Ground vehicles T-64 Prototypes

[Pappina 1,791]

Seeing as the terrifying T-64 is with in the cutoff date, but absolutely nobody in their right mind would ever want tobring that monster into the game(either later or first production versions) i think it would be sort of nice to be able to add at least its prototypes. There were several prototypes of the T-64, with one of the first that i would also like to suggest being under the designation of "Object 430":

 

(data translated from russian)

source: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%8A%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_430(sorry for not very reliable source)

Object 430

Classification Medium Tank

Combat weight, t 35.48

Layout scheme Classical

The crew , man. 4

History

Developer CB-60M

Manufacturer The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Years of development with 1952 for 1961

Years of Production with 1957 for 1959

The number of issued, pcs. 5

Dimensions

The length of the body , mm 6048

Length with gun forward, mm 8785

Width, mm 3120

Height mm 2160

Base, mm 4437

Track, mm 2570

Ground clearance , mm 435..445

Reservation

Armor type Steel

The forehead of the body (top), mm / deg. 120 / 60..40 / 80

The forehead of the body (bottom), mm / deg. 120/55

Hull sides (top), mm / deg. 55/50

The board of the housing (bottom), mm / deg. 20/30

Feed housing (top), mm / deg. 40/30

Feed housing (middle), mm / deg. 40/30

Feed housing (bottom), mm / deg. 20/64

The bottom, mm 20..25

Roof, mm 20..40

Forehead tower mm / deg. 248/0 

212/30 

205/35 

189/44

Bort tower mm / deg. 185/0 

170/35 

150/40 

135/45 

130/50

Forage tower mm / deg. 63..50 / 0..35

The roof of the tower, mm 40/80 

30/83 

30/70

Equipment

The caliber and brand of gun 100-mm 2A24

Type Gun rifled cannon

The length of the barrel , calibers 51

Ammunition gun 50

Sights TPD-43b, TPN-1

Machine guns 1 x 14.5 mm KPVT

1 x 7.62 mm SGMT

Mobility

Type of engine

[Show] 5TD

Engine power, l. p. 580

The speed on the highway, km / h 55

Cruising on the highway , km 450-600

Type of suspension Individual torsion

Ground pressure, kg / cm² 0.75

Gradeability, hail. 30

Surmounted by a ford , m 1.4 (5 OPVT )

 

2A24 gun statistics:

 

Table TTX shots used for firing a gun 2A24 ^[2] Shot type The mass of the projectile , kg Weight of explosives , kg Weight charge kg Muzzle velocity, m / s Penetration mm ^{[CH 2]}Armor-piercing shells Armor-piercing 6.5 - 8.3 1535 310 Cumulative       1000 400 High-explosive 15.88 1.46   900 -
 

 

Table of armor-piercing armor-piercing projectiles for D-54TS ^[2] The angle, deg \ distance, m 1000 2000 3000 0 310 290 270 30 300 280 260 60 122 108 93 Data on Soviet armor penetration measurement method. It should be borne in mind that at different times and in different countries use different methods for determining the armor penetration. As a result, a direct comparison with similar data from other tools is often impossible or incorrect.

 

The next T-64 prototype i would like to suggest would be the Object 435, the tank that came right before the Object 432:

(data translated from russian)

source: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%8A%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_435

Object 435

Classification Medium Tank

Combat weight, t 35.5

The crew , man. 4

History

Developer HZTM

Manufacturer The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics

Years of development with 1961 for 1962

Years of Production with 1961 for 1962

The number of issued, pcs. 1

Dimensions

The length of the body , mm 6048

Length with gun forward, mm 9060

Width, mm 3120

Height mm 2160

Ground clearance , mm 445

Reservation

Armor type Steel

The forehead of the body (top), mm / deg. 120/60

The forehead of the body (bottom), mm / deg. 120/55

Hull sides, mm / deg. 80 / 0..55 / 50

Forehead tower mm / deg. 189..240

Equipment

The caliber and brand of gun 115-mm 2A20

Type Gun smoothbore gun

The length of the barrel , calibers 52.6

Ammunition gun 37

Sights TPD-43 WBC-1

Machine guns 1 x 14.5 mm KPVT

2 x 7.62 mm SGMT

Mobility

Type of engine

[Show] 5TD

Engine power, l. p. 600

The speed on the highway, km / h 55

Cruising on the highway , km 450..600

Specific power, l. c. / m 16.5

Ground pressure, kg / cm² 0.75

Gradeability, hail. 30

Surmounted by a ford , m 1.0 (OPVT 5

 

Gun data:

