The Missing SUs

SU stands for "Samohodnaya Ustanovka" (self-propelled mount). It is an index used to designate an artillery system on a self propelled chassis. It has been applied to many types of vehicles: trucks, tractors, tanks. Only one factor is common: the vehicle consists of a gun mounted on something that previously did not have that gun. Interestingly enough, while in English literature turretless tanks are split into the categories of tank destroyers and self propelled artillery, Russian has no such distinction. A turretless tank is called SAU: Samohodyana Artilleriyskaya Ustanovka (self-propelled artillery mount). Some tanks could fill the role of both TD and SPG. The SU-152 and all of its successors had the ability to provide indirect fire, while commonly seen as tank destroyers in historical documents. In the Russian WoT, they are split into "Art-SAU" (artillery) and PT-SAU (tank destroyers).

The numbers that follow the index could mean a number of things. They could mean the caliber (SU-152), tank of origin (SU-26), or be a sequential index (SU-5). This article will go through the SU indexed vehicles, and give a brief description of them.

SU-1

The SU-1 was developed way back in 1931 on the T-26 chassis. A 76.2 mm short barreled model 1927 gun was located in a casemate. Gun depression was -5 degrees, elevation was 23 degrees 30 minutes, and horizontal aiming was 5 degrees each way. The vehicle also had two DT machine guns. It had armour up to 13 mm thick, and could achieve a speed of up to 30 kph. Tested in December of 1931, it did not pass trials. An improved version based on the T-26-4 was developed, but never built.

SU-2

The index SU-2 was given to a more artillery-like vehicle, a 76.2 mm model 1902 gun on the back of a Kommunar 9GU tractor. The gun could rotate 360 degrees. The vehicle had 10 mm of armour all around. It could reach a maximum speed of 12 kph, and did not pass trials. Read about other Soviet tractor tank projects here.

SU-3

Going back to a tank-like vehicle, the SU-3 (also called SU-76K, or T-27K) was based on the T-27 tankette. It was created in 1933 to accompany scout groups and cavalry, which explains its relatively high speed compared to the previous SUs (45 kph). The gun was a recoilless 76.2 mm "K" Kurchevskiy semi-automatic gun, installed instead of the regular machine gun. Its traverse was quite small: 5 degrees to the side, 1 down, 5 up. Armour was up to 9 mm.

SU-4

The SU-4 was vastly different from previous vehicles. While using the same Kurchevskiy 76.2 mm recoilless gun, it was mounted on a GAZ-A truck, instead of a tracked vehicle. Unlike with the SU-3's limited traverse, the gun could rotate 360 degrees. The armour was not thick: the 6 mm gun shield was the only armoured component of the vehicle. Thanks to this, the SU-4 could reach a 63.2 kph top speed. 23 of these vehicles were built from 1934 to 1937. Colonel-general Arhipov recalls them favourably in his book "Time of Tank Attacks". He doesn't call them by name, referring to them as "recoilless guns on a rotating mount on the back of a truck", but their effectiveness in battle was unambiguous: "The howitzer division and recoilless guns worked very effectively. The shell from such a gun could effortlessly penetrate the front armour of German medium tanks, not to mention the light PzI and PzII."

SU-5

The in-game SU-5 isn't actually called SU-5. The vehicle in game could be either a SU-5-2 or SU-5-3, depending on the gun you put on it. The first vehicle to earn the SU-5 designation was another Kommunar 9GU based vehicle, this time with no armour at all, and a 76.2 mm model 1915 AA gun. A prototype was manufactured and built in 1932, but scrapped due to the Kommunar 9GU chassis being too weak for a 76.2 mm gun.

SU-6

The SU-6 was built in 1934, again on a T-26 chassis. A prototype was built in 1935. In 1937, four more SU-6es were built. The hull of a SU-6 was wider and longer than a T-26, with an extra road wheel and folding 8 mm thick armoured sides to protect the crew during transit. The SPG was armed with a model 1931 76.2 mm 3K AA gun. The gun could rotate fully, elevate to 82 degrees, and depress to -5 degrees. The rate of fire was 20 RPM. During trials, it was also equipped with a 37 mm AA autocannon.

