Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Models and pictures of Soviet MBT designs from 80s. Object 477A, Object 490 Buntar and Object 299.


LoooSeR

Recommended Posts

Still have some questions.

What type of engine have been used on 477a1 and 477A?

I wonder whether all the 477 were built in Ukraine while the 477a and A1 were built in Russia. :)

 

It was planned to use 6TD family, but there wehere tested UTD gas turbine too. In end of the 80s' LKZ and CHzTM start to "melt"in one. For example - some T-80U where produced in Charkiv :-) The plan was to produce one tank in LKZ and ChZTM in 90s'. But there was war between UWZ, LKZ, and CHZTM in 80s and UWZ win.

 

3 prototypes Ob.477 where build. They are still in Ukriane. Then was build circa ~13 Ob.477 Molot on Ukriane until 1993, after that - 3 Ob.477A2 Nota (propably mostly on Ukraina) one was sent to UWZ whit all documentantion. Propably both left (2) prototypes where converted to "Biala".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Ritsu

It's "Обьект" not "Обькет"

"Объект" is correct

I have some photoes of prototypes of new(late 80's) Leningfad Bureau T-80U design.

Please give your email,im send it for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Guests,

 

Thanks for your interest in this forum, however it's by error that guests have the permission to post in this subforum. Fortunately, registering is easy, quick, and free, so feel free to do that and join in the conversation!

 

Welcome to SH!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this is shown for public, there are other - still secret. But someone form Rusia is trolling ChZTM guys in ugly way so Im more then sure that more, and better photos will leake soon.

 

Notis that this prototype have not finished or even funkcional FCS - it was the second big problem of Boxer-Molot. First one was autoloader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not  exactly to be honest - mock up was only part of the FCS. Hull, autoloader and turret system was fully operable - "only" FCS was mocked up. But ist more TTB whit  measuring apparatus .  This tank and other one was used to forced Ob.477A as "soviet future tank" on some GRAU inspectors. Well it was a partial suces couse

new requirements for new gun and other autoloader system. What need almoust new tank :-) So Ob.477A1 Molot rise. Of course there was some spy scandal - plans and photos of the Ob.477 Boxer-Molot was sell to USA and made there huge panic in end of the 80s. And this spy scandal have it's own influence on decision to rebuild whole project in to new tank based on Ob,.477A.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well - I doubt, becouse on Ob.477A1 is based Nota, and it's still OPSPEC... couse Biala project :) More or less it's the same tank whit diffrent FCS and armour

Bad news to me :( .

It seems that I still have to wait for a longtime before I see the real face of Nota.

By the way I am very curious about why not Russian guys disclose some details about Nota but care the Ukrainian secret protect's security, if Russian also have some unspeakable secret controlled in Ukrainian? So there was a consensus between Rus and Ukrainian that they would keep the words about their super tanks program,-)

Well,,above isn't the points,I would like to ask some questions to confirm some relationships among those projects. :)

1. What you post before have said that the upgrade from 477/477a to Nota mainly because the new gun and ammunitions were required. And as we can see the magazine of 477 could only store the projectiles no longer than circa 800mm,but the new APFSDS under development like Grifel-1/2 (Im not sure and I also want to know if they have been used on 477a1)have been longer than 1000mm.So I think it may be the main reason of improving armment machine structure. Am I get it correctly?

2.Also I have no idea about why they developed new gun system as 2a73,did the LP-81 in 477 have anything wrong?And by the way,what is the relationship between 2a83 and LP-83?I cant find more information about them.So could you please introduce the thread of 152 smoothbore cannon? Thanks a lot here.

3.What type of FCS did 477 plan for?I think it should have the ability of Hunter-Killer with commander's independent thermal sight,which showed in photos,but I doubt that if the sight in the right of turret can have 360° field of version,because the objects on the turret roof and its slope may disturb the sight.

4.What type of APS did 477 plan for? some pictures in network show that it may be the Arena..but I think it.may not fit the turret shape of 477s.

Thats all what I can not clear up,I will appreciate it if you can give me an answer!:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad news to me :( .

It seems that I still have to wait for a longtime before I see the real face of Nota.

By the way I am very curious about why not Russian guys disclose some details about Nota but care the Ukrainian secret protect's security, if Russian also have some unspeakable secret controlled in Ukrainian? So there was a consensus between Rus and Ukrainian that they would keep the words about their super tanks program,-)

Well,,above isn't the points,I would like to ask some questions to confirm some relationships among those projects. :)

1. What you post before have said that the upgrade from 477/477a to Nota mainly because the new gun and ammunitions were required. And as we can see the magazine of 477 could only store the projectiles no longer than circa 800mm,but the new APFSDS under development like Grifel-1/2 (Im not sure and I also want to know if they have been used on 477a1)have been longer than 1000mm.So I think it may be the main reason of improving armment machine structure. Am I get it correctly?

