The factoid that the Object 279 was shaped that way to "prevent rollover" from a nuclear blast is almost certainly an internet myth. I have a few older Russian books about tank design and engineering, several of which dedicate at least 1 page to Object 279, and one of which has a 7 page section about Object 279, covering its design and engineering - the purpose of the curvature was to get the maximum possible level of protection with plain steel armor while maintaining the smallest volume (and thus - reducing weight). The design of the 279 showed the limit of protection that steel armor could offer and was one of the motivations for Soviet engineers to start designing composite armor with ceramics. None of the older published books say anything about the shape being designed to "prevent rollover" - that was only a "fact" that I have seen quoted in online forums, which eventually made its way to the English language Wikipedia. So I'm pretty sure that part is a myth that someone pulled out of their hat in the early 2000's, and everyone has been repeating since. The Object 279 did have internal overpressure NBC protection, but so did every Russian tank designed after the T-54 (NBC protection was the defining difference between the T-54 and the T-55, for instance).
That’s very interesting - you’re probably right! The only thing is, why would they bother with the hollow “points” on the side of the vehicle? I don’t really understand the purpose of those if not aerodynamic.
@@RedWrenchFilms The hollow triangles on the side served as an experiment in spaced armor against HEAT rounds. Since the side armor was thinner than the massive chunk of steel at the front, and the superplastic jet of a HEAT round begins to particulate and loses its capacity for penetration over a defined distance regardless of what it goes through, the air gap effectively doubled the thickness of the side armor against HEAT with negligible increase in mass. On a related note - the first experiments in ceramic composite armor that followed - and which ultimately led to the T-64 carrying Combination K composite armor - were also primarily focused on padding the thickness against HEAT, since the early APFSDS developed at the time didn't have the same kind of penetration depth that modern APFSDS offer, and thus, as far as absolute thickness was concerned, HEAT was a much more significant concern in the 1960s - 1970s
@@OlegMilitaryHistory Do these books mention anything about a sabot shell for the 279s gun? I have seen a single mention of it online but I cannot find anything else.
@@alphastronghold715 1)take M50 Ontos; 2)replace its M40A1C 105mm rifles with M29 155mm ones; Enjoy having light tank armed with 6 nuclear shots with effective range of 4km.
The video is straight and to the point Without bloat or artificial lengthening It has interesting information at a natural pace and density And relevant video footage to back it up My faith in youtube increases ever so slightly thanks to your videos 👍🏻
being a military vehicle designer in the cold war must've been a hell of a expencience. you had to design vehicle that were supposed to literally outlast the end of the world. no wonder they came up with all these crazy stuff back then.
Great stuff as always, I still can’t believe you only have 12000 subscribers, with the quality of your content and a bit of luck I’m sure your channel will boom. May the algorithm bless you.
The Object 279 is one of the coolest designs ever seen. Add a second 130mm gun, and it'll be perfect for 'Command & Conquer', 'Warhammer 40,000', or any other wargame we know of.
It's part of arsenal of Russian subfaction specialized in Advanced Weaponry in Rise of the Reds, unofficial sequel to the C&C Generals: Zero Hour. It's called Golem Tank, it's little bit bigger than real life counterpart, it has two AA machine guns, and SHTORA and ERA protection. It's main gun can be replaced later on with a rail gun via upgrade. It's amphibious and can't be affected by radiation, toxins or nerve gas.
@@Meatrocket69 I hope you will. I'd really like you to join our community. ROTR and most of other ZHs long running mods have loyal following. ROTR is IMHO one of very few that surpasses original, while at the same time manages to stay both true to it, and expand on it. It also looks and feels like an official product. And all of that while not yet being finished, 2.0 version is a big version that is supposed to add three new generals each to original factions, and three each for Russia and European Continental Alliance newly introduced sides that are focus of the story in the aftermath of what happened in Generals and ZH.
All comments below about the shaping not having been done for the atomic blast protection have one major flaw. The rim is very thin and the chance of a projectile hitting it just there thus low. that leaves deflection as an argument but this would increase the chance of projectiles getting trapped between the shell and the turret on the Sovjet design and tearing apart the drive system on both, at least turning the vehicles into static bunkers. I’d say the blast theory is still a strong contender. About things being mentioned in literature in the past. An example: Nobody ever mentioned radar stealth when discussing the Blackbird spy plane at the time. Everybody explained it’s shape on the basis of speed requirements. Still the stealth shaping rings through once one knows. I for one never understood those rudders being canted inwards. Now I do.
