@barbenH The only exception I can think of is the American T34; the Calliope rocket launcher. As if it isnt confusing enough to have two entirely different T34 vehicles :P
Все страны имели монстров, подобных этому. И все от них отказались. Слишком тяжёлые. Слишком ненадёжные. Слишком дорогие. И всё равно их можно уничтожить, особенно с воздуха.
ИСУ-152 как раз серийная, 46 тонн, отвоевала пол-войны. Чего их сравнивать?)
All countries have a monster like this. And all of them refused. Too heavy. Too unreliable. Too expensive. Still, they can be killed, especially from the air.
ISU-152 is serial, 46 tons, used half of the war. Why comparing them?)
I wonder if that 105 mm gun could've been put on a much lighter platform. That gun would've definitely had the power to destroy even a Tiger tank. A tank equipped with that gun would've been very useful, in specially during the D-Day landing.
@StiviGun1 yes, but the U.S. Army Ordnance department or whatever it was called strongly opposed the development of new guns, clinging to the idea that the 75mm M3 was enough to disable most German tanks.
@FUK4LL Actually, it was the US army's leaderships at that time that opposed this because they didn't want to change their outdated armor doctrine, not the US army ordnance department. The US Army Ordnance Department actually tried to persuade them really hard to accept such guns to be mounted on tanks. But the US Army's leadership wouldn't have it. They didn't believe in tank vs tank combat. That's why the T-20 and T-23 were never accepted and the M26 came in so late in the war.
if you have air superiority, open and wide terraine, medium Tanks and infantry to support it, good ammunition supply and patience (caus i think this SPG isn't very fast)
then i think, this T95 could hit an enemy tank force very hard...
although i think that the loading time must be around one or two minutes and a clever enemy would retreat while its loading after its first shot, call artillery and then surround it with infantry and medium Tanks... ps.: super heavy tanks are inefficient!
@0341MarineInfantry the soviet SPG ISU-152 could be reloaded in theory in about 10 seconds, too but on the battlefield it mostly took nearly a minute to reload
@ThugCologne The 152 was two part ammo, while the T5E1 105mm was a single unit. I reference both ROF from 105mm armed tanks and 105 mm arty. Also the ISU-152 had a very cramped area to reload making the handling of the round and the charge cumbersome and slow.
@0341MarineInfantry Hmm - the ISU-122 and the JS-2 also had problems like this - this wasn't helped b y the fact these WWII vehicles didn't have much room for ammunition; the JS-2 only 28 rounds whilst the ZVEROBOY only 20 rounds while the ISU-122 only 30 rounds...
This is where americans looked toward soviet style armor and created this kick ass tank. This thing has more psychological power then 10 divisions of abrams put together. Just look at the fucking monster.
Well if 95 tons and 68 tons is the same to you than I feel sorry for you. Besides the IS-7 was produced after the war by German engineers from GDR (German Democratic Republic) and by using plans of german artillery entirely. They were meant to be tank destroyers only they didn't see combat cause USA didn't need it when the war was at it's end, it took long time to build. And believe me 13 km/h for such a tank is just enough to ram a T34 look at the size and weight of this thing
For the record, the reason turret free tanks or self propelled guns stopped being produced was because originally a tank had to stop before it could fire it's main armament with any degree of accuracy. When this was the case, having a turret didn't matter much as you could just point the whole vehicle in the general direction of your target and zero in with the gun. Once gyroscopes and firing on the move became the standard, turrets became mandatory.
@KatanaK1D93 Good? What makes this good? Limited obstacle crossing ability due to underpowered engine and too heavy for any portable bridge at the time. Only two of these were ordered and none saw combat. Besides more accuarately this is tank destroyer. So what makes this so great compared to Russian "shit" tanks?
What makes it so great compared to Russian tanks? Simple one shot and any russian tank would be wiped out the face of the earth, one shot from any russian tank to this one and there isn't even a scratch is that enough? Or are you gonna be a little upset with the truth kid and cry about it even more?
@KatanaK1D93 And how do you know that when it never was in combat -_-? That one turns and moves so slowly so how it would even hit anything. How about KV-2 with 152mm howitzer or KV-4 super heavy project what was cancelled. You are born in 93 and you say that Im kid... So sad...
And how do you know that the russian shit would beat it? Need I remind you that T35 was such weak tank that you only needed to throw a molotov cocktail on the back of it and the engine would immiadetly get overheated? The KV4 looked like a fuckin tunafish can. And it would take about million shots for any russian tank to destroy it. you'r older right but age doesn't really count if you have a brain of a 12 year old...and in your case that is sad.
@KatanaK1D93 Well our military expert why didn't they mass produce this masterpiece if it was so awesome as you claim? Those russian shit tanks won the war in the eastern front and thats it and Insulting me like that tells only about you when you can't give any sensible arguments.
Simple it took to much time and money to make these tanks. And USA needed tanks which would be faster built so they sticked with shermans and other US tanks. Besides they started producing it at the end of the war when USA entered Germany so they figured it wouldn't be much of a need. russian tanks only won the eastern front cause there was more of them, and because when germans had to retreat to defend western front they took a lot of the tanks with them.
@KatanaK1D93 "there was more of them" So? USSR had ability to mass produce tons of tanks and that was in key position to victory. Or why didn't nazis massproduce their tanks as much? Because they didn't want to? Who is this military expert who praises this T28/T95?
