Tanks/Vehicles Object 685 Amphibious Light Tank

[WulfPack 1,693]

In December of 1969, seeking a replacement for the PT-76, the Soviet Government formed following design specifications:

1. It should weigh no more than 15 tons
2. Use the D-33 rifled 100-mm gun
3. Ability to use the "Fagot" ATGM
4. Have 12.7-mm to suppress infantry and helicopters
5. Armor should be able to survive hits from 23-mm shells to the front and 12.7-mm to rest of it
6. NBC protection 
7. Have a top speed of 70 km/h on land and 12 km/h in the water

Those spections were sent to 3 design bureaus: Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, Mytishchi Machine Works, and Volgograd Tank Factory. 

Chelyabinsk put forward the Object 788. However, since this design lacked preparation for the "Fagot", the water jets, and the self entrenchment tool, it was disqualified.

Kurgan's Object 685(I didn't mention Kurgan before, as they were not mentioned) and Volgograd's Object 934(I would like to do a separate suggestion for this Light Tank) were both deemed sufficient to continue work on them. In 1975 they both were deemed sufficient to continue development and subsequently had at least one of each built. After they were both tested, neither received production orders and were cancelled. The Object 685 would live on in the form of the BMP-3(The BMP-3 uses its chassis). Object 934 would live on to be the test bed for various guns/turrets. Such as the D-62, 2A36 Giatsints-B 152-mms and the Nona-2. It would finally find a "home"  as the chassis for the 2S31 Vena and the 2S25 Sprut-SD.

 

Object 685

Combat weight: 16.5 tonnes 

Crew:-

3(Gunner, Commander, and Driver)

Dimensions:-

Length: 23.6 feet

Width: 10.3 feet

Height: 7.3 feet

Mobility:-

Engine: 2B-06-2 outputting 400 horsepower

Top speed: 43.3 mph

Armor:-

Regarding its armor, all I have been able to find, was that the frontal arc was bulletproof against 23-mm shells. The hull was made of welded sheets(Yes sheets) of steel, while the turret was made of welded sheets of titanium 

Armament:- 

2A48-1 100-mm with a hydraulic stabilizer, laser range finder, and automatic loader.

Ammunition load was 40 rounds with 19 in the autoloader.

PKT 7.62 coaxial MG

Ammunition load was 2,000 rounds.

"Strela-2" MANPAD

Ammunition load was 4 rounds.(wouldn't be usable in game)

 

In game this LT would be the end-game of the Soviet LT line. It would be capable of hurting all targets(thanks to possible ammo) but couldn't take a single hit its self. Should it find its self in a no win senino, it has the speed to leave the area of engagement. 

 

Possible ammunition:-

3BM25 APFSDS

Entered service: 1978 

Muzzle velocity: 1430 M/S

Armor pen: 300mm at 1000 meters @ 90 degrees   

3BK17M HEAT-FS  This round has "hooks" on the tip to reduced the effectiveness on armor angling.

Entered service: 1978

Muzzle velocity: 1075 M/S

Armor pen: 390mm @ 0 degrees(Thank you for this information, Choogleblitz)

 

Additional ammo:-

3OF32 High Explosive 

Entered service: ????

Muzzle velocity: 900 M/S 

3BK5M HEAT-FS

Entered service:1961 

Muzzle velocity: 900 M/S

Armor pen: 375mm @ 90 degrees

3BM8 APDS-T

Entered service: 1966 

Muzzle velocity: 1415 M/S

Armor pen:  @ 2000M/ 90 degrees 190mm/ 60 degrees 80mm

3SH5 Shrapnel shell

Entered service: ????

Muzzle velocity: ????

 

 

 

 

Sources:-(All is in Russian, sorry)

Vehicle:

http://www.tankinfo.ru/Country/SSSR/3/light/Ob_685.php

http://www.razlib.ru/voennaja_istorija/obozrenie_otechestvennoi_bronetankovoi_tehniki/p180.php

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%8A%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%82_685

Ammo:

http://forum.worldoftanks.ru/index.php?/topic/823429-%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%8B-100-%D0%BC%D0%BC-%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85-%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%8B%D1%85-%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BA-%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%B9%D1%81%D1%82/

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/100-%D0%BC%D0%BC_%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BF%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%94-10#.D0.9C.D0.BE.D0.B4.D0.B8.D1.84.D0.B8.D0.BA.D0.B0.D1.86.D0.B8.D0.B8

http://saperka.ru/osnovnye-vystrela-tankovyx-protivotankovyx-pushek

Edited May 24, 2016 by WulfPack

[SAUBER_KH7 3,325]

Open for Discussion. :salute:

[NightHawkF117 392]

very interesting

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

i can see it in T4 end / 5, with BR like 6.3/6.7/7.0

 

But without any more date on Front and Turret armor, and turrt turn speed: i can't precise possible BR.