SU-7

The SU-7 was a heavy SPG with a 203 mm B-4 or 305 mm Br-18 howitzers, based on a special chassis developed at factory #185, based on the T-35. Gun elevation was up to 52 degrees with the B-4, or 70 degrees with the Br-18. The gun had a horizontal traverse of 84 degrees. The project also called for a 400 mm mortar, but it was dropped from the later versions of the design.  Elements of the SPG were built, but scrapped when all heavy SPG projects were cancelled in 1937.

SU-8

You should all know the SU-8 from the Soviet artillery tree (where, at least until the next patch, it occupies a spot at tier 5). However, it differs somewhat from the historical SU-8. The SU-8 started development in 1934, as a mobile AA gun. For this task, it was armed with a 76.2 mm 3K AA gun. Like with the SU-6, it could rotate fully. The armour ranged from 8-20 mm, with 15 mm folding screens to protect the crew. Two variants of the SPG existed: one with a front mounted gun, and one with a rear mounted gun. Although, technically, both guns were located in front of the T-28 chassis. In the case of the "rear" gun (the one in game), the chassis was reversed. The speed of the front gun SU-8 was 40 kph, and the speed of the rear gun SU-8 was 48 kph.

SU-10

SU-10 (or SU-BU-10) was a coastal gun project developed in 1933. The vehicle consisted of a 152.4 mm B-10 naval gun on a T-28 chassis, with a curious feature: when deployed, the SPG could rotate 360 degrees using a special deployable mount. In this mode, the engine power would rotate the SPG instead of moving the tracks. The armour of this vehicle was between 8 and 20 mm, and its projected speed was 20 kph.

SU-12

SU-12 was another truck project. In 1933, 76.2 mm model 1927 guns were mounted on Morland and GAZ-AAA trucks in a fully rotating turret. Despite the turret technically being able to rotate fully, firing with the gun forward was a bad idea, as the gases exiting the barrel would bend the roof. The safe range of fire was 270 degrees. Unlike with the SU-4, the crew was protected from four sides by 4 mm thick shields, instead of just one. After successful trials in 1933, 99 vehicles were produced. These vehicles fought at Khalkin-Gol, Lake Hasan, and in the Winter War. No combat losses of these vehicles have been recorded. They were largely taken out of service due to obsolescence of their armament. Even upon their creation, the RKKA saw them as a temporary measure until the development of superior SPGs.

The SU-76 prototype developed by factory #38 was also tested under the index SU-12, with a SU-76M indexed SU-12M.

SU-14

The SU-14 was developed in 1933, and a prototype was built in 1934. It mounted a 203 mm B-4 howitzer on a chassis made of T-28 and T-35 components. The B-4 was replaced with a 152 mm B-30 gun (ironically, the upgrade path in the game is the opposite).

The SU-14-1 was built on the superior T-35 chassis. The armament was a B-4 howitzer. The SPG was made ligher by reduction of side skirts from 10 mm to 6 mm. A variant of the SU-14-1, SU-14-Br2, was equipped with an armoured casemate and a Br-2 gun.

The SU-14 is in game, but again, not really. The tank that is in game right now is the SU-14-2. It was a SU-14, equipped with armour screens, to serve as a bunker buster in Karelia. A real SU-14 seems to be on its way in the next patch.

To make things even more confusing, the SU-152, developed under the index KV-14, is accepted into production under the name SU-14.

SU-15, SU-15M and SU-16

These two vehicles were proposed  SU-76 variants. SU-15 was a SU-76 with a larger, fully enclosed fighting compartment, a S-15 76.2 mm gun, and GAZ-203 dual engines. The SU-16 was completely based on the production T-70, featuring a shorter hull. It was armed with the same S-15 gun.

SU-15M borrowed the semi-closed layout of the SU-16, while keeping the longer length, with dual GAZ-202 engines.