Germans built less tanks but they were better made and stronger. russians just built a lot of shitty tanks cause they didn't have enough money and good engineers to make good tanks. The key to their victory was like I wrote in the previous comment the retreat of the germans to the western front. Otherwise they wouldn't have a chance against Nazis. Like I wrote up top germans didn't need a lot of tanks they wanted to have less but better tanks and that took even more money.
@KatanaK1D93 There are facts and "facts" and this "if they would have done this and that and not done that" is uselless now. How about if I say that "If Stalin would not have killed his own officers and would have prepared to nazi attack in 1941 nazis would not have had chanse". Does that change something?
No cause obviously even if he didn't kill his officers and prepared for the war Germans would win. the reason? I already gave you germans had better technology and better trained soldiers.
@KatanaK1D93 i said the is-7 was built during the 1940's or early 50's not the t95 plus i thought u meant built in germany u have ur opion i have mine. I'm not fighting over the internet about a real life tank that never actualy passed trails so whatever u can have ur own version of the facts.
@KatanaK1D93 Well Germany didn't win even if they had "superior" technology and soldiers... Not Soviets fault if Hitler thought that war would be over in just months with Blitzkrieg.
@KatanaK1D93 This is going nowhere... Allies won thanks to USSR. "And am I claiming that It was Soviets fault? " Partly yes if you still claim that USSR won in Stalingrad just because of winter...
@KatanaK1D93 the t95 project was canceled due to the american engines blowing up and there was only 3 of them ever produced and they did not pass the trials succesfully. And second of all the comanders hatch only had 43mms of amour so if u hit that spot it also held ammo right beside it. That would blow up the tank. So the goverment sold one for scrap and the last one was lost.
Well that's funny cause it's actually the reason why the KV4 didn't come to production xD.
The t34 was such a weak tank that you only needed a molotov cocktail to beat it you just had to throw it on the back of it and the engine would get overheated or immiadetly blow up. One shot from that tank and even the newest T95 black hawk would be torn too pieces.
@KatanaK1D93 and simply no it would not 1 shot any russian tanks. First the is-7 with almost 300mm of armour cause of the slopings. Second the is-4 with almost 250mm of armour cause of slopings. Third the object704 with 120 or 150 and a sloping of 30-40 degree's therefore making it 230mms learn you're facts before you say to someone else "little upset with the truth kid and cry about it even more?" cause u don't even seem to know what the truth is.
Now I dont know what your'e talking about cause this tank would only crash into any russian tank and the russian tank would be destroyed. Now therefore learn your'e facts but first learn english properly.
@KatanaK1D93 first of all this and the is-7 where the same weight almost and whats the likelyhood of this thing being able to ram something when it only goes 13 km/h moron? Second of all these where only meant for base defense fixed installations it wasn't meant to realy move.
@KatanaK1D93 t34 ok and they traveled in groups it rams one another goes around? and it took 5 months to build 1 of them so it was cancelled unless you're still to stupid to figure out that the us goverment said that it was useless as a tank? and second idk where u got that weight the is-7 ways more than 68 tons and if ur looking at wikipedia for ur answers the final prototype for the is-7 weighed over 80 so umm yeah plus it went close to umm 40-50 km/h i think.
Did I say it rams groups you fuckin idiot? Yeah I mentioned that it took long for them to built it. The government never said it was useless it was the most powerfull tank ever. Not like the russian weak shit T34 which alittle molotov cocktail could destroy, even a sherman was stronger than T 34. And look on every fuckin single sight that has the weights of tanks and you'll see that IS-7 weights 68 tons. Can you manage that or is it too hard for you?
@KatanaK1D93 and where the fuck did u get this horse shit about german enginers designing the is-7. it was built during the 1940's like shit dude and it was built in russia even wikipedia can tell u that
Every single Tank, BTR, Helicopter that russians had was produced by german engineers from GDR, and they were even based on german military designs. And I think Im begininng to conversate with a mentally challanged person cause it's clearly written this tank was built after the war.
@KatanaK1D93 and where the fuck did u get this horse shit about german enginers designing the is-7. it was built during the 1940's like shit dude and it was built in russia even wikipedia can tell u that
It would have been fun to see a duel between a T28 and a german Panzer VIII 'Maus'. But actually the T28 is not a tank at all, it's an assault gun or gun motor carriage.
THAT TANK IS BADASS!!! MORE SLOPED THAN ANY GERMAN ASSAULT GUM I EVER SEEN!!! Ill ask russia to export it to me for serbia to fend off 2nd nazi invasion of serbia!! And NATO WAR MACHINE
t28\95 - ASI (Anti-tank Self-propelled Installation)
Well in any way the super heavy tank!
Hard armor, with powerful arms self-propelled gun Т95 wasn't entered in the concept of armoured arms of Land forces of the USA. So, tanks should have a tower, and at Т95 it wasn't. As a result in June 1946 г the name has been again changed — the car became ASI-Т28. Works have been stopped, in connection with the decision of department of a military policy to stop all works in a class of 100-ton cars.
Wonder how the germans would react when they realize no gun they own (not including artillery or other high-explosive i-hate-you-and-will-annihilate-you guns) will be able to shoot through the front of that thing.