[BlitzkriegWulf 4,265]

i can see it in T4 end / 5, with BR like 6.3/6.7/7.0

 

But without any more date on Front and Turret armor, and turrt turn speed: i can't precise possible BR.

 

I would say 6.7 at the bottom end, if we look at the T92. Closer to 7.0, when we look at the power to weight, amphibious capability, and ammunition choice.

[Rebster86 51]

On the subject of amphibious tanks, is there any discussion on or about the LVT's for the American line?  The 2 i am thinking about would be the LVT(A)-1 (1942) and the LVT(A)-4 (1944). 

 

This is some info i got from wiki(i know wiki sucks but i didn't have time to look elsewhere):

LVT(A)-1 (1942)

The first infantry support LVT. With the first experience of pacific amphibious operations it was clear heavier firepower than the usual .50 cal guns was needed. Based on the LVT-2, A standing for armored, this fire support version had an armored (6 to 12 mm) hull. It was fitted with a turret nearly identical to that of the Light Tank M3, with a 37 mm Gun M6 in an M44 mount, and also carried two rear-mounted machine guns. 510 units produced. The vehicle's hull was covered in 6-12mm of armor plate, and the vehicle was powered by a 262 hp air-cooled petrol engine. Despite the limitations imposed by the turret it could still carry a limited payload of 1,000 lbs of cargo and had a quite respectable speed of 25 mph or land and 6.5 mph in water, and an operational range of 125 miles on land or 75 miles in water.

 

The LVT(A)-1 would be an interesting addition for the low tiers like say in mid tier 1 or late tier 1. Since it only has a 37mm and 6-12mm of armor, i don't see it being good any higher, plus these things were big.

 

 

LVT(A)-4 (1944)

The 37mm gun of the LVT(A)-1 was inadequate for fire support version so the turret of the 75 mm Howitzer Motor Carriage M8 - armed with a 75 mm howitzer - was used to produce the LVT (A)-4. In some cases the 75 mm was replaced with the Canadian Ronson flamethrower.<(obviously this would be useless in Warthunder) A single .50 cal machine gun was installed on the ring mount above the turret rear. In the late production vehicles the heavy machine gun was replaced with two M1919A4 .30 MG's on pintle mounts and one more in the bow mount. 1,890 units produced.

 

The LVT(A)-4 could be in a higher tier such as early Tier 2 or mid Tier 2. Since they have the same armor(for the most part anyway), and they are pretty big, the only thing i can compare this one to is maybe the Stug III A with its short barrelled 75mm howitzer. I don't see them being at any use at higher tiers. 

 

These may not be useful like the PT-76 but i don't see why they cant be added at a later date just to add some more amphibious tanks to the game. What do yall think? Am i crazy or are these not a decent idea?

[Jansza 65]

Heh, "Fagot". Missing a 'g' there, buddy. :P

[juraleona 3,944]

No armor, following the PT-76 logic it will fight Tigers.

 

Yes. PLEASE ಠ_ಠ

[WulfPack 1,693]

i can see it in T4 end / 5, with BR like 6.3/6.7/7.0

But without any more date on Front and Turret armor, and turrt turn speed: i can't precise possible BR.

Based on weight, the armor should be about the same as the PT-76.

[swedeonthemoose 12,809]

lol why not, this game is alreayd full of cold war era stuff facing ww2 stuff so one more wouldnt hurt xD

[WulfPack 1,693]

I would say 6.7 at the bottom end, if we look at the T92. Closer to 7.0, when we look at the power to weight, amphibious capability, and ammunition choice.

I was thinking it would occupy the 8.0 slot.

[Mercedes4321 4,695]

I would say 6.7 at the bottom end, if we look at the T92. Closer to 7.0, when we look at the power to weight, amphibious capability, and ammunition choice.