@@hang_kentang6709 Not really, the author of this video talk about the notion of void to protect against shaped-charges and enhancing the aerodynamic effect of the armour beneath, which is completely wrong.
Knowing that some vehicles actually became nuclear like battleships and submarines, you should cover what would happen if one were to be sunk or destroyed. What aftermaths would play out and could it be as bad as Chernobyl
I like how rather than go with the new style of power or a new oscillating turret technology, they just slapped a better engine and transmission into the M26 Pershing and called it the M48 Patton.
People imagine the Object 279 being the size of like a Tiger tank, but people easily forget that this is a Soviet tank we're dealing with here. It was shorter and much smaller than most people imagine it and you'd be lucky if you could fit inside.
The biggest problem with the first Nuclear powered ship's was that people did not Trust them. The Ship SS Savannah could only dock in pre-determined places and had to get permission from nation's to even be near the ship. Which took months to do.
I love how Chrysler a car company could just use it's regular name to build weapons back then. That would never fly today, could you imagine the Lockheed Town & Country? Lmao
@@oldleatherhandsfriends4053 first of all you're talking about a cultural difference between the US and Japan. No American car company does or would build weapons under their brand name today, most sold off their defence divisions when the cold war ended anyway
Pls make a vid about the heaviest of the IS family (4and7) and compere there specific data with each other and the western countr parts........I was requisting this for too long....best of future for you
the soviets developed 152mm nuclear shells which could be fired from their normal artillery units, the kv-2 had a 152mm cannon, we need to develop a time machine just to see a kv-2 fire nuclear artillery.
I thought it was a war thunder video and skipped 1 minute not understanding where the gameplay :) But it was interesting and i stayed to wath the video
7:40 Soviet infrastructure was designed to only allow 50 ton vehicles to pass. bearing in mind the western tanks sent to Ukraine were 70 tonnes. the majority will not be able to cross the bridge and have to do snorkeling
I love how th TV-8 would not even be a good tank even if it didnt run the risk of producing micro meltdowns on the battlefield. There is a reason why modern tanks try to minimize vital parts in the turret and even put all the crew into the hull, cause the turret is the part that is gonna get shot the most. So even when hull down this thing exposes the entire crew and powerpack. Not only that but with the gun mounted this load it has to expose basically everything but the tracks to get a shot off. Imagine this thing getting shot down in the middle of a street and you are now tasked with getting past it without having your hair fall out.
How about VK 16 02 leopard? Can you tell us why the machine gun equipped tank never made it to production and it's flaws ,advantages,dis-advantages and other stuff about it plese
VK16.02 were never planned to have a 2cm gun mounted, instead a 5cm gun the same mounted on a Panzer 3 and it was designed to be a Mini Panther but was cancelled in favour of producing more Panther tanks
Fighting through an atomic wasteland to reach their objective..basically a pile of ash. So strange even now to think that there could have been a winner in this..and the billions and billions of money manpower ingenuity wasted. What a sad strange race we humans are😢😢😢
Point being, the Cent crew would have died from the shock wave as the tank wasn't designed to fight on a nuclear battlefield in the same way as the 279 was.
Funny how, after all of the work that went into all these different tanks, mediums, heavies, lights, nuclear, aluminium rocket tanks, etc etc, they'd already knocked it out the park with Centurion in 1945.
Tanks like Obj. 279 had quantifiable advantages over Centurion, but suffered in other departments as would be expected for an exotic prototype. Chrysler TV-8 never made it past concept stage. Also it's hard to "smoke" the competition when your vehicle is one of the slowest on the field and by a considerable margin. The "nuclear Centurion" was more of a fluke and a vehicle expressly designed for a post-nuclear battlefield would certainly fare better.
Obj. 279: “Where do you work out?”
TV-8: “The library”
Obj.279: Ohhhhh, so that's why they call you an "armored dictionary" 😏
666th thumbs up GET!
