Ensign's Q&A Answers #1

By EnsignExpendable

A while ago, I opened the floor for some questions. Here is the first batch. Some of them are edited for grammar. A number of questions were very much outside my specialty, so I could not answer them, sorry.

Q: Were there ever actually any plans to upgun the IS-3 with the 122 mm BL-9, or did WG pull that out of their asses?
A: The BL-9 was meant for the ISU-122BM tank destroyer only. I'm pretty sure that the BL-9 and BL-10 projects were cancelled before the IS-3 was even produced. However, the М-62-Т2 gun was planned to replace the D-25 on all platforms that carried it, including the IS-2 and IS-3.

Q: Is it true that the IS-8 share the same hull as the Object 268? Obviously, in real life, as in-game it's different.
A: They differed a little bit. The T-10 hull is 7250 mm in length. The Object 268 hull was 6950 mm in length. The width of the two hulls is the same.

Q: I know your specialty is Soviet tanks, but could you or Zarax write a special article about the history of the German E-Series tanks?
A: I'm sure Zarax will get there eventually. Meanwhile, there is an article from the Russian WoT website about the E-50, briefly talking about all E-series, available here.

Q: What do you have on the F-39 95 mm tank gun?

A: In 1939-1940, Soviet intelligence brought information of heavier and heavier tanks being developed in the West by Germany, France and Great Britain. There was a program to increase the armament of heavy tanks from 76 mm to 85, 95, and 107 mm guns to deal with these new threats. The start of the war interfered with these developments, especially since German tanks, at the start of the war, did not warrant a gun more powerful than the F-34. 

As for the F-39 specifically, it was developed in 1938, and tested in a T-28 in 1940. The gun had two loading options: one piece (the shell had to be tilted in the T-28 turret) and two-piece. The ballistics of the gun were similar to the F-28 divisional gun. However, the gun proved too powerful for the T-28's turret ring, and heavier tanks could be equipped with superior 107 mm guns, so the project was shelved.

Q: Can you tell me or in a blog how the Russian speaking community is thinking about tier 10 matches and regarding artillery? Are they as unhappy with it like the EU community?

A: Believe it or not, the complaining on every WoT forum, worldwide, is nearly identical, regardless of language. RU cluster players complain about arty, UP German tanks, and matchmaker conspiracies too.

Q: Was there a prototype of T-62A built on the dark side of the moon, with 120-140 mm of armor and with 54-60 km speed ?

A: The T-62A was produced very briefly, and lost out to the T-62 with only a handful of units built. Object 167, the T-62's planned successor, could achieve 60 kph. The T-62D, a 1983 modernization, received additional hull and turret armour, as well as the Drozd active protection system. Further versions received better engines and better armour. However, since even the original T-62 is a bit too much for this game, don't expect any of its successors to show up.

Q: What do you think about the Idea of implementing the Russian BMP-1 into world of tanks. What do you think its stats would be like and how would it match up in game. Would it even be possible to add it into the game and have historical stats?
A: Sadly, the BMP-1's smoothbore gun disqualifies it from WoT. However, as an arms show pamphlet tells me, the BMP-1 can be modernized with the combat module from the BMP-2, bringing with it a 30 mm 2A42 autocannon. The gun penetrates quite poorly compared to a tank gun (51 mm at a 60 degree slope at 500 meters with the most modern ammunition). This, combined with very light armour, and 65 kph maximum speed could make it somewhat viable as a higher tier Pz I Ausf C. I want one already.

Q: As you know they are implementing the Object 907 Tier 10 medium as a gift tank for clan wars or something else probably. But after studying the armor model for it on Gamesmodels3d it does not match this armor layout picture. If you happen to know which one of these is correct that would be great. If that picture is right then the model we are getting in game is woefully under armored.
A: A part of the Object 907 Medium project requirements was the increase of the T-54's armour by 30%. The armour layout in the schematic seems a lot closer to the spirit of the project than the in-game version. Russian Bias fails again.

That's it for this batch! Send in more questions to tankarchives@gmail.com.