@DuelNexus Yep. The need for such tanks really went away with airplanes and better artillery. and a few decades later they would have been undergunned, underpowered and underarmored.
@DuelNexus The T-28/95 is a motor gun carriage, designed for breeching the fortifications of the Siegfried line. It is not a tank destroyer, nor a tank. It was never produced beyond the two prototypes, one of which was destroyed by fire,(if one wishes to believe that story) and the remaining example is now at the New Armor museum at Ft. Benning Ga. The British built the Tortoise to perform the same mission.
@MultiAREE Because early german tanks were inferior to them. As well as t-34/76 was inferior to Tiger. To kill a single KV they could use tank attacks as false maneuver only to deploy the aa guns.
@MultiAREE I mean saying the German tanks totally ruled everything is wrong. And I added that f.e. the ability of soviet tanks was higher before USSR suffered its defeat in 1941. As well, the quality of German tanks started to decrease when Germany started to lose.
@Kukaaaaa The T28/T95 was originally designated a super heavy tank, but the Army realized that didn't make much sense and redesignated it a self-propelled gun.
@HyperFoxTails first - T28/95 is one tank. second it was made by americans not russians. third - it was suppousednot to kill tanks, its prime targets were bunkers and other concrete fortifications, and fourth - in us army classification it was heavy tank, not tankkiller.
@malypowstaniec44 ok, lets just try the simpliest way - lets look in mazafakin wiki:"Sometimes referred to as a super-heavy tank, the T28 was re-designated as the 105 mm Gun Motor Carriage T95 in 1945 and then renamed a super heavy tank in 1946". may be my english is poor and i can't get meaning of word "re-designated", but i think it's not the same as "re-designed". Only two tanks were built and it was not like one was T28 and the other - T95.
@OgrabliatorKorovanov Sorry for late reply, but "re-designated" would be like this example: Ford decided their new car (named the Panther) is more like a truck, so they "re-designated" it from the Ford Panther 'CAR' to the the Ford Panther 'TRUCK'. Hope this helps.
@OgrabliatorKorovanov "re-designated" means whatever its name was before is now changed.In this case its old name was T28,its new "re-designated" name is T-95 Gun Motor Carriage.So it's simply a change of name.
@OgrabliatorKorovanov your right about the americans , it was theirs , but judging by the length of the cannon it was most certainly a tank killer , even if it was'nt designed to do that. my geuss is it was an answer to the german jagdtiger?....maybe?
@OgrabliatorKorovanov first you're wrong look at tank wiki or just wikipedia it was designed as a TD! and second its targets where base defence.There where only 3 of them made 1 was made with a russian engine the other with a canadian engine and the last one with a american engine. the one with the american engine went up in flames during the testing. second if it was a heavy tank it would have a turret almost any tank that has the gun sticking out of the body is a Td plz learn you're facts lulz
@matthewgroen A rectangular prism with a smaller rectangular prism on top of it and 3 triangle prisms on the back, and sides, as well as 4 tracks, an engine, and a cannon, noob.
@MultiAREE There is 4 types of tanks used between World War II, and now. The light tank, the medium tank, the heavy tank, and the tank destroyer. There are known tanks that had incredible amounts of armor and a very large gun, hence the nick name "super heavy." The T28/T95's are tank destroyers, but so is the M10 Wolverine. It has a rotating turret just like light, medium, and heavies do. These tanks are given the nickname "super heavy" because of there massive armor. Stop learning from WoT.
@MultiAREE I also said "There are known tanks that had incredible amounts of armor and a very large gun, hence the nick name "super heavy." Super heavy isn't a category of tank. It is a nick name that people use for extremely heavily armored tanks... And tank destroyers and tanks are the same in the fact that they have armor, tracks, and a gun... the only difference is that most tank destroyers don't have rotating turrets. Where did you learn about tanks, the back of a cereal box?
@nsp1213 Occasionally I platoon up with my mates which also have tier 6-7 tanks to level up my M5 Stuart, and that Matchmaker has to put me in a battle with loads of T95s, Mauses, Object 704's and E-100. Forget brix, I shat a fuckin house.
Thumbs up if you were familiar with this tank before WoT and know more than these gamer idiots!
Trashcansam123 10 hours ago
Вообще то это не танк а ПТ-САУ
Mishanya423 23 hours ago
who dislike ARE RUSSIANS
borkokid 1 day ago
@borkokid who dislike, has not enough penetration :P
gOtze1337 20 hours ago
How much tanks this weapon destroyed?
SamuraiYamomoto 58 minutes ago
блинчик)))
GREEz611 1 day ago
the T series won the war for the russians , beautiful , practical design, my fav is T39 awesome!!
barbenH 3 days ago
@barbenH American tanks were given T numbers as prototypes. If they were accepted for army use, they got an M number.
Maus5000 3 days ago
@Maus5000 Thanks for that, you learn something every day. ;)
barbenH 3 days ago
@barbenH The only exception I can think of is the American T34; the Calliope rocket launcher. As if it isnt confusing enough to have two entirely different T34 vehicles :P
Maus5000 9 hours ago
The battlefield 1942 theme song is good for this kind of thing.