The factoid that the Object 279 was shaped that way to "prevent rollover" from a nuclear blast is almost certainly an internet myth. I have a few older Russian books about tank design and engineering, several of which dedicate at least 1 page to Object 279, and one of which has a 7 page section about Object 279, covering its design and engineering - the purpose of the curvature was to get the maximum possible level of protection with plain steel armor while maintaining the smallest volume (and thus - reducing weight). The design of the 279 showed the limit of protection that steel armor could offer and was one of the motivations for Soviet engineers to start designing composite armor with ceramics. None of the older published books say anything about the shape being designed to "prevent rollover" - that was only a "fact" that I have seen quoted in online forums, which eventually made its way to the English language Wikipedia. So I'm pretty sure that part is a myth that someone pulled out of their hat in the early 2000's, and everyone has been repeating since. The Object 279 did have internal overpressure NBC protection, but so did every Russian tank designed after the T-54 (NBC protection was the defining difference between the T-54 and the T-55, for instance).
That’s very interesting - you’re probably right! The only thing is, why would they bother with the hollow “points” on the side of the vehicle? I don’t really understand the purpose of those if not aerodynamic.
@@RedWrenchFilms The hollow triangles on the side served as an experiment in spaced armor against HEAT rounds. Since the side armor was thinner than the massive chunk of steel at the front, and the superplastic jet of a HEAT round begins to particulate and loses its capacity for penetration over a defined distance regardless of what it goes through, the air gap effectively doubled the thickness of the side armor against HEAT with negligible increase in mass.
On a related note - the first experiments in ceramic composite armor that followed - and which ultimately led to the T-64 carrying Combination K composite armor - were also primarily focused on padding the thickness against HEAT, since the early APFSDS developed at the time didn't have the same kind of penetration depth that modern APFSDS offer, and thus, as far as absolute thickness was concerned, HEAT was a much more significant concern in the 1960s - 1970s
Very impressive… may i know the name of the book? Would like to get one too
@@OlegMilitaryHistory Do these books mention anything about a sabot shell for the 279s gun? I have seen a single mention of it online but I cannot find anything else.
@@OlegMilitaryHistory can u pls tell the name of the book is where u got all the information regarding tanks?
"Let's put a nuclear reactor on the frontlines, I mean what can ever go wrong?"
Cant have radiation poisoning if the air around you is already irradiated from the nukes.
@@dudududu1926 fallout
america wouldve wiped its own army out before they even saw a single soviet tank
Have you heard of "fracture jaw"?
Metal Gear Solid 3 had some Object 279's parked in a military base.
That was a cool detail, I noticed while playing it again. Makes sense...
This man is a powerhouse. Glad hearing about some of the Astron series! Although I’d still love a deep dive! But this is a great video! Keep it up!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Ah yes, 1950s when US and USSR tried to either put nukes on everything or make it nuke-proof so they can still fight each others.
Cut to US nuclear bazooka which didn’t have enough range for the soldier firing it to clear the blast zone
Just fire it out of a helicopter like in MGS3.
@@alphastronghold715
1)take M50 Ontos;
2)replace its M40A1C 105mm rifles with M29 155mm ones;
Enjoy having light tank armed with 6 nuclear shots with effective range of 4km.
God the 279 is such a cool looking design.
i feel like bringing a nuclear powered tank to a battlefield is saying "if we lose, you lose"
The video is straight and to the point
Without bloat or artificial lengthening
It has interesting information at a natural pace and density
And relevant video footage to back it up
My faith in youtube increases ever so slightly thanks to your videos 👍🏻
being a military vehicle designer in the cold war must've been a hell of a expencience. you had to design vehicle that were supposed to literally outlast the end of the world. no wonder they came up with all these crazy stuff back then.
Great stuff as always, I still can’t believe you only have 12000 subscribers, with the quality of your content and a bit of luck I’m sure your channel will boom. May the algorithm bless you.
The Object 279 is one of the coolest designs ever seen. Add a second 130mm gun, and it'll be perfect for 'Command & Conquer', 'Warhammer 40,000', or any other wargame we know of.