Table TTX shots used for firing a gun 2A20 ^{[1] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]} Index shot Index projectile Muzzle velocity, m / s Round weight, kg The mass of the projectile (the pallet), kg Mass explosives kg Penetration mm ^{[CH 1]}Armor-piercing shells 3UBM3 3BM3 1650 22 2.8 (4.0) - 300 3UBM4 3BM4 1650 22 3.2 (5.5) - 250 3UBM5 3BM6 1680 22 3.9 (5.4) - 228 3UBM9 3BM21 1600 23.5 4.5 (6.1) - 330 3UBM13 3BM28 1650 24 4.89 (6.7) - 380 3UBM17 3BM36       -   Armor-piercing shaped-charge projectiles 3UBK3 3BK4 950 26 12.97 1.48 440 3UBK3M 3BK4M 950 26.6 12.98 1.48 440 3UBK7 3BK15           3UBK7M 3BK15M 1060 26.3 12.2     High-explosive shells 3UOF1 3OF11 905 28 14.86 2.64 - 3UOF6 3OF18 750 30.8 17.86 2.8 - 3UOF37 3OF27 800 30.75 17.82 3.13 - Shrapnel shells 3USH2 3SH6     17.4 0.08 - The guided missile 3UBK10-2 9M117 370 28 18.8   660 ^{[CH 2]} 3UBK10M-2 9M117M   30.7     600 ^{[CH 3]} 3UBK23-2 9M117M1   28     850 ^{[CH 4]}

 

Edited June 6, 2015 by Pappina

[Smin1080p_WT 60,444]

Open for discussion  :salute:

[mistomaxo 446]

the devs werent shy about including various iterations of the t-54, i think these stand a good chance

 

i wonder how they would stack up against the planned introduction of the leopard, or leopard prototype, or whatever it was going to be

[Pappina 1,791]

the devs werent shy about including various iterations of the t-54, i think these stand a good chance
 
i wonder how they would stack up against the planned introduction of the leopard, or leopard prototype, or whatever it was going to be

For certain spots on these tanks as well as even the T-62 that before it, it will be like punching a concrete wall for the leopard 1. While in the flip side it will be like punching a ghost for certain spots on the leopard.

[Pappina 1,791]

Just edited the poll, to keep the people who just saw the word "T-64" and voted no. As well as get people who did thoroughly read through the post to explain themselves.

[RohmMohc 11,494]

I voted No with the explain addition since i did read the poste... yet my only answer to this is simply: NO! NO! NO!... If we get it i want a 120mm Rheinmetall Gun Leopard...

[Volger50616 119]

I'm sorry but these tanks are prototypes, I want this game to keep as historical and realistic as possible, gaijin already added the american heavy line and the T95 and T28 wich are all prototypes too...

[ValkyrieLitewing 1,659]

If this would be the only way to balance the Chieftain, I'm all for it.

[Pappina 1,791]

I'm sorry but these tanks are prototypes, I want this game to keep as historical and realistic as possible, gaijin already added the american heavy line and the T95 and T28 wich are all prototypes too...

So you would rather have the Composite armor, 115mm auto-loading tank that is the T-64 opposed to having a much more mild non composite armor, non-auto-loading prototype of it?

Edited June 6, 2015 by Pappina

[ValkyrieLitewing 1,659]

I'm sorry but these tanks are prototypes, I want this game to keep as historical and realistic as possible, gaijin already added the american heavy line and the T95 and T28 wich are all prototypes too...

I like and enjoy prototypes as long as they are balanced, or for balancing purposes so I see no problem with these.

[EN3MY 762]

just keep killing the game with prototypes.

[The_Bowman_TW 583]

If this would be the only way to balance the Chieftain, I'm all for it.

The Chieftain shouldn't be added in the first place.

[juraleona 3,944]

No. Gods, no. Please. 

[IceySmooth 198]

I like and enjoy prototypes as long as they are balanced, or for balancing purposes so I see no problem with these.

+1 (as long as they stay proto ie premium ie rare enough)

Edited June 7, 2015 by icehawk223

[ezattilabatyi 195]

Hmmm ... I'm pretty sure yesterday this suggestion had a poll with only a few votes for the tanks, and a huge amount against both ...

<sarcasm>I wonder why did the poll magically disappear</sarcasm>

 

 

 

There won't be any tier5 premiums and as prototypes, these shouldn't be in the regular tech tree.

 

-1 I say no.

[Tzalafim 695]

I vote yes, but in any case soviets are gonna have a serious advantage if they introduce the T-64 tank. but I vote yes if Gaijin brings tanks for the other factions to fight against the T-64. This could bring M60A3 or Chieftains into the game. 

But it would be awesome to have a T-64 in the hangar.

