Tank Mayhem - T-100 Heavy Tank
Thenoob1234
Jun 09 2012
After scavenging around certain websites on google, I found a tank named the "T-100 Heavy Tank". I think it would be a nice tank to have in-game.
After 1937, the Red Army lacked a heavily armored, sufficiently armed heavy tank. Through 1938 to 1939, a new tank was developed, ending in the T-100 heavy tank project.
The T-100 was a multi-turreted heavy tank, developed as a heavy breakthrough tank in Factory 185 of Kirov in Leningrad. The T-100 was designed by the Red Army to replace the aging T-35, which was another multi-turreted tank. The T-35 lacked armor, and was too slow and cumbersome to be any good on modern, fast-paced tank battlefields. The T-100 was to be faster, while having thicker armor and better cannons.
The first project, dubbed the Objekt 100, was the initial prototype of the T-100. With armor at 70mm on the front, 70mm on the sides, and 50mm on the back, it was far sturdier than the T-35, which had, at maximum, 30mm of armor. However, Objekt 100 was rejected as it's engine could not cope with the initial weight of 56 tons.
The second project, launched in 1939, was the T-100. It had the same armor as the Objekt 100, but had an upgraded petrol 4-stroke V-12 GAM-34BT water cooled engine pumping out 850 horsepower.
Designed in competition with the SMK project, a tank similar in size and design to the T-100, it featured many of the same components of the SMK. However, it had a stronger engine, and thicker armor. It also was significantly heavier than the SMK, at 58 tons when combat-loaded.
Prominent features of the T-100 included a long hull with two turrets. The frontal turret was placed under the turret in the back, and fired a 47mm gun. The larger, bulkier turret in the back housed a 75mm L-11 gun. In many ways, the hull resembled a stretched KV-1 hull.
Two separate variants of the T-100 were also constructed, respectively the T-100(Z) and the Objekt 103.
The T-100(Z) had a much larger turret than the T-100, and mounted a 152mm howitzer cannon resembling the KV-2's 152mm gun. It would be inaccurate but have huge alpha and splash damage.
The Objekt 103 would have a huge turret, even larger than the T-100(Z)'s turret. It would mount the fearsome 130mm B-13 Naval gun. This would give it a punch nearly twice it's tier. It would have great penetration with good damage, but low Rate Of Fire.
So, this could, potentially, be an tier 5 heavy tank. It would have average armor but a woeful stock gun. Thus, it would act much like a buffed, larger AMX40 or B1 Bis. However, when upgraded, it would have firepower far superior to it's counterparts.
So what do you think? Should the T-100 be added in game?
Picture Of T-100:
http://ww2drawings.j.../1-Vehicles(bis)/USSR/4-HeavyTanks/T-100(late)/p1.jpg
Picture Of T-100(Z):
http://ww2drawings.j.../1-Vehicles(bis)/USSR/4-HeavyTanks/T-100Z/p1.jpg
Picture Of Objekt 103:
http://ww2drawings.j.../1-Vehicles(bis)/USSR/4-HeavyTanks/Objekt-103/p1.jpg
After 1937, the Red Army lacked a heavily armored, sufficiently armed heavy tank. Through 1938 to 1939, a new tank was developed, ending in the T-100 heavy tank project.
The T-100 was a multi-turreted heavy tank, developed as a heavy breakthrough tank in Factory 185 of Kirov in Leningrad. The T-100 was designed by the Red Army to replace the aging T-35, which was another multi-turreted tank. The T-35 lacked armor, and was too slow and cumbersome to be any good on modern, fast-paced tank battlefields. The T-100 was to be faster, while having thicker armor and better cannons.
The first project, dubbed the Objekt 100, was the initial prototype of the T-100. With armor at 70mm on the front, 70mm on the sides, and 50mm on the back, it was far sturdier than the T-35, which had, at maximum, 30mm of armor. However, Objekt 100 was rejected as it's engine could not cope with the initial weight of 56 tons.
The second project, launched in 1939, was the T-100. It had the same armor as the Objekt 100, but had an upgraded petrol 4-stroke V-12 GAM-34BT water cooled engine pumping out 850 horsepower.
