The BT-42 is a Finnish modification of the captured Soviet BT-7 tank, outfitted with a new turret housing a high-caliber howitzer.
Continue reading “War Thunder: BT-42”
Category: War Thunder
‘FIRE AND ICE’ UPDATE / WAR THUNDER
War Thunder – HJ-9: The Red Arrow
The HJ-9 is a Chinese wheeled ATGM carrier which entered service with the PLA in the late 1990s as a platform for a newly developed anti-tank missile. Coming to War Thunder as part of the next major update, the HJ-9 will soon reinforce the top ranks of the Chinese ground forces tree with a highly capable new tank hunter!
Briefly: A late 1990s Chinese wheeled missile carrier, equipped with the powerful ATGMs.
HJ-9, tank destroyer, China, Rank VI
Features:
- Superb mobility
- Powerful missiles
- Thermal vision
- Retractable launcher
- Light armor
Continue reading “War Thunder – HJ-9: The Red Arrow”
The Main Problems Of War Thunder: Ground Forces
“Worm Thunder” 2022 April Fools Event
German Intelligence on the M6 Heavy Tank “Dreadnought”
This is a German armored combat vehicle comparison chart (“Panzerkampfwagen Vergleich”), released in 1945. Here, we can see a distinct lineup of various vehicles side by side, starting from Deutschland / Germany, England-U.S.A. / Allied, and Russland / Russia. Light tank on the left, medium tanks in the middle, and heavy tank on the right, pretty conventional.
At first glance, there appears to be nothing out of ordinary with this chart. But soon you will notice a rather unusual vehicle at the end of the Allied tank lineup. Instead of exhibiting the combat-proven British Churchill Infantry Tank, the chart instead draws upon the design of an American T1 Heavy Tank, peculiarly nicknamed “Dreadnought”.
We can draw some conclusions based on this evidence:
- The Germans were well aware of the existence of US heavy tank development since the beginning, particularly with the T1. This is based on the silhouette design. Taking shape on one of the earliest prototypes armed with commander’s cupola .30 cal machine gun and internally-mounted anti-aircraft .50 cal machine gun facing rearward. The prototype would most likely be the T1E2.
- They expected to see combat against the T1 on the battlefield at some point. It was even designated as “M1”, denoting M for “Model”, a designation used by the US Army for inventories that have been approved for production. In reality, the tank never left the US soil due to transportation issues and general objection by the Army Ground Forces from using heavy tanks.
- How they acquired data of the US heavy tank was rather straightforward, contrary to expectations. The T1/M6 saw frequent use by the US Army as a parade and propaganda tool in major US cities during the Second World War. The main purpose of it was to display the might of the US Armored Forces to general public, despite never entering combat at any capacity, and gaining support from war bonds in return. It would be no surprise if German Spies could easily obtain sufficient data on this behemoth of a tank.
- However, the data they obtained were quite outdated (and also slightly incorrect), especially by this time and year. The tank’s final form for production was notably different from its prototype form, including omission of the redundant commander’s cupola machine gun and rear-facing anti-air machine gun. The production designation wouldn’t be M1. Instead, it would be called as M6.
- “Dreadnought” was never an official name given by the US. It was the German who nicknamed it, hence the peculiarity.
Special thanks to Whelmy for providing this valuable information.
T29 and T32 Heavy Tank – A Divergence in the US Heavy Tank Design
The T29 and T32 represented a divergence in the American heavy tank design after the development of T26 series heavy tank. The T29 with its large turret mounting the 105 mm gun, and the T32 with its ludicrously armored frontal protection are some of the main key distinctions between them. While the U.S. Armored Division would culminate their final heavy tank for service with the T26E3 Pershing for the rest of World War II, their development on even heavier versions did not end there.
Committed to developing the US heavy tanks even further, four new heavy tank projects were laid out as a response from the Army Ground Forces to modify the Pershing tank with heavier firepower and/or heavier protection. Two of those only required modifications on the T26 hull with no need to build an entirely new design. One was armed with a high velocity derivative of the Pershing’s 90 mm gun, known as the T26E4, and the other was reinforced with thicker armor casting at the front for increased protection, known as the T26E5. The remaining two had higher design requirements to fulfill that simply altering the main hull of Pershing simply wouldn’t be possible. Enter the T29 and T32 heavy tank.
The T29 sported a new high velocity 105 mm gun, something unheard of in the US tank armor development before. Such a large caliber cannon was not without a purpose, as it allowed the T29 to perform multi-purpose mission of destroying heavily armored fortification, while also engaging contemporary heavy tanks of the time on an equal footing, befitting for its role as a true heavy tank. However, the original T26E1 turret was simply not capable of mounting this rather cumbersome gun, and as such, a new turret design was urgently needed, a gigantic one.
A new power pack was provided to give enough propulsion for the T29, as its design and configuration bloated the tank’s combat weight by up to 22 tonnes from the Pershing, and only 4 tonnes lighter than the Tiger II, which proved to be a major liability in terms of logistics and transportation. However, its 105 mm was greatly appreciated for what it brought to the table, and was almost approved for mass production with a contract of 1200 units to participate in a cancelled plan for a full-scale invasion of Mainland Japan. It then continued endurance and engineering trials at home and was tested with various high caliber guns, resulting in two more variants to be developed, known as the T30 (155 mm), and the T34 (120 mm).
The T32, on the other hand, put more emphasis on being an impregnable mobile fortress from the front. The frontal armor consisted of a cast hull with 127 mm armor set at 54° and a cast turret with 298 mm of armor on the mantlet, which would give sufficient effective armor to deflect the most powerful AP shots of the time. The T32 would take a role as an assault tank, in the same lineage as the M4A3E2 Jumbo assault tank: Break through enemy defenses and exploit its heavily armored front to withstand enemy gunfires.
While this tank’s armor was loosely similar in term of armor construction as the T26E5, experiences from the M4A3E2’s combat in Ardennes demanded a more powerful engine to allow the assault tank to keep up with the spearheading forces. Therefore, an upgraded power pack consisting of a V12 engine and a cross-drive transmission was produced. That would mean a new, lengthened hull was preferred instead of retaining the original Pershing hull, which would leave not much room to install the new engine and transmission. Though, unlike the T29, the T32 had a more tolerable combat weight at 54 tonnes, just short of 3 tonnes than the Tiger I. However, the T32 was only partially finished by the end of the war, and only produced in limited number, generating one last variant with all-rolled front hull armor instead of cast, designated as the T32E1.
The T32 unfortunately was met with a development dead end, as the Pershing-based hull was quickly getting phased out by the Army, in favor of a relatively novel tank design in the 50’s. The 90 mm high velocity cannon was considered inadequate in combating the prevalent Soviet armor as well. Instead, the large caliber gun development from the T29 series finally found its usefulness when the T34, with its 120 mm T53 cannon, was improved even further, paving way into the development and production of the M103 Gun Tank.
