Jump to content


T58?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
19 replies to this topic

__gabriel__ #1 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 20:23

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16055 battles
  • 5,930
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010
Posted Image

French style oscillating turret, auto loader,

Quote

The T30 Heavy Tank was an World War II American tank project developed to counter new German tanks. The T30 was designed at same time as the T29 Heavy Tank. Pilot models were started in April 1945 and were delivered in 1947.[1] The 155 mm fired two-piece (shell and charge) ammunition. The loader was helped by a powered rammer.[2]
A variant designated T30E1 had an additional hatch at the back of the turret for ejecting the shell casings.[3] Another variant of the tank was the T30E2. The weight of the T30 shell was 43 kg and the charge 18 kg, a total of 61 kg for the whole ammunition, which made it difficult to handle.[4]
A post-war era variant designated T58 had the conventional turret replaced with an oscillating version that allowed the fitting of an automated loader.

http://en.valka.cz/v...opic.php/t/1383

Quote

Armor:

Type: Tower - homogeneous cast steel hull - welded from rolled plates and castings

thickness of armor:

Body:

front: 5 inch (127 mm), tilt 60 ° - top, 4.5 inches (114 mm), angle 50 °, - lower
Sides: 2 inches (51 mm), angle 40 °, - top, 1.75 inches (44 mm), gradient 30 °; - lower
rear front: 1.5 inches (38 mm), inclined 30 °, - upper, 1 inch (25 mm), tilt 60 ° - bottom
cap: 1 inch (25 mm), inclination 90 °;
bottom: 1.5 inches (38 mm), inclination 90 °; - front, 1.25 inches (32 mm), inclination 90 °; - Rear

Tower:

front: 5 inches (127 mm), angle is 60 °;
Sides: 3.25 to 2.75 inches (83-70 mm), gradient 40 °;
rear panel: 2 inches (51 mm), gradient 40 °;
ceiling: 1.5 inches (38 mm), angle of 80-90 °;

Armament:

gun: 155mm T180 T170 mounted in the bed in the tower
delivery: electrically and manually 360 °;
speed: 20 sec/360 °;
Elevation: +12 ° Manual; to -8 °;
elevation rate: 4 ° / sec;
Rate of fire: 23 rpm ​​(in theory)
Charge: automatic with 6-cylinder early
Stabilisation: No

23 RPM theoretical  :o

zayack #2 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 20:51

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 3267 battles
  • 317
  • Member since:
    10-29-2010

View Postgabriel, on Mar 23 2011 - 20:23, said:

Posted Image

French style oscillating turret, auto loader,



http://en.valka.cz/v...opic.php/t/1383



23 RPM theoretical  :o
This thing would be so OP putting 155s down range faster then i can shoot 75s would be so much pwnge only problem is that you would have limited ammo capacity

__gabriel__ #3 Posted Mar 23 2011 - 21:20

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 16055 battles
  • 5,930
  • [VILIN] VILIN
  • Member since:
    07-18-2010

View Postzayack, on Mar 23 2011 - 20:51, said:

This thing would be so OP putting 155s down range faster then i can shoot 75s would be so much pwnge only problem is that you would have limited ammo capacity

Oh, I'm sure the RoF would be drastically reduced, something like 6 maybe. After all nothing in game reflects RL.

Less armor than the T30 but higher RoF?

not proposing it for game clearly, just think it's interesting

nozrat #4 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 16:25

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 5879 battles
  • 33
  • [-K-] -K-
  • Member since:
    09-22-2010
Wow you have same idea with me

http://forum.worldof...d/page__st__780

Its good tank really, with 155mm gun it will be the same as T30 with better spec
The dev must adding this tank as US second line heavy tank

lets make polling for it  :Smile-izmena:

DrBlue62 #5 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 18:56

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 6280 battles
  • 1,193
  • Member since:
    12-20-2010

View Postgabriel, on Mar 23 2011 - 20:23, said:

Posted Image

French style oscillating turret, auto loader,



http://en.valka.cz/v...opic.php/t/1383



23 RPM theoretical  :o

I don't think we'll see one bit of "historical accuracy" on this tank.

nozrat #6 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 19:21

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 5879 battles
  • 33
  • [-K-] -K-
  • Member since:
    09-22-2010
You can see the T58 project here before M103 born and after T30 prototype

http://sa100.ru/armo..._Tanks/5.2.html

if french tank got second heavy line why not US heavy ???

Jayzilla #7 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 19:30

    Sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 18379 battles
  • 221
  • [RELIC] RELIC
  • Member since:
    09-05-2010
I too would agree on putting a second US Heavy, but the rate of fire of this tank is just too godly. Since we are leaning away from WWII and meandering towards the Cold War, weapons race it its!

lostwingman #8 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 19:37

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 20250 battles
  • 19,781
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View Postnozrat, on Jun 15 2011 - 19:21, said:

You can see the T58 project here before M103 born and after T30 prototype

http://sa100.ru/armo..._Tanks/5.2.html

if french tank got second heavy line why not US heavy ???

French second heavy line is not confirmed I thought. Or at least those are only fan made tank trees (still good trees though).

But still I would love to see more tanks of course, and some of the alternate American heavies floating on the ground look pretty interesting.

SFC_Storm #9 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 20:03

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 11945 battles
  • 3,613
  • [-TRN-] -TRN-
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010
Also more Limbs would be lost and fired downrange than actual ammo :)P

KilljoyCutter #10 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 20:16

    Major

  • Players
  • 8469 battles
  • 16,484
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
It mentions the 6-cylinder thing in the section on the gun.  