Designed in competition with the SMK project, a tank similar in size and design to the T-100, it featured many of the same components of the SMK. However, it had a stronger engine, and thicker armor. It also was significantly heavier than the SMK, at 58 tons when combat-loaded.
Prominent features of the T-100 included a long hull with two turrets. The frontal turret was placed under the turret in the back, and fired a 47mm gun. The larger, bulkier turret in the back housed a 75mm L-11 gun. In many ways, the hull resembled a stretched KV-1 hull.
Two separate variants of the T-100 were also constructed, respectively the T-100(Z) and the Objekt 103.
The T-100(Z) had a much larger turret than the T-100, and mounted a 152mm howitzer cannon resembling the KV-2's 152mm gun. It would be inaccurate but have huge alpha and splash damage.
The Objekt 103 would have a huge turret, even larger than the T-100(Z)'s turret. It would mount the fearsome 130mm B-13 Naval gun. This would give it a punch nearly twice it's tier. It would have great penetration with good damage, but low Rate Of Fire.
So, this could, potentially, be an tier 5 heavy tank. It would have average armor but a woeful stock gun. Thus, it would act much like a buffed, larger AMX40 or B1 Bis. However, when upgraded, it would have firepower far superior to it's counterparts.
So what do you think? Should the T-100 be added in game?
Picture Of T-100:
http://ww2drawings.j.../1-Vehicles(bis)/USSR/4-HeavyTanks/T-100(late)/p1.jpg
Picture Of T-100(Z):
http://ww2drawings.j.../1-Vehicles(bis)/USSR/4-HeavyTanks/T-100Z/p1.jpg
Picture Of Objekt 103:
http://ww2drawings.j.../1-Vehicles(bis)/USSR/4-HeavyTanks/Objekt-103/p1.jpg
mrasianman2
Jun 09 2012
A tier 5 heavy with a 130 mm naval gun? You do realized that would be putting a tier X gun on a tier 5...you would have to nerf that thing to oblivion to make it anywhere closed to being balanced.
lostwingman
Jun 09 2012
All of them should be added to the game, but I think the Obj 103 might be better at a tier....higher than than tier 5...
KnightFandragon
Jun 09 2012
mrasianman2, on Jun 09 2012 - 01:34, said:
A tier 5 heavy with a 130 mm naval gun? You do realized that would be putting a tier X gun on a tier 5...you would have to nerf that thing to oblivion to make it anywhere closed to being balanced.
Its Russian, it would be BUFFED!!!....t5? Perfectly balanced comrade!
sharlin648
Jun 09 2012
The T100 was a real tank and was basically a super KV and could work as a teir 6 tank but then again it would depend on WG getting the multi-turret/gun feature working, which I really doubt they will ever do.
lostwingman
Jun 09 2012
sharlin648, on Jun 09 2012 - 10:55, said:
The T100 was a real tank and was basically a super KV and could work as a teir 6 tank but then again it would depend on WG getting the multi-turret/gun feature working, which I really doubt they will ever do.
I'm pretty sure that the T-100 and designs similar were precursors to the KV.
OOPMan
Jun 09 2012
The T-100 was developed in competition to the T-35 if I recall. Both sucked...
gman2725
Jun 09 2012
mrasianman2, on Jun 09 2012 - 01:34, said:
A tier 5 heavy with a 130 mm naval gun? You do realized that would be putting a tier X gun on a tier 5...you would have to nerf that thing to oblivion to make it anywhere closed to being balanced.
Sadly this is why we will also never see a Patton in game with its 160mm (British) and 173mm (US) demolitions cannon.
sharlin648
Jun 10 2012
The T100 and its competitor as well as the KV-1 were built to replace the T-35 and give the Soviets a heavy tank. All were tested in combat in Finland as their final exam. The T-100 and the other new multi-turret tank the SMK failed to perform. The SMK got tracked by a mine and could not be towed to safety by any of the soviet tanks, even the T-100 could not tow it. The KV-1 performed well and won the competition to become the new heavy tank.
Thenoob1234
Jun 10 2012
sharlin648, on Jun 10 2012 - 07:40, said:
The T100 and its competitor as well as the KV-1 were built to replace the T-35 and give the Soviets a heavy tank. All were tested in combat in Finland as their final exam. The T-100 and the other new multi-turret tank the SMK failed to perform. The SMK got tracked by a mine and could not be towed to safety by any of the soviet tanks, even the T-100 could not tow it. The KV-1 performed well and won the competition to become the new heavy tank.