This is the end of the SPGs and TDs with SU in their name that were numbered sequentially.

"Buff my tank" - Matilda II

Author: Vollketten (US server)

SS: here we have a little article made by Vollketten and submitted to me. Enjoy!

For those of you who read The Challenger’s threads on the EU server you may be aware that the correct name for the Matilda II should in fact be Matilda Senior. In game we all know it as the Matilda II and it has decent armour, decent gun but terrible speed.

Here are a few buffs we could have for it to make it the ultimate troll tank it could be and to correct some historical inaccuracies within the game model:

Speed: In August 1940 one Matilda was shipped to the USA for evaluation with a view to having it built over there. Although production never began in the USA Mr. L.E.Carr of the British Tank Mission designed a power pack featuring a pair of General Motor two-stroke diesels. An arrangement later adopted for some American medium tanks such as the M4A2 Sherman.
The Detroit Diesel Series 71 engine is a two stroke diesel engine and in the form of the inline 6-71 was adapted for use in the Canadian (and later by the British) built Valentine tanks under the nomenclature GMC 6004. As a twin unit though as used in some versions of the Sherman tank it was known as the 6046 Diesel. The 6-71 is a 7 litre unit which as an inline produced some 238 brake-horsepower (BHP). A twin unit would therefore deliver some 476 BHP. (355 Kilowatts).
The original engines being a twin AEC or Leyland Diesel unit putting out a paltry 174 BHP and 190 BHP gave a power to weight ratio of 6.55 hp/tonne. (6.57 hp/t in game). The new engines would give a blistering power to weight ration in the region of 15.5 hp/t. The top speed therefore could be increased by about 25% to a lighting fast 32 or 33 kmh albeit a very noisy 32 kmh. In real life the wear and tear involved would not have been fun but we don’t need to worry about this in the game.

Armour: Renowed for having very tough armour already the Matilda could get even more. Firstly for anyone living in a hole and was not already aware but the previous model of the Matilda Black Prince lacked an armoured collar around its larger turret. (Now corrected) Many of the surplus converted MBP hulls were shipped it appears to Britain’s commonwealth allies, most notably Australia where these hulls with added collars saw extensive action in the Far East against the Japanese. The collar already in game on the MBP would add a small 15mm thick spaced armour protective ring around the turret base and would look like this:

Secondly the Australians also had heavily armoured track guards to cover the front of the track as the Japanese AT gunners seemed very proficient (or just lucky) in hitting there and disabling their Matilda. Personally I think they look like giant knuckle dusters.

I don’t know whether these were made in the UK and shipped with the Matildas to Australia or if they were fabricated in Australia but either way they are quite substantial and although I can’t find the thickness of them anywhere yet or personally go and measure their thickness they would appear to be about 25mm thick.

Finally as you can see below in the front view of the MBP which uses the same hull there is a steep join between the curvy front glacis and the vertical plate in front of the driver.

But now look at the hull of a real Matilda tank:

Now if you noticed that the glacis slope on the model is wrong you win a prize. The real Matilda had a much more pronounced slope for the front casting which was a single piece rather than the very angled joint between the glacis and vertical section which we see in the in-game model this is due to manufacture. Although the design schematics indeed have a steep angle change it was cast in a single piece and therefore this was never acheived in real life.

Which brings me onto a final point on the armour. Although it was designed to be 78 mm thick due to the difficulties of casting such a thick piece of steel in that shape it was ALWAYS too thick when it came out and had to be ground down by hand on the inside (a very difficult and laborious process) to try and get to the desired thickness originally designed. In real life the front casting on the Matilda hull was generally 2 to 5% thicker than designed meaning it should be 1.56mm to 3.9mm thicker and therefore should be (in order to be realistic) 79.5 to 82mm thick at the front and commensurately thicker in other cast elements of the frontal armour as well.