I think it's refering to the auto-loader having a 6-round quickfire capacity, after which the 6-round feed has to be reloaded.

Hotwired #11 Posted Jun 15 2011 - 22:10

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 1,033
  • Member since:
    09-12-2010

View Postgabriel, on Mar 23 2011 - 20:23, said:

23 RPM theoretical  :o

View Postzayack, on Mar 23 2011 - 20:51, said:

This thing would be so OP putting 155s down range faster then i can shoot 75s would be so much pwnge only problem is that you would have limited ammo capacity

You're looking at the numbers and assuming more than it really is.

Only warships or massive fixed gun emplacements have the space and weight capacity to have a fully automatic loading system for a cannon.

What the French tried was a 6 shot magazine which was manually loaded, some of these magazines had to be loaded from OUTSIDE the tank.

The system could fire those its 6 shots at whatever the rate was then the magazine had to be manually reloaded again.

So. Six shots at 23rpm then you're helpless for several minutes while you reload the magazine again.

ParaGod #12 Posted Jun 16 2011 - 00:32

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 3479 battles
  • 239
  • Member since:
    06-09-2011

View PostHotwired, on Jun 15 2011 - 22:10, said:

You're looking at the numbers and assuming more than it really is.

Only warships or massive fixed gun emplacements have the space and weight capacity to have a fully automatic loading system for a cannon.

What the French tried was a 6 shot magazine which was manually loaded, some of these magazines had to be loaded from OUTSIDE the tank.

The system could fire those its 6 shots at whatever the rate was then the magazine had to be manually reloaded again.

So. Six shots at 23rpm then you're helpless for several minutes while you reload the magazine again.


  Actually the soviet T-64 had a full automatic loader.  Army Guide

Schematics on the auto loader.  T-72 Auto-loader

UKKSuurSuomi #13 Posted Jun 16 2011 - 13:57

    Private

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 5
  • Member since:
    10-06-2010
I think this tank should be a tier 9-10 td... Just like It's parent the t30 will be. Or make it a premium td with the rapid fire capability but with hp as low as t29 or t20... Of course the ability kill 2 tier 10 in under a minute would be op unless severe hinderances to its other attributes would not be implemented, maybe accuracy and aim speed should be in the u-11 territory...

JakeEDogge #14 Posted Dec 20 2011 - 05:08

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 12356 battles
  • 64
  • Member since:
    08-04-2011

View PostUKKSuurSuomi, on Jun 16 2011 - 13:57, said:

I think this tank should be a tier 9-10 td... Just like It's parent the t30 will be. Or make it a premium td with the rapid fire capability but with hp as low as t29 or t20... Of course the ability kill 2 tier 10 in under a minute would be op unless severe hinderances to its other attributes would not be implemented, maybe accuracy and aim speed should be in the u-11 territory...
I would tend to agree, let the boys fire quickly but spray them around. Then, two minutes into the fight you look up and realise you're out of ammo. That'd be kinda funny.  :D

Faren #15 Posted Dec 20 2011 - 22:12

    Corporal

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 74
  • Member since:
    01-13-2011
I found some new heavy tanks projects, so maybe there is hope for new tech tree:

I would like to see american tanks with turrets and autoloading like frenchies  :rolleyes:
New tanks like T58

Arcade1000 #16 Posted Mar 27 2012 - 05:42

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11227 battles
  • 12
  • Member since:
    05-30-2011
I saw in a "You ask we Reply" that they will be implementing tier X Tank Destroyers and Medium tanks. IMO The T58 would a be a godlike tier X tank destroyer if they were to give its "Historical Stats". 4 round drum with a the 750 average damage per shot would just rip apart anything that sits in front of this beast.  :o  of course the magazine reload would have to be terribly long.

hell I wouldn't even care if the thing had crap armor lol.

Source: http://worldoftanks....-march-23-2012/

Dands #17 Posted Mar 27 2012 - 23:23

    Staff sergeant

  • Beta Testers
  • 6471 battles
  • 491
  • Member since:
    08-03-2010

View PostDrBlue62, on Jun 15 2011 - 18:56, said:

I don't think we'll see one bit of "historical accuracy" on this tank.

Well it's not Russian is it!  :lol:

Gyarados #18 Posted Mar 28 2012 - 10:39

    Major

  • Council of Armored Forces
  • 12434 battles
  • 10,176
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    07-09-2010
I'm not sure if a Tier X medium or tank destroyer is going to be terrible wonderful to implement. I can understand the mediums basically being faster and having a very slight amount more HP, but if they had better guns and armor, they'd make Tier X heavies obsolete. Tank destroyers are only an issue because of the technology that's already in game.

panzerwagoneer #19 Posted Mar 30 2012 - 18:00

    Captain

  • Players
  • 15338 battles
  • 1,933
  • [STAND] STAND
  • Member since:
    03-28-2011
its a nice concept but 155mm is too big for a 6 cylinder auto loader, the french even had difficulties making a 120mm auto loader work which is why the prototype never made it into production. The rounds were simply too big and too heavy for the mechanism to handle, so some how I doubt 155mm shells would be easier to handle being even bigger then the 120mm shells. Still I would love to see some US autoloader tanks in game. We did have designs for  them first after all.

BubbaQ #20 Posted Mar 30 2012 - 19:18

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 7294 battles
  • 40
  • [DTSD] DTSD
  • Member since:
    06-08-2011
Rampage did a ton of Research on this for many Tiers. Check it out, great stuff, I could only hope...one day

http://forum.worldof...us-heavy-route/