Jump to content

Schwerer Panzer X / T-10 (T-10, T-10A, T-10B, T-10M)


Stuhlfleisch
 Share

Panzer X  

192 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like to see the East-German T-10 (any version) being added to War Thunder?

    • Yes!
      101
    • Yes, but only with Warsaw-pact match-maker for RB/SB!
      38
    • No!
      53


  • Technical Moderator

Flag_of_East_Germany.png

 

A brief disclaimer: I have not seen the main-source regarding this topic, merely a summary on a website which works with documents of the military-branch from East-Germany, so while I do not doubt that these documents exist, I cannot vouch for this being 100% historically accurate and I let a lot of my interpretation flow into it, since, for example, the exact version of the T-10 is not stated.

I honestly believe the GDR could have received any T-10 version, from the T-10, over the T-10A, T-10B to the T-10M, there simply is no way to tell with the limited informations we have so far. Though considering East-Germany was known to receive more contemporary equipment, compared to other Soviet states, I would personally set the specific version closer to being either the T-10B or T-10M.

 

If I manage to locate the actual document(s) talking about the potential adoption of the T-10 into the East-German forces, I will update this post with it / them.

 

Disclaimer over, here is the suggestion:

 

After the creation of the NVA in 1956, the GDR quite quickly voiced the order, that multiple heavy-tank brigades were to be put into service. This order was executed just as quickly and IS-2's, that were beforehand fielded to the KVP (Kasernierte Volkspolizei and the predecessor of the NVA), in 1952, were inherited and put into service with the NVA in the same year as it's creation: 1956.

 

However, there were mentions during the same time, that a new heavy tank, the T-10, was planned to be adopted from the USSR for GDR use. In the German documents regarding this tank, it is referred to as "Schwerer Panzer X", or just "Panzer X", basically being the "Germanized" version of the name T-10 (tank 10) with the German words "Schwerer Panzer", meaning heavy tank, and the number 10 being a roman numeral.

 

A total of 121 T-10s were supposedly ordered in 1957. At the same time, 7.000 shells for the main gun of the Panzer X were ordered, with a further 140.000 planned for 1960. There were also plans for driving-lessons (Motorstunden) planned in 1957, for 1960. The new T-10s were to be fielded by 1959 and the remaining IS-2s were to be converted into towing-machines.

 

All of these ambitions came to a stop, with the realisation, that the heavy-tank as a concept, will not be effective on the battlefields of the cold war, seeing as the new American M60 was able to perforate the T-10 from the front with it's 105mm cannon, while a heavy tank would be quite slow and it's now irrelevant armor did not justify the cumbersomeness of the a tank like the T-10, additionally, seeing as the USSR was constructing a new medium tank, the T-62, the GDR ultimately did not go through with the plan of introducing any T-10 into the NVA, and in fact, dropped the heavy tank altogether from their doctrine.

 

I will still suggest this vehicle for the German tech-tree, simply because of two reasons: Germany is in need of a replacement for the Tiger II 10,5cm (there really isn't any other heavy-tank at rank V Germany could get) and, in case a newer version like the T-10B or T-10M is chosen, it could be the only chance for Germany to get a "high-tier" heavy tank.

 

 

Versions:

T-10:

 

Compared to all later T-10 models, the base T-10 lacks any sort of stabilizer, it does not even sport the horizontal stabilizer of the T-10A. The cannon is also different, the T-10 has a 122mm D-25TA which has no fume-extractor, overall being quite old-fashioned.

The T-10 was also only fielded with two types of shells, AP and HE, this includes standard 122mm shells like the various BR-471 APHEBC shells and OF-472 HE, since sub-caliber and HEAT-FS ammo for the 122mm was firstly introduced in 1967 and by that time, the T-10 was already replaced by the T-10M with the more powerful high-pressure 122mm M-62-T2 L/43 cannon. The T-10 obr. 1953 also did not possess any night-vision capabilities, while the T-10 obr. 1960 did, more on that further down below.

 

Much like all other T-10's, the T-10 obr. 1953 is equipped with a chain-rammer loading-assistant mechanism, which is similar in operation to the loading-assistant mechanism of the IS-7, though instead of having the shells stored in a dedicated ammo-rack, like it is the case with the IS-7, the two-piece ammo of the 122mm cannon has to be placed on the loading-tray by hand.

 

Compared to the T-10M, the T-10 appears to have a faster reload-rate, with the T-10M having an average of 16 seconds, while the T-10 achieves under 10 seconds with use of the ready-rack.

 

This text from the book "Soviet T-10 Heavy Tank and Variants" by James Kinnear and Stephen L. Sewell talks about the differences of the T-10 and T-10M and mentions the increase in loading-time, though it sadly doesn‘t mention why the reload-time was increased:

 

image0.png

 

Loading-procedure of the T-10:

 

T-10A_reload.gif

 

 

T-10 pictures:

 

1.png
T-10_Potsdam_WEB.png

image0.jpg

19542Bt-102Bfront.png

19542Bt-10.png

trumpeter05545reviewcs_1.png

 

Schematics:

 

 

image0.jpg

t10m_draw_1.png

interior.png

 

T-10A:

 

The T-10A was not much different to the T-10, with the main difference being the addition of a vertical stabilizer for the 122mm cannon, as well as a fume-excavator, which reduced the buildup of residual propellant-fumes in the fighting compartment, during the firing of the cannon.