Raleigh3000 5 days ago
ЧЕРЕПАДЛА
LunarAngelus 1 week ago
"That one went right through"
MrFootballforlife123 1 week ago 2
reminds me of Battlefield. i wonder why?
fallomoko 1 week ago
Кстати... Мощность двигателя всего 410 л.с.?!! Они что, руками её подталкивали, чтоб ехала?) У Т-34 больше...
Speed: 13 km/h. Всё понятно, они как раз почти доехали до Германии, сейчас начнут штурм Берлина.
HomelandProtector 1 week ago
Все страны имели монстров, подобных этому. И все от них отказались. Слишком тяжёлые. Слишком ненадёжные. Слишком дорогие. И всё равно их можно уничтожить, особенно с воздуха.
ИСУ-152 как раз серийная, 46 тонн, отвоевала пол-войны. Чего их сравнивать?)
All countries have a monster like this. And all of them refused. Too heavy. Too unreliable. Too expensive. Still, they can be killed, especially from the air.
ISU-152 is serial, 46 tons, used half of the war. Why comparing them?)
HomelandProtector 1 week ago
the isu 152 just take one round to rip a panther apart, just have to hit first
bingrasm 1 week ago
I wonder if that 105 mm gun could've been put on a much lighter platform. That gun would've definitely had the power to destroy even a Tiger tank. A tank equipped with that gun would've been very useful, in specially during the D-Day landing.
StiviGun1 2 weeks ago
@StiviGun1 yes, but the U.S. Army Ordnance department or whatever it was called strongly opposed the development of new guns, clinging to the idea that the 75mm M3 was enough to disable most German tanks.
FUK4LL 6 days ago
@FUK4LL Actually, it was the US army's leaderships at that time that opposed this because they didn't want to change their outdated armor doctrine, not the US army ordnance department. The US Army Ordnance Department actually tried to persuade them really hard to accept such guns to be mounted on tanks. But the US Army's leadership wouldn't have it. They didn't believe in tank vs tank combat. That's why the T-20 and T-23 were never accepted and the M26 came in so late in the war.
StiviGun1 6 days ago
Comment removed
FUK4LL 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@StiviGun1 woops, army leadership, then. Thanks for correcting me.
FUK4LL 6 days ago
Dear Santa...
Cacowninja 2 weeks ago
Bf2 song makes me cry
the best song ever
lumelancia 2 weeks ago
Если этой красавице сбить гусеницу, то она ничто станет, пробить она не сможет даже ИС 3
со своей пушкой, не говоря уже о Т-90 русском танке, но броня очень хороша, сойдёт для укрытия пехоты :D
Translite
If this beauty shoot down a caterpillar, it will be nothing, it can not penetrate even the IP 3
with his gun, not to mention the T-90 Russian tank, but the armor is very good, will go to shelter infantry: D
OnlySkupe 3 weeks ago
Fri T95 slow stupid not agile
Antoha00281 3 weeks ago
MMO-action World of Tanks
rostechtron1000 3 weeks ago 15
School of hard knocks baby!!
19K7635 4 weeks ago
Most of you guys dont have a damn idea what you your talking about!!!! Stfu
proracer87 4 weeks ago
if you have air superiority, open and wide terraine, medium Tanks and infantry to support it, good ammunition supply and patience (caus i think this SPG isn't very fast)
then i think, this T95 could hit an enemy tank force very hard...
although i think that the loading time must be around one or two minutes and a clever enemy would retreat while its loading after its first shot, call artillery and then surround it with infantry and medium Tanks... ps.: super heavy tanks are inefficient!
ThugCologne 4 weeks ago
@ThugCologne The t5E1 gun could be reloaded in about 10 seconds giving it a rate of fire of about six rounds per minute.
0341MarineInfantry 3 weeks ago
@0341MarineInfantry the soviet SPG ISU-152 could be reloaded in theory in about 10 seconds, too but on the battlefield it mostly took nearly a minute to reload
ps.: can you give me some sources?
ThugCologne 3 weeks ago
@ThugCologne The 152 was two part ammo, while the T5E1 105mm was a single unit. I reference both ROF from 105mm armed tanks and 105 mm arty. Also the ISU-152 had a very cramped area to reload making the handling of the round and the charge cumbersome and slow.
0341MarineInfantry 2 weeks ago
@0341MarineInfantry Hmm - the ISU-122 and the JS-2 also had problems like this - this wasn't helped b y the fact these WWII vehicles didn't have much room for ammunition; the JS-2 only 28 rounds whilst the ZVEROBOY only 20 rounds while the ISU-122 only 30 rounds...
HeirofGojira91 2 weeks ago
This is where americans looked toward soviet style armor and created this kick ass tank. This thing has more psychological power then 10 divisions of abrams put together. Just look at the fucking monster.
Ouija121085 1 month ago
hahaha,305mm front armor.....but he never fight and he catch 20 km\h it's very slow
TIGER4933 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheTemplarnight
Well if 95 tons and 68 tons is the same to you than I feel sorry for you. Besides the IS-7 was produced after the war by German engineers from GDR (German Democratic Republic) and by using plans of german artillery entirely. They were meant to be tank destroyers only they didn't see combat cause USA didn't need it when the war was at it's end, it took long time to build. And believe me 13 km/h for such a tank is just enough to ram a T34 look at the size and weight of this thing
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
У нас т90 нам пох
RomshikGan 1 month ago
О черепаха)
TheBany80 1 month ago 16
@TheBany80 Жаба :)
Normaplus01 2 weeks ago
@Normaplus01
А мне напоминает самоходный хот-дог))
HomelandProtector 1 week ago
@TheBany80
Улитка епн! :)
MrMatyzz 1 week ago
For the record, the reason turret free tanks or self propelled guns stopped being produced was because originally a tank had to stop before it could fire it's main armament with any degree of accuracy. When this was the case, having a turret didn't matter much as you could just point the whole vehicle in the general direction of your target and zero in with the gun. Once gyroscopes and firing on the move became the standard, turrets became mandatory.