Firepower: Mentioned previously on the FTR blog is this little Canadian beauty:

Known as the David gun, it is a six pounder shell casing necked down to fire the 2 pounder projectile. It may have been possible to mount this into the Matilda turret had the project come to fruition* and firing a shell at 1264 metres per second (1550 mps with a Littlejohn adaptor) this would be a substantial increase over the Mk.X-B  2 pounder gun. Brought into game this could deliver a significantly better armour penetration. This would be at the expense of a slightly smaller ammunition capacity inside the tank and a small reduction in the rate of fire.

(*Had this project gone further and production of the Matilda was undertaken in Canada of the USA there is no reason why this gun could not have been the weapon of choice)

Sources:
The Matilda Infantry Tank, David Fletcher
Secret Weapons of the Canadian Army, Roger V. Lucy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Diesel_Series_71

4.5.2013

Very little info today (Storm is on vacation)

- it is possible that T92 will have its splash radius reduced in 0.8.6
- when you have a vehicle you want to unlock and it is possible to unlock from two vehicles (for various prices), you have both those vehicles unlocked and click on the "unlock" button in the tech tree, it will unlock for the cheaper price, BUT it will not take free XP into account (SS: example: you want to unlock vehicle A, that can be unlocked either from vehicle B for 50k XP or from vehicle C for 45k XP, vehicle B has 51k regular XP available, vehicle C has 10k XP available (eg. not enough), you also have 60k free XP available and you click on the "Research vehicle B" button, it will unlock for 45k FREE XP. Thus it's always better to unlock vehicles directly from concrete vehicle research panel)


A small bonus then: how are the new tanks doing on RU server? Data from last two weeks. (Source: wot-news.com)

Finnish Armor 1917-1945 part 1

Finland is one of the countries not much is known about. Most people have heard of the Finnish struggle to defeat the Soviets in the early 20's and throughout the Winter War right to the end of World War 2, but armor doesn't play major role in Finnish warfare. Still, there were some very interesting designs in Finnish arsenal. Let's have a look at them.

Probably the first armored vehicle to serve in Finnish army was the American Peerless armored car, captured from the Soviets in 1919 by the Finnish. This 7-ton armored car was one of the 16 vehicles first bought in 1916. I haven't found any real details about this vehicle, but it probably looked something like this (this is a later model though):

This vehicle was captured by Estonian volunteers however and after the civil war ended, it remained in Estonia. It was called "Pohjan Poika" by the Finnish ("Son of the north"). Another armored car from this era, captured (some sources say bought) from the Russians was the Fiat A armored car. Four were obtained during the turmoil preceding the Finnish civil war in 1915 and they continued to serve in Finland until early 20's.

The third armored car to make it to Finland was the Soviet Austin-Putilov armored car. Basically, these armored cars consisted of the Austin chassis (during the war, that was all the British factories could provide) with Russian modifications. This armored car was the most important Russian armored car of WW1.It was equipped with two machineguns and armored with 8mm thick plates. Apart from the Russian army, it also served in the Japanese and Polish forces. The Finnish captured a few in 1918 and used them until the 20's.

But those were just the armored cars. The first real tanks were purchased by the Finnish in 1919. Those were the ubiquitous Renault FT-17 tanks. 14 were purchased with the 37mm Puteaux gun and 18 with the 8mm Hotchkiss MG. Two of them actually saw combat: they served with the "white" troops of general Yudenich against the bolsheviks. After their defeat (Yudenich himself escaped capture and fled to France, where he lived until his death in 1933), they were returned to Finland, but they were in such a poor shape that France supplied to additional vehicles.

Finnish FT-17's continued to server deep into the 30's. By that time they were totally obsolete, but high costs of modern armor prevented Finnish to buy anything better and the FT-17's formed the backbone of Finnish armored corps until 1938. Even in 1942 a few were still used for training, others were turned into pillboxes in Winter War.

Of course, the Finnish army experimented with other types of vehicles too. St.Chamond M21 Chenilette wheel-cum-track design was purchased (allegedly in several exemplars), but the design was found unsatisfactory and was rejected. Another such vehicle was the Vickers Mk.IVB tankette, Vickers Mod.1931 amphibious tank, Vickers Mod.1933 or the famous Vickers 6ton. Here, sources differ about their use. The St.Chamond disappeared from the scene really quick, but the 1931 and 1933 light tanks were used for training until 1939 or even 1942.