 

Pictures (T-10A):

 

Spoiler

04tdov457zt21.jpg

16018442386_366152e4e4_b.jpg

fe0041ebd4591f0f4b6c5a23021233a1.jpg

 

T-10B:

 

The T-10B's main improvement over the T-10A was a two-plain stabilizers, which allowed for accurate on the move firing and reloading of the main cannon.

 

Picture (T-10B):

 

Spoiler

unknown.png

 

T-10M:

 

Compared to the T-10B, the T-10M, which entered service in the same year as the former, received a new 122mm M62T2 cannon with improved ballistics and muzzle-brake, two-plain stabilizer, NVD equipment, 12,7mm HMG's were replaced with 14,5mm HMG's, full NBC protection and an improved 750hp V-12-6 engine.

 

Pictures (T-10M):

 

 

T-10 obr. 1960:

 

In 1960 an unknown amount of T-10's were upgraded with IR and night-sight capability, which would open the possibility to give Germany such a version, though this is more of a side-note.

 

Upgrades included:

 

TPN 1-29-14 night-sight

L-2 "Lua" IR-spotlight

TKN-1T IR-periscope

OU-3T IR-spotlight

FG-100 IR-spotlight

 

Picture of a T-10 obr. 1960:

 

modernized2Bt-102Bwith2Bnight2Bvision.pn

 

 

Specifications (T-10 obr. 1953):

Crew: 4

Lenght: 9,87m

Width: 3,56

Height: 2,43

Weight: 52t

Armament: 1x 122mm D-25TA (30rpg) 2x 12,7mm DShK HMG (500 rpg)

 

Conclusion:

I personally think that regardless of what version(s?) would be chosen by the developers, if this tank is ever added, it would be a great vehicle for the German tech-tree, being a tank with decent armour, decent mobility and decent firepower, which for a heavy tank, is something Germany does not have many of.

Any of the versions would be non-modified T-10's with the exception of the NVA markings on the turret, which is why I think the markings on the Panzer X should probably be part of all camos and be unremovable, much like the unremovable NVA markings on the SPz BMP-1.

As for the name, I believe "T-10 / T-10A / T-10B / T-10M" would be completely adequate, although the name "Schwerer Panzer X / Panzer X" would be unique and cool to see, I think the standard "T-10" specification would spark less confusion.

 

How the markings could look (picture is an East-German T-54AMZ):

 

c232647a-2d90-4f0a-942a-cbfbc79c7811.jpe

 

Thanks for reading and if you want to add or correct something, feel free to let me know.

 

Cheers! :salute:

 

Sources:

 
  • Like 5
  • Confused 4
  • Upvote 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Senior Suggestion Moderator

Open for discussion. :salute:

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, that's a pretty good idea to be honest. Because it's the non M version, you cannot directly call this a copy-paste vehicle. Do earlier T-10s also have the Autoloader/Loading Assistant from the T-10M?

 

 

Edited by MrEdHardy
  • Like 2
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
On 30/06/2019 at 00:44, MrEdHardy said:

I agree, that's a pretty good idea to be honest. Because it's the non M version, you cannot directly call this a copy-paste vehicle. Do earlier T-10s also have the Autoloader/Loading Assistant from the T-10M?

Thank you! Though neither the T-10, nor the T-10M have any sort of loading-mechanism. Are you maybe referring to the IS-7? :)

 

(this statement is of course no longer valid)

Edited by Stuhlfleisch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stuhlfleisch said:

Thank you! Though neither the T-10, nor the T-10M have any sort of loading-mechansism. I think you are referring to the IS-7. :)

Yeah sorry mixed that up:016:

  • Haha 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
Just now, MrEdHardy said:

Yeah sorry mixed that up:016:

Haha no problem. xD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's possibly the only replacement option for the 10,5cm Tiger 2 other than removing it entirely

Edited by MrEdHardy
forgot smth
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
7 hours ago, MrEdHardy said:

I think it's possibly the only replacement option for the 10,5cm Tiger 2 other than removing it entirely

It's definitely the only replacement that was built that could be added to rank V without raising eyebrows. Every other heavy-tank, that could replace it would either be rank IV or be a paper/fantasy design.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This would be a good tank to see, and it would be alright at taking the Tiger II 105's place in the tree, although I'd think it would have a higher BR.  

 

(I believe Gaijin said already that the Tiger II 105 and Panther II would just be made unresearchable for new players, but those who already have them could keep them.)

  • Like 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
On 30/06/2019 at 15:53, Milocat said:

This would be a good tank to see, and it would be alright at taking the Tiger II 105's place in the tree, although I'd think it would have a higher BR.  