Incorrect. The T-100 was built before the KV-1, as was the SMK tank. The KV-1 chassis was built after the SMK was built, by compressing the hull and adding additional armor. The SMK's main turret became the KV-1's turret. And no, the T-100 and SMK were not tested at the same time as the KV-1, because they were built before the KV-1 was built. Finally, the SMK tank never had a landmine detonation. The track cracked because of the bad road conditions and the huge weight of the tank.
sharlin648
Jun 10 2012
I've read several books all that state the SMK hit an anti-tank mine and thats what imobilised it and led to it being abandoned in the snow for 2 months before being recovered. I know that all three designs were tested in Finland in combat conditions, that they didn't go back to the drawingboard after the falure of the SMK and T-100 and rip out a turret and compress the hull. All three designs existed at the same time.
Also I don't know why you downvoted me, if i'm wrong i'm wrong but you're being rather spiteful about it for no apparent reason.
Also although its from Wikipedia and thus open to being downrignt wrong:
The SMK, the two KV-1 prototypes and the two T-100 prototypes were put through proving trials before being tested operationally in combat during the Winter War against Finland. The vehicles formed a company of the 91st Tank Battalion of the 20th Heavy Tank Brigade. The unit was under the command of the son of the Defence Commissar. After being immobilized by a mine, the SMK had to be abandoned and was not recovered for 2 months.
The KV design proved superior in both trials in Finland and was accepted.
Thank you very much.
Edited by sharlin648, Jun 10 2012 - 14:33.
Also I don't know why you downvoted me, if i'm wrong i'm wrong but you're being rather spiteful about it for no apparent reason.
Also although its from Wikipedia and thus open to being downrignt wrong:
The SMK, the two KV-1 prototypes and the two T-100 prototypes were put through proving trials before being tested operationally in combat during the Winter War against Finland. The vehicles formed a company of the 91st Tank Battalion of the 20th Heavy Tank Brigade. The unit was under the command of the son of the Defence Commissar. After being immobilized by a mine, the SMK had to be abandoned and was not recovered for 2 months.
The KV design proved superior in both trials in Finland and was accepted.
Thank you very much.
Edited by sharlin648, Jun 10 2012 - 14:33.
Thenoob1234
Jun 10 2012
sharlin648, on Jun 10 2012 - 14:30, said:
I've read several books all that state the SMK hit an anti-tank mine and thats what imobilised it and led to it being abandoned in the snow for 2 months before being recovered. I know that all three designs were tested in Finland in combat conditions, that they didn't go back to the drawingboard after the falure of the SMK and T-100 and rip out a turret and compress the hull. All three designs existed at the same time.
Also I don't know why you downvoted me, if i'm wrong i'm wrong but you're being rather spiteful about it for no apparent reason.
Also although its from Wikipedia and thus open to being downrignt wrong:
The SMK, the two KV-1 prototypes and the two T-100 prototypes were put through proving trials before being tested operationally in combat during the Winter War against Finland. The vehicles formed a company of the 91st Tank Battalion of the 20th Heavy Tank Brigade. The unit was under the command of the son of the Defence Commissar. After being immobilized by a mine, the SMK had to be abandoned and was not recovered for 2 months.
The KV design proved superior in both trials in Finland and was accepted.
Thank you very much.
Also I don't know why you downvoted me, if i'm wrong i'm wrong but you're being rather spiteful about it for no apparent reason.
Also although its from Wikipedia and thus open to being downrignt wrong:
The SMK, the two KV-1 prototypes and the two T-100 prototypes were put through proving trials before being tested operationally in combat during the Winter War against Finland. The vehicles formed a company of the 91st Tank Battalion of the 20th Heavy Tank Brigade. The unit was under the command of the son of the Defence Commissar. After being immobilized by a mine, the SMK had to be abandoned and was not recovered for 2 months.
The KV design proved superior in both trials in Finland and was accepted.
Thank you very much.
I did not downvote you. You are right, I was misinformed. The KV-1 prototypes were already being tested along with the T-100. This, I did not know. Thanks for telling me, I appreciate it.
