited January 10, 2015 by sickpuppiesftw

[swedeonthemoose 12,809]

Löl homosteel ^^  

 

on a serious note if the leo1 and t62 is on the table to be added i Think this thing would fit it and wouldnt couse that much imbalance

[SuperTechmarine 1,575]

I don't see how people can vote no for this. Do they not realize that if something like this is added then the Americans are going to get decimated? The Germans will have the Leopard 1 and Gaijin has already admitted to be adding in the t-62 for Russia. If America doesn't get this then they will need a lot of lube for the xxx rap that will happen to them. This would be an effective counter to the T-62.

Major +1 from me

 

M60A1, mate.

[SteelWings55 752]

Löl homosteel ^^  

 

on a serious note if the leo1 and t62 is on the table to be added i Think this thing would fit it and wouldnt couse that much imbalance

 

I think the 2 major points would be the gun and the armor ..... Tough nut from the front since the UFP is 4.4 inches at 65 deg from vertical ( 265mm of effective armor ) turret is 178 on the front sides are 78 , and the hull sides arent bad for a medium tank either ... 102 that thins to around 38 near the engine ...

 

Tho the gun ..... 127mm pen at 60 deg at 2k yards and thats the T320 ( APFSDS-T )

 

And it isnt a slouch either , at 56 km/h , which for a 40 t tank isnt bad

Edited January 9, 2015 by SteelWings55

[SteelWings55 752]

Edited January 10, 2015 by SteelWings55

[Captain_Puppies 37]

M60A1, mate.

I'm all for the M60. I just think this should be added as well. IMO any tanks and prototypes that had very little to no problems should be added.

[Galen503 547]

I'd start to argue no and yes but the reality is this game moves so slow who really cares about all these suggestions. At the current rate of development I am all for saying yes to every suggestion. But only after they add production vehicles that would just as likely fill the role this tank is being suggested for. American TDs, American Heavy T29 or Super Pershing, British Tanks, Russian T10 and T62, German Leopard 1, American M48s, M60s (by then it is 2027) and then sure this tank. 

[ronan0 40]

M48/60 needs IMO to be added first but why not?

[SteelWings55 752]

I'd start to argue no and yes but the reality is this game moves so slow who really cares about all these suggestions. At the current rate of development I am all for saying yes to every suggestion. But only after they add production vehicles that would just as likely fill the role this tank is being suggested for. American TDs, American Heavy T29 or Super Pershing, British Tanks, Russian T10 and T62, German Leopard 1, American M48s, M60s (by then it is 2027) and then sure this tank. 

 

Well , having it suggested , just so it is there is fine by me . Having it in game would be cool , but , like you said , tanks that saw mass production and are on the tech tree have the privilege , and this thing is neither so .... 2020 i presume :Ps

[EliteMusic 22]

How this is possible that more ppl are voting on 'NO'?

Every tank is needed to bring some choose between them.

I dislike german Tier I and II because of grinding the same tank...

It wasn't so big difference between pz III A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K blah blah blah. You know what I'm saying?

Change of a letter its not something worth grind for, we need even paper tanks that bring something fresh and cause wave of new players.

Maybe devs said "never" to paper tanks, but "never" in any game means "not yet", "later".

I want that tank in US tree :) The more the better :)

[ronan0 40]

How this is possible that more ppl are voting on 'NO'?
Every tank is needed to bring some choose between them.
I dislike german Tier I and II because of grinding the same tank...
It wasn't so big difference between pz III A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K blah blah blah. You know what I'm saying?
Change of a letter its not something worth grind for, we need even paper tanks that bring something fresh and cause wave of new players.
Maybe devs said "never" to paper tanks, but "never" in any game means "not yet", "later".
I want that tank in US tree :) The more the better :)

No we don't actually need every blueprint/project/prototype tank IG. Some proto ( as the T95E1) may be cool to have as a high tier premium later, but there is still TONS of combat used tanks that need to be add IG before this one. If you want an unhistorical game with wafflepanzer and others paper projects WoT is pretty cool in this way.

And if their is not many difference between all variants of the pzIII, let's make a match: you take the earliest one, and I take the latest one. It should be fair if their is not a lot of differences, isn't it?

[MillyTealy 4,141]

Lets wait and see which proper 60s tanks we gonna get first and how they gonna fare against each other, before we get into adding prototypes.

 

I mean, don't get me wrong, I think this suggestion is neat and good, but I would put this kind of ideas to ice until the game adds the vehicles of the level that have actually served.

 

Once we get there, this might be a pretty solid match for T-62A, but I we gonna see.

Edited January 20, 2015 by TealMillan

[EliteMusic 22]

No we don't actually need every blueprint/project/prototype tank IG. Some proto ( as the T95E1) may be cool to have as a high tier premium later, but there is still TONS of combat used tanks that need to be add IG before this one. If you want an unhistorical game with wafflepanzer and others paper projects WoT is pretty cool in this way.