I would say 7.0 or higher due to it's capabilities and the fact that it is uses what is essentially a lightweight version of the guns on the the T-54/55 with some pretty modern ammunition.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Mercedes4321

[WulfPack 1,693]

I would say 7.0 or higher due to it's capabilities and the fact that it is uses what is essentially a lightweight version of the guns on the the T-54/55 with some pretty modern ammunition.

There is also the gun being stabilized on 2 planes, automatic loader(I can't find how that affected RoF), laser range finder, etc.

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,789]

Based on weight, the armor should be about the same as the PT-76.

 

nope it could be more effective on the Front (and less behind,...)

[Mercedes4321 4,695]

nope it could be more effective on the Front (and less behind,...)

Since there is clearly a still existing prototype, Gaijin could always just visit it and check the thickness.

[KirkorKirkor 356]

It looks cool, but please don't throw it at WWII vehicles...

[BlitzkriegWulf 4,265]

I was thinking it would occupy the 8.0 slot.

I would say 7.0 or higher due to it's capabilities and the fact that it is uses what is essentially a lightweight version of the guns on the the T-54/55 with some pretty modern ammunition.

 

 

Considering that he included 6.3, I think anywhere 7.0 and above makes infinitely more sense.

[WulfPack 1,693]

Regarding its armor, all I have been able to find, was that the frontal arc was bulletproof against 23-mm shells. The hull was made of welded sheets(Yes sheets) of steel, while the turret was made of welded sheets of titanium.

Edited April 22, 2016 by WulfPack

[WulfPack 1,693]

Additional ammo:-

3OF32 High Explosive 

Entered service: ????

Muzzle velocity: 900 M/S 

3BK5M HEAT-FS

Entered service:1961 

Muzzle velocity: 900 M/S

Armor pen: 375mm @ 90 degrees

3BM8 APDS-T

Entered service: 1966 

Muzzle velocity: 1415 M/S

Armor pen:  @ 2000M/ 90 degrees 190mm/ 60 degrees 80mm

3SH5 Shrapnel shell

Entered service: ????

Muzzle velocity: ????

Edited May 2, 2016 by WulfPack

[McPuff 2,212]

No. Just no. You're streching the time frame WAY to much. The requirement was issued in 1969, 3 years after the Chieftan entered service, and the Chieftan is the vehicle with the latest service entry date in the game. 

 

I could perhaps see the BMP-1 in the game, but this is just to modern. By opening to this sort of thing you're eventually going to open up to modern MBTs.

[WulfPack 1,693]

No. Just no. You're streching the time frame WAY to much. The requirement was issued in 1969, 3 years after the Chieftan entered service, and the Chieftan is the vehicle with the latest service entry date in the game. 

 

I could perhaps see the BMP-1 in the game, but this is just to modern. By opening to this sort of thing you're eventually going to open up to modern MBTs.

The Chieftain Mk 3 entered service in 1968 or 1969. The new cut-off date is the 70ies. The BMP-1 would occupy about the same spot as the PT-76.

[Daddo2 328]

The question really is, whether it does have composite armour or not, because the developers have stated that there won't be any vehicles with composite armour in WT.

 

BMP-1 and BMD-1 (entered service in 1966 and 1969 respectively) are however fully valid candidates for addition with their 73 mm cannon shooting 300+ mm penetration HEATFS shells plus having ATGMs together making it an interesting vehicle even for the highest BR battles.

[WulfPack 1,693]

Regarding its armor, all I have been able to find, was that the frontal arc was bulletproof against 23-mm shells. The hull was made of welded sheets(Yes sheets) of steel, while the turret was made of welded sheets of titanium.

 

 

The question really is, whether it does have composite armour or not, because the developers have stated that there won't be any vehicles with composite armour in WT.

 

BMP-1 and BMD-1 (entered service in 1966 and 1969 respectively) are however fully valid candidates for addition with their 73 mm cannon shooting 300+ mm penetration HEATFS shells plus having ATGMs together making it an interesting vehicle even for the highest BR battles.

It does not have composite armor. 

BMP-1 and BMD-1 might sit at about 7.0. ATGMs are not allowed.

[Daddo2 328]

It does not have composite armor. 

BMP-1 and BMD-1 might sit at about 7.0. ATGMs are not allowed.

 

ATGMs are confirmed to be implemented in WT, so for example Sheridan is very likely to appear at some point in the future.

[WulfPack 1,693]

ATGMs are confirmed to be implemented in WT, so for example Sheridan is very likely to appear at some point in the future.

What? Could link me confirmation of that?