[Nope 10,634]

Why? The T-54's HEAT ammunition already can take care of a Chieftain just fine. Prototypes either work as premiums or as a way to fill in gaps in the trees, and as far as I know not a soul complained about the USSR tanks needing some decent endgame. What exactly is wrong with T-54s with HEAT ammunition, the T-62 and the T-10M that would make them completely useless against later opposition?

[juraleona 3,944]

I vote yes, but in any case soviets are gonna have a serious advantage if they introduce the T-64 tank. but I vote yes if Gaijin brings tanks for the other factions to fight against the T-64. This could bring M60A3 or Chieftains into the game. 

But it would be awesome to have a T-64 in the hangar.

T-64 has composites almost all over it..... M-60 still uses steel armor... Do I need to continue, how much T-64 would be OP? Even to late M-60 models? Hell, ERA made M-60 better, but it was still VERY vulnerable to T-64.

[Pappina 1,791]

Hmmm ... I'm pretty sure yesterday this suggestion had a poll with only a few votes for the tanks, and a huge amount against both ...
<sarcasm>I wonder why did the poll magically disappear</sarcasm>
 
 
 
There won't be any tier5 premiums and as prototypes, these shouldn't be in the regular tech tree.
 
-1 I say no.

I decided to throw it out, because I knew there would be people voting against simply because they don't understand it. They are either opposed to it because they think it will be like the T-64, or because they are sore when it comes to prototypes. I regret the title I originally chose for this simply because every one just sees "T-64" and looses their mind. Plus anyway, suggestions don't need to be beloved by the players in order to go anywhere.

[Lord_Waka 1,932]

No.

 

Just No.

 

You just don't realize the power of the T-64.

 

It's because of this "thing" that we got giants such as the Leopard 2 or the Leclerc. The T-64 leaded to the developpement of every modern Main Battle Tank because it was too strong for the first generation. In comparizon with it, T-62, Leopard I, M60... are outdated. 

 

Plus the Soviet Army can already have T-62 and T-55. It's not like if this tank was needed to balance anything that the T-62 can't fight...

 

I do not trust the "Soviet Bias" but if Gaijin introduce this tank... Yes, the game will be biased. And then germans and americans will ask for the MBT-70. To balance it, frenchies will ask for the AMX-32. Then russians will ask for the T-72. Ect, ect...

 

The T-64 haven't to be ingame. If Germany stop with the Leopard I, USA with the M60, Britain with the Chieftain and France with the AMX-30, then USSR need to stop with the T-62.

[Pappina 1,791]

No.
 
Just No.
 
You just don't realize the power of the T-64.
 
It's because of this "thing" that we got giants such as the Leopard 2 or the Leclerc. The T-64 leaded to the developpement of every modern Main Battle Tank because it was too strong for the first generation. In comparizon with it, T-62, Leopard I, M60... are outdated. 
 
Plus the Soviet Army can already have T-62 and T-55. It's not like if this tank was needed to balance anything that the T-62 can't fight...
 
I do not trust the "Soviet Bias" but if Gaijin introduce this tank... Yes, the game will be biased. And then germans and americans will ask for the MBT-70. To balance it, frenchies will ask for the AMX-32. Then russians will ask for the T-72. Ect, ect...
 
The T-64 haven't to be ingame. If Germany stop with the Leopard I, USA with the M60, Britain with the Chieftain and France with the AMX-30, then USSR need to stop with the T-62.

*facepalm* did you even read the vehicle stats or are you another one who saw "T-64" and lost his mind? Take a very good hard long look at the stats and then tell me on a scale from 1-10 how OP these tanks would be?

[Lord_Waka 1,932]

*facepalm* did you even read the vehicle stats or are you another one who saw "T-64" and lost his mind? Take a very good hard long look at the stats and then tell me on a scale from 1-10 how OP these tanks would be?

Okay.

 

So where is the interest of a T-64 prototype ?

 

It wasn't in operationnals units. And it's not needed for the Soviet Tree.

 

If there was a tank wich is way superior to the T-62 in the 1st generation MBT, ,why not. Here it's not the case. 

[sabaton_ 3,821]

That thing scares me  :Os

btw, the prototype version would not have the rare plastic armor that some standard versions had?

I'm not sure about this

[Pappina 1,791]

That thing scares me  :Os
btw, the prototype version would not have the rare plastic armor that some standard versions had?
I'm not sure about this

No the composite armor didn't come until the Object 432 which entered service as the T-64, they also lacked the automated loader of the Object 432. So this would be like a shorter, better sloped T-62.

[Naam54673 1,537]

No the composite armor didn't come until the Object 432 which entered service as the T-64, they also lacked the automated loader of the Object 432. So this would be like a shorter, better sloped T-62.

The 1 million dollar question is:Do we need a better T-62?