442hoeky 1 month ago
наши ИСУ выебут ваших коров)и по сей день)))
Egorka18076 1 month ago
Looks like a turtle :)
IxamusMC 1 month ago
It's like a fucking house on tracks.....
xCh34pShOtx 1 month ago
Russian tanks are shit compared to this one.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 Big does not always means good
ThugCologne 1 month ago
@ThugCologne
It was big and good :)
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 Good? What makes this good? Limited obstacle crossing ability due to underpowered engine and too heavy for any portable bridge at the time. Only two of these were ordered and none saw combat. Besides more accuarately this is tank destroyer. So what makes this so great compared to Russian "shit" tanks?
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
What makes it so great compared to Russian tanks? Simple one shot and any russian tank would be wiped out the face of the earth, one shot from any russian tank to this one and there isn't even a scratch is that enough? Or are you gonna be a little upset with the truth kid and cry about it even more?
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 And how do you know that when it never was in combat -_-? That one turns and moves so slowly so how it would even hit anything. How about KV-2 with 152mm howitzer or KV-4 super heavy project what was cancelled. You are born in 93 and you say that Im kid... So sad...
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
And how do you know that the russian shit would beat it? Need I remind you that T35 was such weak tank that you only needed to throw a molotov cocktail on the back of it and the engine would immiadetly get overheated? The KV4 looked like a fuckin tunafish can. And it would take about million shots for any russian tank to destroy it. you'r older right but age doesn't really count if you have a brain of a 12 year old...and in your case that is sad.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 Well our military expert why didn't they mass produce this masterpiece if it was so awesome as you claim? Those russian shit tanks won the war in the eastern front and thats it and Insulting me like that tells only about you when you can't give any sensible arguments.
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
Simple it took to much time and money to make these tanks. And USA needed tanks which would be faster built so they sticked with shermans and other US tanks. Besides they started producing it at the end of the war when USA entered Germany so they figured it wouldn't be much of a need. russian tanks only won the eastern front cause there was more of them, and because when germans had to retreat to defend western front they took a lot of the tanks with them.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 "there was more of them" So? USSR had ability to mass produce tons of tanks and that was in key position to victory. Or why didn't nazis massproduce their tanks as much? Because they didn't want to? Who is this military expert who praises this T28/T95?
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
Germans built less tanks but they were better made and stronger. russians just built a lot of shitty tanks cause they didn't have enough money and good engineers to make good tanks. The key to their victory was like I wrote in the previous comment the retreat of the germans to the western front. Otherwise they wouldn't have a chance against Nazis. Like I wrote up top germans didn't need a lot of tanks they wanted to have less but better tanks and that took even more money.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 There are facts and "facts" and this "if they would have done this and that and not done that" is uselless now. How about if I say that "If Stalin would not have killed his own officers and would have prepared to nazi attack in 1941 nazis would not have had chanse". Does that change something?
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
No cause obviously even if he didn't kill his officers and prepared for the war Germans would win. the reason? I already gave you germans had better technology and better trained soldiers.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 i said the is-7 was built during the 1940's or early 50's not the t95 plus i thought u meant built in germany u have ur opion i have mine. I'm not fighting over the internet about a real life tank that never actualy passed trails so whatever u can have ur own version of the facts.
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
@TheTemplarnight
????????? where did I wrote that T95 was built in 50's?
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@TheTemplarnight
By looking at it's armour and his canon I can clearly testify that it is the most powerfull tank ever made and no russian tank would destroy it.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 Well Germany didn't win even if they had "superior" technology and soldiers... Not Soviets fault if Hitler thought that war would be over in just months with Blitzkrieg.
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
Didn't win thanks to the allies. And am I claiming that It was Soviets fault?
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KatanaK1D93 This is going nowhere... Allies won thanks to USSR. "And am I claiming that It was Soviets fault? " Partly yes if you still claim that USSR won in Stalingrad just because of winter...
ziegfail 1 month ago
@ziegfail
And Im not a military expert I just listen to the military experts words :)
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 the t95 project was canceled due to the american engines blowing up and there was only 3 of them ever produced and they did not pass the trials succesfully. And second of all the comanders hatch only had 43mms of amour so if u hit that spot it also held ammo right beside it. That would blow up the tank. So the goverment sold one for scrap and the last one was lost.
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
@TheTemplarnight
Well that's funny cause it's actually the reason why the KV4 didn't come to production xD.
The t34 was such a weak tank that you only needed a molotov cocktail to beat it you just had to throw it on the back of it and the engine would get overheated or immiadetly blow up. One shot from that tank and even the newest T95 black hawk would be torn too pieces.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 and simply no it would not 1 shot any russian tanks. First the is-7 with almost 300mm of armour cause of the slopings. Second the is-4 with almost 250mm of armour cause of slopings. Third the object704 with 120 or 150 and a sloping of 30-40 degree's therefore making it 230mms learn you're facts before you say to someone else "little upset with the truth kid and cry about it even more?" cause u don't even seem to know what the truth is.