The only tank from that period, purchased in larger numbers was the Vickers 6ton, model E, type B. The Finnish called it "Viku". The first prototype, ordered from Britain was shipped without machineguns with only a 47mm Barrow gun. 16 more (this time with no armament at all!) were shipped in 1938 and another 16 in 1939. Since these tanks lacked their own guns, they were refitted with the FT-17 37mm Puteaux guns and Hotchkiss machineguns from the same source. This too was deemed unsatisfactory in 1939 and it was decided to re-arm the tanks with 37mm Bofors AT guns (or rather local copies under the designation 37 psvk 36) and with turret-mounted L-33/36 machuneguns. The hull machineguns were removed and instead 9mm Suomi submachineguns were installed. These vehicles fought in 1940 against Russians near Honkaniemi in February 1940. The Finnish crews - unexperienced at the time - suffered losses with 8 tanks being lost due to breakdowns and combat.

Since the Finnish captured a large number of T-26 tanks in the war with the Soviets, it was decided to rearm the Vickers tanks with the Russian 45mm guns and DT machineguns. Further modifications were made (including the modifications to drivetrain and suspension) and such modified tanks with Soviet guns were redesigned to T-26E. These vehicles could be recognized from other captured T-26 tanks only by careful detail observation and they were so well regarded they stayed in service until 1959.

Another vehicle worth noting that was purchased in this period would be the Swedish Landsverk L182 armored car. It wasn't really a success and it was later transferred to Finnish police. The Finnish however did capture a number of BA-20 and BA-20M Soviet armored cars (as many as 20), they were kept around as scouting and liaison vehicles until 1951. Their official designation in the Finnish army was BAB, but they were nicknamed "Beibi".

Heavier armored cars (such as the BA-6 and BA-10) were also captured. They underwent a refit, where their original Ford IV 50hp engine was replaced with the stronger Ford V8. These stayed in service until 1959, just like the T-26E tanks.



Source:
Finská obrněná technika 1917-1945
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/

3.5.2013

Disclaimer: I kinda caught flu and Im not feeling well (that's why I was so irritated yesterday). Considering I am feeling like shit and am in bed atm, I can't guarantee the quality of the translations today. Should be okay, but don't crucify me if I forgot a word somewhere.

First: Alienware invite code giveaway (for new players only) can be found here - if any of you are starting a new account, it contains 1000g, 5 days premium and 100k credits. 8000 of them are left.

- the physics bugs (SS: flying tanks when clipping into certain objects, the infamous "turning on the spot") are considered very rare, fixing them has low priority
- if the client gets disconnected (shut down), extended results of the fight become inaccessible. This is intentional to save up on data transfer: "there is no point to transfer data when the client is shut down"
- IS-4 with D-25T is the historical tank setup, its historicity being about the only advantage this setup offers
- one of the big things the developers are working on right now are the esports functions
- when a tank is coming directly at you, it's possible to detrack it by shooting anywhere in the frontal track part, not just into the wheels
- the new prepared sound engine will bring improved sound overall
- WoT on consoles? "If there is ever such a thing, it'll be kept separate from PC WoT server-wise"
- according to SerB, the new tier 9 tanks (those with high penetration) are balanced fine and are historical
- the only Japanese tank already modelled is the Chinese Chi-Ha
- Japanese hightier tanks will be unique (not similiar to any other nations) (SS: from what I could tell, the heavies will be very large, heavy, less armored than Maus, but possibly better armed)
- in first Japanese patch, cca 19 tanks will be introduced
- SerB states that even on the same tank, when using removed speed governor, one vehicle can get its engine yellow in different times, because the removed speed governor damages the engine only when the engine works outside its nominal horsepower boundaries. It cannot be detected by player whether it's really working or not, this is intentional.
- Storm on armor: "Everything is almost okay with armor now. But in order to make it totally okay, we will be taking measures in 0.8.6. What measures - will tell later." (SS: bold font used by Storm himself)".
- Storm sees the problem with heavily armored tanks in their low popularity and limited playability.
- this year there will be new camos for Germans implemented