And if their is not many difference between all variants of the pzIII, let's make a match: you take the earliest one, and I take the latest one. It should be fair if their is not a lot of differences, isn't it?

Ofc I don't have any chances, but I mean that if I grind for new tank its gotta be a whole new tank, not other version of the same tank with different gun and 20mm extra armor, and I dont like WoT, I've been playing it since 2012 i believe and War Thunder is better for me, but I want more tonks.

[ronan0 40]

Ofc I don't have any chances, but I mean that if I grind for new tank its gotta be a whole new tank, not other version of the same tank with different gun and 20mm extra armor, and I dont like WoT, I've been playing it since 2012 i believe and War Thunder is better for me, but I want more tonks.

Yeah I can understand this feeling to play X times the same tanks, but there is still some major differences between the earliest one and the latest one, and agreed, we need moar tonks IG, but what I wanted to say is that prototype like t95 should have a low priority when we are still missing a lot of mass produced and combat tested tanks.

Sorry for my first message thought, was a bit rude.

[EliteMusic 22]

No, it wasnt :) Only I was rude, talking what I want over what community wants, sorry bout that :) I hope we all get tanks we want and you are right, its only prototype xD It can wait, I'll be playing War Thunder anyway cuz this is a lot of fun :) I want this tank, but I want M18 Hellcat over that and it saw II Word War :)

[Galen503 547]

 

How this is possible that more ppl are voting on 'NO'?

Every tank is needed to bring some choose between them.

I dislike german Tier I and II because of grinding the same tank...

It wasn't so big difference between pz III A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K blah blah blah. You know what I'm saying?

Change of a letter its not something worth grind for, we need even paper tanks that bring something fresh and cause wave of new players.

Maybe devs said "never" to paper tanks, but "never" in any game means "not yet", "later".

I want that tank in US tree :) The more the better :)

 

I understand what you are saying and though I completely oppose it I actually respect your reasoning. Here is mine. I have nearly every tank in game (no isu 152 or ZSU 57 and some premiums). Honestly I don't sit around wishing for more tanks to grind. I like that I fight in battles that could have plausibly happened. I'm not stuck in some never ending grind for that next miracle tank that is owning me every game. I dare say I am content. That is the lure of this game. I could play another game where I get to play everything under the sun. Yes the physics are different and so on but thats not my point. My point is all of these not really tank, tanks only marginalize the actual tanks. I want to play a panther. as soon as they add 5 other tanks that never really existed they slowly but surely marginalize the panther. No longer will I ever play a T34/85 vs Panther vs M26/M4a3e8. I am sorry but that makes me and many others not want to play.

 

But I understand what you are saying it is just a fundamental disagreement in what we are playing the game for. Your right its up to the devs to decide but I am only here because of what we were promised. If they are going to bring in the paper army than I may as well just go play another game where I already have all of the stupid nonsense tanks. Why wait around here. That game already exists.  

[EliteMusic 22]

I understand what you are saying and though I completely oppose it I actually respect your reasoning. Here is mine. I have nearly every tank in game (no isu 152 or ZSU 57 and some premiums). Honestly I don't sit around wishing for more tanks to grind. I like that I fight in battles that could have plausibly happened. I'm not stuck in some never ending grind for that next miracle tank that is owning me every game. I dare say I am content. That is the lure of this game. I could play another game where I get to play everything under the sun. Yes the physics are different and so on but thats not my point. My point is all of these not really tank, tanks only marginalize the actual tanks. I want to play a panther. as soon as they add 5 other tanks that never really existed they slowly but surely marginalize the panther. No longer will I ever play a T34/85 vs Panther vs M26/M4a3e8. I am sorry but that makes me and many others not want to play.

 

But I understand what you are saying it is just a fundamental disagreement in what we are playing the game for. Your right its up to the devs to decide but I am only here because of what we were promised. If they are going to bring in the paper army than I may as well just go play another game where I already have all of the stupid nonsense tanks. Why wait around here. That game already exists.  

I also have near every tank in the game :) 
Yes, WoT exists long time, with nonsense tanks, and so what, I said before I was playing since 2012 and I dont like it anymore. 
And if You want game balanced You'll need more tanks, cuz what we have now in germany is not balanced well. 
Yes, tanks are fine, but Soviet and US tanks just destroy them. 
Dont get me wrong, but its up to you if you stop play this game or not, there be some players on your place. 
And paper tanks can also help with getting new players, dont you think? 
And now think about it, will Gaijin cry for one player or will be happy from 100 new? 
Yes its all about new cash potential, not what they promissed. But enough, cuz it'll start flame war wich I dont mean. 
Sorry if I offended you in any way :)