 

(I believe Gaijin said already that the Tiger II 105 and Panther II would just be made unresearchable for new players, but those who already have them could keep them.)

Thanks for the support!

Edited by Stuhlfleisch
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator

Also, my apologies about an earlier statement, were I said the T-10 does not have any sort of loading mechanism. After looking a bit more into it, I found out, that it actually does have a sort of loading-assistant in form of a ram-loader as can be seen in this video (I included a timestamp, but if it doesn't work, you can see it at 00:54):

 

Edited by Stuhlfleisch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 29/06/2019 at 18:35, MrEdHardy said:

I think it's possibly the only replacement option for the 10,5cm Tiger 2 other than removing it entirely

That’s if the replacement is required to be a heavy tank.  The Jagdtigers (P) would be the closest replacement otherwise, with the same chassis, and since because of BR compression and constant whining, it’ll be the same BR even for some reason.

 

Anyways +1 to the “Panzer X” and a DDR line.  Maybe if it is dense enough, it is enough of an excuse to get a lineup to justify a separation mechanic between east and west.

  • Like 2
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator

Added info regarding the loading mechanism and corrected my statement on the BR. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I would love more NVA-tanks/units in the game but I also would like to have a seperate techtree for them. A solution could be the addition of a new tab like for the choppers. If you reached rank V/VI you could then research NVA planes/tanks/boats there and you wouldn't mix up Bundeswehr and NVA equipment. If that is not possible feel free to implement those in the normal techtree as germany (as a whole) used western and eastern tech.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
15 minutes ago, Obirzoe said:

Honestly I would love more NVA-tanks/units in the game but I also would like to have a seperate techtree for them. A solution could be the addition of a new tab like for the choppers. If you reached rank V/VI you could then research NVA planes/tanks/boats there and you wouldn't mix up Bundeswehr and NVA equipment. If that is not possible feel free to implement those in the normal techtree as germany (as a whole) used western and eastern tech.

Thanks for the support!

I personally would rather like to see all NVA vehicles to be implemented like any other German tank, plane, ship etc. like it has already been done with all the other NVA units that have been added.

Though I can see why a sub-tree, like the helicopter one, also would have quite the support behind it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stuhlfleisch said:

Thanks for the support!

I personally would rather like to see all NVA vehicles to be implemented like any other German tank, plane, ship etc. like it has already been done with all the other NVA units that have been added.

Though I can see why a sub-tree, like the helicopter one, also would have quite the support behind it.

 

As stated I am fine with both since there would be a lot of possible vehicles to implement. The reason behind the seperate tree would be (if possible gameplay wise) to allow a seperate matchmaker but if that is not possible from a technical standpoint then all those NVA/East german vehicles could help fill out the german ranks and replace paper vehicles.

  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
4 minutes ago, Obirzoe said:

 

As stated I am fine with both since there would be a lot of possible vehicles to implement. The reason behind the seperate tree would be (if possible gameplay wise) to allow a seperate matchmaker but if that is not possible from a technical standpoint then all those NVA/East german vehicles could help fill out the german ranks and replace paper vehicles.

 Yeah. We have to see what Gaijin comes up with if they are planning on adding more NVA vehicles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, *BrentD15 said:

-1

Purely paper design that isn't necessary.

It's a real tank that was built and tested, is there some sort of misunderstanding? The NVA evaluated and planned to use the Soviet T-10 ( do you not see the real life pictures above?). Can you further explain what you mean by "paper design?"

  • Like 2
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Technical Moderator
17 hours ago, *BrentD15 said:

-1

Purely paper design that isn't necessary.

Well, it‘s not a paper-design by the common definition. As Private_Wolk already said, the NVA fully intended to adopt the T-10, they already had a designation for it, ordered 121 of them, aswell as a lot of ammo and even planned driving-lessons.

Even though they changed their minds at the last second, in my mind, this makes the Panzer X a viable tank, that could be added to the German tech-tree.

 

As for unnecessary, not at all! The T-10 is one of the very, very few heavy-tanks, that could replace the Tiger II 10,5cm at rank V. Basically all other German heavies would be paper designs, like the Pzkpfw VII Löwe and E-75.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, *BrentD15 said:

-1

Purely paper design that isn't necessary.

It has more rights to be in the game than Gaijin's Tiger 105.

+1 to fight with the USSR in RB and SB

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, *BrentD15 said:

-1

Purely paper design that isn't necessary.

It is obvious he read the title, and left a comment after not only not reading any of the article, but probably not even seeing the pictures at absolute minimum.  I think he read the “Panzer X” title and automatically thought of that bubble-y shaped fictional design or whatever.

But seriously, literally the picture would have proved that wrong, no offence but 1% of effort would prevent this misunderstanding.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Stuhlfleisch changed the title to Schwerer Panzer X / T-10 (T-10, T-10A, T-10B, T-10M)
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...