Storm on WOT issues

Source: http://world-of-kwg.livejournal.com/190893.html

SS: Well, today's EU Q&A answer session brought a lot of useless crap, but also one interesting answer: 0.8.6 will bring a city map. Combined with the info from RU server that it might in fact be a winter city map, I think we all are thinking: "Stalingrad". In fact, there was such a map supertested before the 0.8.5 patch.


Either way, Storm (who is currently on vacation) wrote a post, where he asks players about WoT issues. According to his post, it's not an "official" feedback thread, more likely something to give him stuff to think about when he's resting.

He stated in the post that within 2 weeks he will start unvealing 0.8.6 details and that they will cause a lot of controversy ("prepare asbestos chairs"). Here's what was in the post comments:

- Storm is aware of the cheat mod issue, WG is investigating it. Measures will be taken - it's not however yet decided what kind of measures, they are still discussing it. According to Storm, the cheats in the modpack are "not really that terrible".
- one of the cheat solutions considered is a portal with "certified" mods - only certified mods would then work with the game
- 2-3 reworked maps have (arty cover) problems, one of the problematic maps is Highway
- according to Storm, most players like the new map, it won't be taken down
- devs considered the possibility to transfer free XP to crew XP, but refused because they feel it's "pay to win"
- it's not known for now whether the amount of XP needed to train skills/perks will be reduced
- Storm does see the lack of high-end content as a problem, WG is working on it
- 8.6 will bring a solution for ride over bumpy terrain affecting the aim circle spread too much ("gun jumping")
- no "leagues" will be implemented
- the rate of tanks being implemented has been reduced roughly two times
- WG is pretty pissed about the Nvidia-caused bugs
- 0.8.6 will introduce a "hot feature" regarding game optimalisation
- deathmatch won't be introduced
- 25 percent random factor won't be reduced
- sort of "battle miniquests" for players are planned  (SS: no details, but what I understand from the context, it's something like "kill X tanks of type Y")
- in 8.6, heavily armored tanks in general will be changed (SS: as in buffed)
- in 8.6, "there will be changes in armor mechanics"
- Storm agrees that the social aspect of the game is underdeveloped
- there will be more attempts to introduce "fair environment" and "fair play"
- 7 vs 7 battles will be implemented (SS: 7/42)
- looks like Storm isn't too hot into the (WarThunder) garage battle mode (SS: as in when you die in one vehicle, you enter the same battle in another) - "what if you enter a garage battle and in first minutes you realize your teammates are retards and you will have to lose several of your vehicles?"

That's it for now. Storm disconnected and will continue the session tomorrow (today, it's past midnight already?o.O) Will make part 2 if something interesting comes up.

Hack controversy (conclusion)

Getting back to the earlier article from today about the nasty hack "modpack" (TBH I don't know how to call it - illegal mod? hack? does it matter?). Those who condemned me for posting it with righteous fury and those who were afraid that tomorrow the battlefields of World of Tanks will be swamped with thousands of cheaters, you can reast easy tonight.

It doesn't work.

Well, at least not anymore, that's what I got reported from several sources. Apparently, it was some sort of limited edition, a beta of sorts, with limited access. Which is good, it gives Wargaming time to deal with this shit. So you guys in the German "Fragen zum WoT - "Blog-der-nicht-genannt-werden-darf"" thread can stop getting upset over the evil Silentstalker posting omghax and whatnot.


Personally (and I know I will piss a lot of you off with this), if I was a WG developer, the first thing I'd do would be to disable all mods until this can be contained. But I am no programmer, not sure it would even help (what the hell is dll injection anyway?).

Well, let's hope Wargaming contains this. I'd hate to make more posts about hacks in game.