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
@TheTemplarnight
Now I dont know what your'e talking about cause this tank would only crash into any russian tank and the russian tank would be destroyed. Now therefore learn your'e facts but first learn english properly.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 first of all this and the is-7 where the same weight almost and whats the likelyhood of this thing being able to ram something when it only goes 13 km/h moron? Second of all these where only meant for base defense fixed installations it wasn't meant to realy move.
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
Comment removed
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 t34 ok and they traveled in groups it rams one another goes around? and it took 5 months to build 1 of them so it was cancelled unless you're still to stupid to figure out that the us goverment said that it was useless as a tank? and second idk where u got that weight the is-7 ways more than 68 tons and if ur looking at wikipedia for ur answers the final prototype for the is-7 weighed over 80 so umm yeah plus it went close to umm 40-50 km/h i think.
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
@TheTemplarnight
Did I say it rams groups you fuckin idiot? Yeah I mentioned that it took long for them to built it. The government never said it was useless it was the most powerfull tank ever. Not like the russian weak shit T34 which alittle molotov cocktail could destroy, even a sherman was stronger than T 34. And look on every fuckin single sight that has the weights of tanks and you'll see that IS-7 weights 68 tons. Can you manage that or is it too hard for you?
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
@KatanaK1D93 and where the fuck did u get this horse shit about german enginers designing the is-7. it was built during the 1940's like shit dude and it was built in russia even wikipedia can tell u that
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
@TheTemplarnight
Every single Tank, BTR, Helicopter that russians had was produced by german engineers from GDR, and they were even based on german military designs. And I think Im begininng to conversate with a mentally challanged person cause it's clearly written this tank was built after the war.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KatanaK1D93 and where the fuck did u get this horse shit about german enginers designing the is-7. it was built during the 1940's like shit dude and it was built in russia even wikipedia can tell u that
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
@ziegfail
Besides you just said it its a tank destroyer. That alone makes it better.
KatanaK1D93 1 month ago
"We didn't even scratch them!"
RoranHawkins 1 month ago
@RoranHawkins PENITRATION!
critical hit!
ect
DragonsREpic 1 month ago
"T95 ahead , we should turn back"
Shockinh 1 month ago
1) а броня существует только на лбу?
2) это не танк это пт-сау!
3) автор дурак.
GenVoronin 1 month ago
this is not a tank this is tank destroyer
luki8901 1 month ago
@luki8901 It is neither. It is a "Gun Motor Carriage". Not to be used against tanks, it was designed to assault fortifications
0341MarineInfantry 1 month ago
tanks for watching*
TheSuperRowan 1 month ago
It would have been fun to see a duel between a T28 and a german Panzer VIII 'Maus'. But actually the T28 is not a tank at all, it's an assault gun or gun motor carriage.
ThePerfectRed 1 month ago
THAT TANK IS BADASS!!! MORE SLOPED THAN ANY GERMAN ASSAULT GUM I EVER SEEN!!! Ill ask russia to export it to me for serbia to fend off 2nd nazi invasion of serbia!! And NATO WAR MACHINE
HybodusStudios 1 month ago
wiki.worldoftanks. com/T95 - Here this tank is shortly described.
worldoftanks. com/game/ - And here it is possible to play on it.
Clean a blanks in the reference
n0sk0FF 1 month ago
"Speed: 13 km/h" - NO! Speed of this ASI is equal 13.6 km \h :D
n0sk0FF 1 month ago
If it is the Heavy tank explain why it doesn't have tower?
n0sk0FF 1 month ago
@n0sk0FF becouse real life does not give a shit on world of tanks
flobeul 1 month ago
@n0sk0FF The mouse didn't have a tower either to save on expenses.
FireOfEire 1 month ago
Though I and the Russian person, but I understand many tanks of Europe and America.
n0sk0FF 1 month ago
t28\95 - ASI (Anti-tank Self-propelled Installation)
Well in any way the super heavy tank!
Hard armor, with powerful arms self-propelled gun Т95 wasn't entered in the concept of armoured arms of Land forces of the USA. So, tanks should have a tower, and at Т95 it wasn't. As a result in June 1946 г the name has been again changed — the car became ASI-Т28. Works have been stopped, in connection with the decision of department of a military policy to stop all works in a class of 100-ton cars.
n0sk0FF 1 month ago 5
@n0sk0FF its a tank destroyer an spg is arty
bell2626 3 weeks ago
@bell2626 Tank destroyers are SPG's, too
ThugCologne 3 weeks ago
That thing is a damned beast.