2.Also I have no idea about why they developed new gun system as 2a73,did the LP-81 in 477 have anything wrong?And by the way,what is the relationship between 2a83 and LP-83?I cant find more information about them.So could you please introduce the thread of 152 smoothbore cannon? Thanks a lot here.

3.What type of FCS did 477 plan for?I think it should have the ability of Hunter-Killer with commander's independent thermal sight,which showed in photos,but I doubt that if the sight in the right of turret can have 360° field of version,because the objects on the turret roof and its slope may disturb the sight.

4.What type of APS did 477 plan for? some pictures in network show that it may be the Arena..but I think it.may not fit the turret shape of 477s.

Thats all what I can not clear up,I will appreciate it if you can give me an answer! :D

 

1) Decision about change gun+amunition system was strange in end of the 80s. Decision about new gun for new tanks where taken 9.10.1984 by chief of the GRAU - general  Litwinienko in circa 3minutes (lol) becouse He thought that bigger gun is alway better so he choose the largest caliber from some proposition: 152,4mm. BUT in the end of the 1980 was made another decision about longer gun and longer APFSDS. In some way it was good decision. But it was taken not only couse rational analys but there was "hidden factor" " little dirty fuc!n war between LKZ, ChZTM and UWZ.Charkiv's was close to bulid it own "new generation tank" and other big producion centers (whit suporting them politics) had tryied to forced something to stop, delay, or slow down Charkiv way to new tank. So new system gun+amunition was greate opurtinity to do that. 

It was even funny -> 1984-1986 Buntar is redy, but new gun 152 then 130mm is ndded -program abondend, 1986-1989 - 3x Molot Ob.477A is redy, new gun again needed, so AGAIN charkiv must rebuild whole project...etc 

And new longer APFSDS was impossible to put in autoloader from Ob.477A (this posted on previous pages). New solution was needed...

 

 

2) New gun was build in better technology whit bigger preassure, and whit longer APFSDS amunition. Old gun was enought or even more then enought. New gun was overkill. But explanation was circa about this spy scandal when someone from ChzTM sell tons of plans to USA. So it was second factor to rebuild project - something on base: :they know that we have 152mm whit max penetration value xxxx so we change this gun and build system whit 1.3 better penetration" Tha same was about armour: between Ob.477A and Ob.477A1/A2 was improved from circa 1000 to 1300mm -so almoust in 1.3.

 

 

3) Well - FCS was whit panoramic sight and independent thermal camera. for TK. What was interesting - system palned for gunner was preatty close to Ka-50 system whit never ended auto detection system and autotracer. The most important (and never finished) was to "put" tank into netware system. It's almoust unkown on west but Soviet have their own and net-warfare system build almoust 20yers before US and NATO ones!  It was Battle Menage System "Manewr" "maneuver in englis" -it was introduced in 1981 and fully operational in 1983. And design for: regiment, brigade and division whit fully automatic transmision and exchange of information between "levels". The same system was planed for Ob.477A but on platoon and regiment level - so scaled down and small version whit new base. And this system was never ended.

BTW: Part of "Maneuver" system was export (in downgraded version) to Chechoslovakia, DDR, Poland, and Bulgary and Hungary. Czech, Hungary and DDR system was destroyed in 1989 just before SU colapse, Poland had part of this system operational up to milenium, and Bulgary...sold them to USA in end of the 1990. What was funny - system bild between 1968 and 1981 was tested in USA in circa 1997-1999 and it was dicoverd that it's very very good and in scenario blue vs red the red whit "Maneuver" system alway win battle... Just funy that in country without toilet paper and whit Lada car and Rubin TV (yes, I rememebr those days and wainting in shop queue 3h to buy ONE toilet paper and ONE almoust rotten lemon -fucken comunist system) build greate BMS whit netwarfare abilities -iofcourse on 80's technical level. :) Sorry for OT.

 

 

4) There was planned 3 diffrent APS hard kill for new generation tanks: Arena, Drozd-2, and Dożdź - so "Rain" so...today ukrainian Zaslon. And it's not clear if there was planed to choose ONE system or as ussaly in comunism - all 3 was planned to be producet in the same time. IMHO this option. As I know LKZ planned Drozd-2, and Charkiv - "Rain/Zaslon", but its not sure information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...