Wonder how the germans would react when they realize no gun they own (not including artillery or other high-explosive i-hate-you-and-will-annihilate-you guns) will be able to shoot through the front of that thing.
svartehelll 2 months ago
@svartehelll its frontal armor is a FOOT thick
DragonsREpic 1 month ago
He means why would an American tank take over America NEWB
TYRESS10 2 months ago
It is A TD i think
TheJoshan889 2 months ago
lol, i would never have it on the street, someone can take over US with that thing ;)
TheXCrazZ 2 months ago
@TheXCrazZ its an American tank.... facepalm
ELEMENTSFAN666 2 months ago
@ELEMENTSFAN666 ... US is america... Noob
TheXCrazZ 2 months ago
@TheXCrazZ y would you invade your own country with you own tank thats ironic
DragonsREpic 1 month ago
@DragonsREpic ... ok lets say fuckin Russia... omg people an be stupid
TheXCrazZ 1 month ago
so when is this scheduled to replace the abrams? ;)
refinedfriend 2 months ago
xDDDD n rießen panzer. aber mitn verdammt kleinen geschütz...xDDDD
toniTHEmaster 2 months ago
isnt it spg? :?
SuperVladeG 2 months ago
@SuperVladeG no, its a american TD
DragonsREpic 1 month ago
бугага таких всего 2 штуки построили и то 1 сгорел при испытаниях гыгыгы, а патриотизма то нагнали ))) 1 Т-34-85 завалил бы его и не заметил....
serg123456888 2 months ago
@serg123456888 идиот???
TrueDemoralizator 2 months ago
@TrueDemoralizator
Инна...
serg123456888 2 months ago
the t95 super shitty tank, i destroy these in my is-3 on wot...circle the fat fucks.
DuelNexus 3 months ago
@DuelNexus World of tanks is not that realistic. if it would be no one had a chance to kill a german tank.
Oloss55 3 months ago
@Oloss55 who is talking about german tanks? IS-3 is 'joseph stalin 3' tank and the t95 is american, also german tanks where not all that strong.
DuelNexus 3 months ago
@DuelNexus True but then a vehicle like this would be escorted by a group of tanks and infantry so you would be screwed anyways.
valcan321 3 months ago
@valcan321 but what if they came across a german division, would the t95 open fire?
DuelNexus 3 months ago
@DuelNexus Erm yea probably if they believed they could defeat them. The T-28 wasn't a Flee the scene tank kinda slow LOL.
valcan321 3 months ago
@valcan321 i heard the sturmtiger was a really powerful tank with the same role as the T-95
DuelNexus 3 months ago
@DuelNexus Yep. The need for such tanks really went away with airplanes and better artillery. and a few decades later they would have been undergunned, underpowered and underarmored.
valcan321 3 months ago
@valcan321 yeah, you never see tank destroyers rolling around but you still get artillery but i think now days we rely mostly on air.
DuelNexus 3 months ago
@DuelNexus The T-28/95 is a motor gun carriage, designed for breeching the fortifications of the Siegfried line. It is not a tank destroyer, nor a tank. It was never produced beyond the two prototypes, one of which was destroyed by fire,(if one wishes to believe that story) and the remaining example is now at the New Armor museum at Ft. Benning Ga. The British built the Tortoise to perform the same mission.
beardo52 2 months ago
@beardo52 yep i have been to ft. benning museum and i read up on it, basically its a mobile bunker =D
DuelNexus 2 months ago
@DuelNexus Perfect description!
beardo52 2 months ago
@beardo52 hehe
DuelNexus 2 months ago
@Oloss55 You better not compare KV and t-34 with early German tanks.
mizukami999 3 months ago
@mizukami999 Lol why not.
MultiAREE 3 months ago
@MultiAREE Because early german tanks were inferior to them. As well as t-34/76 was inferior to Tiger. To kill a single KV they could use tank attacks as false maneuver only to deploy the aa guns.
mizukami999 3 months ago
@mizukami999 But they were of the same era, so they have to.
MultiAREE 2 months ago
@MultiAREE I mean saying the German tanks totally ruled everything is wrong. And I added that f.e. the ability of soviet tanks was higher before USSR suffered its defeat in 1941. As well, the quality of German tanks started to decrease when Germany started to lose.
mizukami999 2 months ago
its no tank its tank destroyer
Pietrasiuk 3 months ago
It's not a tank, it's a Tank Destroyer...
Kukaaaaa 3 months ago
@Kukaaaaa The T28/T95 was originally designated a super heavy tank, but the Army realized that didn't make much sense and redesignated it a self-propelled gun.
Clarancecat 3 months ago
В нём есть кондиционер? А подогрев сидений? А CD проигрыватель?
100misha1 3 months ago
T28 and T95 where made by the Russians to destory the heavy German tanks of WW2 and beyound. The turret doesn't turn, that makes the a Tank Killer!
HyperFoxTails 3 months ago
@HyperFoxTails first - T28/95 is one tank. second it was made by americans not russians. third - it was suppousednot to kill tanks, its prime targets were bunkers and other concrete fortifications, and fourth - in us army classification it was heavy tank, not tankkiller.
OgrabliatorKorovanov 3 months ago 15
@OgrabliatorKorovanov
Anyway it is never attended in combat, so it is not a tank it is a piece of art, that's all.
zubovichvika 3 months ago
@OgrabliatorKorovanov actually, T28 and T95 were slightly different vehicles, or were supposed to be
malypowstaniec44 2 months ago
@malypowstaniec44 actually, it's 1 item with 2 designations... juuuust google it...
OgrabliatorKorovanov 2 months ago
@OgrabliatorKorovanov well if you put it that way, then A-20, A-32 and A-34 are the same vehicles, just different designs...
malypowstaniec44 2 months ago
@malypowstaniec44 ok, lets just try the simpliest way - lets look in mazafakin wiki:"Sometimes referred to as a super-heavy tank, the T28 was re-designated as the 105 mm Gun Motor Carriage T95 in 1945 and then renamed a super heavy tank in 1946". may be my english is poor and i can't get meaning of word "re-designated", but i think it's not the same as "re-designed". Only two tanks were built and it was not like one was T28 and the other - T95.
OgrabliatorKorovanov 2 months ago
@OgrabliatorKorovanov Sorry for late reply, but "re-designated" would be like this example: Ford decided their new car (named the Panther) is more like a truck, so they "re-designated" it from the Ford Panther 'CAR' to the the Ford Panther 'TRUCK'. Hope this helps.
442hoeky 1 month ago
@OgrabliatorKorovanov "re-designated" means whatever its name was before is now changed.In this case its old name was T28,its new "re-designated" name is T-95 Gun Motor Carriage.So it's simply a change of name.
JLennon1998 2 weeks ago
@OgrabliatorKorovanov your right about the americans , it was theirs , but judging by the length of the cannon it was most certainly a tank killer , even if it was'nt designed to do that. my geuss is it was an answer to the german jagdtiger?....maybe?
sander4211 2 months ago
@OgrabliatorKorovanov first you're wrong look at tank wiki or just wikipedia it was designed as a TD! and second its targets where base defence.There where only 3 of them made 1 was made with a russian engine the other with a canadian engine and the last one with a american engine. the one with the american engine went up in flames during the testing. second if it was a heavy tank it would have a turret almost any tank that has the gun sticking out of the body is a Td plz learn you're facts lulz
TheTemplarnight 1 month ago
Zmarszczyłem.
Kubixox77 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Noob? is that the best you can come up with!
SuperMario1621 3 months ago
Why is it that at 0:38, it has two pairs of tracks. Was this for modularity's sake so they could share with M4 tanks?
TimOvrlrd 3 months ago
@TimOvrlrd There is 2 tanks that are very similar, the T28 (1 pair of tracks) and the T95 (shown in this video, two pairs of tracks)
Gater1337 3 months ago
JÁ PENSOU ESSE MONSTRO NA GUERRA???
RRHB1 3 months ago
you noob it is a tank destroyer!
SuperMario1621 3 months ago
@SuperMario1621 A Super Heavy Tank Destroyer. Noob.
Gater1337 3 months ago
@Gater1337 A Super Heavy Tank. Noob.
MultiAREE 3 months ago
@MultiAREE An armored vehicle, Noob.
matthewgroen 3 months ago
Comment removed
MultiAREE 3 months ago
@matthewgroen A rectangular prism with a smaller rectangular prism on top of it and 3 triangle prisms on the back, and sides, as well as 4 tracks, an engine, and a cannon, noob.
MultiAREE 3 months ago
@MultiAREE There is 4 types of tanks used between World War II, and now. The light tank, the medium tank, the heavy tank, and the tank destroyer. There are known tanks that had incredible amounts of armor and a very large gun, hence the nick name "super heavy." The T28/T95's are tank destroyers, but so is the M10 Wolverine. It has a rotating turret just like light, medium, and heavies do. These tanks are given the nickname "super heavy" because of there massive armor. Stop learning from WoT.
Gater1337 3 months ago
@Gater1337 I knew of this tank before Wot Lol.
I pretty much got the name from Wikipedia. And if anyone had the balls to change the title of *T28 Super Heavy Tank*, they would have done it by now.
MultiAREE 3 months ago
@MultiAREE "Had the balls" ... What? Why does anybody even need to change the title?...
Gater1337 3 months ago
@Gater1337 As you have claimed earlier, 'The T28/T95's are tank destroyers' yet the title states that they are tanks. Not the same thing breh.
MultiAREE 3 months ago
@MultiAREE I also said "There are known tanks that had incredible amounts of armor and a very large gun, hence the nick name "super heavy." Super heavy isn't a category of tank. It is a nick name that people use for extremely heavily armored tanks... And tank destroyers and tanks are the same in the fact that they have armor, tracks, and a gun... the only difference is that most tank destroyers don't have rotating turrets. Where did you learn about tanks, the back of a cereal box?
Gater1337 3 months ago
@Gater1337 I am in a very calm mood right now not felling like thinking.
MultiAREE 3 months ago
Now, I'm waiting for BRITISH TURTLE in WoT.
R0mE3 3 months ago
this one looks mean and is effective with the fear factor by far.
ByrneBeatsInc 3 months ago
holy shit 95 tons...Must need a gallon of gas to move that bitch 1 foot
xCh34pShOtx 3 months ago
Everytime I play WoT I shit brix whenever I come across this tank (Im just up to tier 6)
kennychan100 4 months ago
@kennychan100 i know right it puts my m6 in battles with a t95 two object 704's and a jagdtiger it's torture
nsp1213 3 months ago
@nsp1213 Occasionally I platoon up with my mates which also have tier 6-7 tanks to level up my M5 Stuart, and that Matchmaker has to put me in a battle with loads of T95s, Mauses, Object 704's and E-100. Forget brix, I shat a fuckin house.
kennychan100 3 months ago
the best tank in the world is by arguably the samoan 9000.......
etornel79 4 months ago
it had a gasoline engine? i wouldve thought it would have been a diesel
themechanicalunivers 4 months ago