It's part of arsenal of Russian subfaction specialized in Advanced Weaponry in Rise of the Reds, unofficial sequel to the C&C Generals: Zero Hour. It's called Golem Tank, it's little bit bigger than real life counterpart, it has two AA machine guns, and SHTORA and ERA protection. It's main gun can be replaced later on with a rail gun via upgrade. It's amphibious and can't be affected by radiation, toxins or nerve gas.
flight of the navigator ua-cam.com/video/1G13KzEJqBw/v-deo.html
@@Dembilaja yo c&c generals is of my favorite games of all time im going to check rise of the reds out for sure thank you so much dude
@@Meatrocket69 I hope you will. I'd really like you to join our community. ROTR and most of other ZHs long running mods have loyal following. ROTR is IMHO one of very few that surpasses original, while at the same time manages to stay both true to it, and expand on it. It also looks and feels like an official product. And all of that while not yet being finished, 2.0 version is a big version that is supposed to add three new generals each to original factions, and three each for Russia and European Continental Alliance newly introduced sides that are focus of the story in the aftermath of what happened in Generals and ZH.
@@Dembilaja have you already tried the 1.87 version as well as Hanpatch add on? They're great
Good stuff as usual Wrenchie! Greatest idol ever
god's fastest working UA-camr
Archie stop simping
@@germanpanzer38t change your name and I will
God *
@@archiebotten4061 In before he changed it to SovietM4Sherman
Great video. Probably my favorite channel to watch about tanks
All comments below about the shaping not having been done for the atomic blast protection have one major flaw. The rim is very thin and the chance of a projectile hitting it just there thus low. that leaves deflection as an argument but this would increase the chance of projectiles getting trapped between the shell and the turret on the Sovjet design and tearing apart the drive system on both, at least turning the vehicles into static bunkers. I’d say the blast theory is still a strong contender. About things being mentioned in literature in the past. An example: Nobody ever mentioned radar stealth when discussing the Blackbird spy plane at the time. Everybody explained it’s shape on the basis of speed requirements. Still the stealth shaping rings through once one knows. I for one never understood those rudders being canted inwards. Now I do.
The specific shape of the Object 279 was meant to disable the fuzes of the HEAT rounds, not withstand nuclear blast.
he actually mentioned it @6:09 mark.
@@hang_kentang6709 Not really, the author of this video talk about the notion of void to protect against shaped-charges and enhancing the aerodynamic effect of the armour beneath, which is completely wrong.
The TV-8 in Loki means that in some timeline, this design hit production, but it wasn't the true timeline so the tank was thrown to wolves. xD
sorry, *what* ?!
Or it was a nod to the TVA in the series.
Ahh yes, the armored definition of "Unstoppable force vs. An Immovable object"
Knowing that some vehicles actually became nuclear like battleships and submarines, you should cover what would happen if one were to be sunk or destroyed. What aftermaths would play out and could it be as bad as Chernobyl
What a fascinating subject, your research is superb! When I first saw the title I thought of Indiana Jones in that refrigerator! 😂 👍
Hahah thanks Phil - I'll do a video on that nuke proof fridge for next week!
Hot. Obj is one of my favourite tanks, thanks for this
7:09 bro glitched
I like how rather than go with the new style of power or a new oscillating turret technology, they just slapped a better engine and transmission into the M26 Pershing and called it the M48 Patton.
Both ideas have their special strengths, but execution proved they're over the board. Well, good thing is that they're nice technical curiosities.
People imagine the Object 279 being the size of like a Tiger tank, but people easily forget that this is a Soviet tank we're dealing with here. It was shorter and much smaller than most people imagine it and you'd be lucky if you could fit inside.
It is sub 7 foot tall
You feel that American low effort design from 1930-60 then when the 70s came everything became smooth designed
this looks like some thing in fallout
They both are beasts!
Wow, how do you make such good videos so fast?
Because I love it!
except that 279 was actually built, where as tv-8 never left a pipe dream stage
Have you ever heard about sleep? New vids all the time 🤯
No rest for the wicked!
The biggest problem with the first Nuclear powered ship's was that people did not Trust them. The Ship SS Savannah could only dock in pre-determined places and had to get permission from nation's to even be near the ship. Which took months to do.
It were crazy times back then.
I love how Chrysler a car company could just use it's regular name to build weapons back then. That would never fly today, could you imagine the Lockheed Town & Country? Lmao
So did ford, Cadillac, GMC, Mitsubishi and many others. Hyundai and Mitsubishi still build tanks.
@@oldleatherhandsfriends4053 first of all you're talking about a cultural difference between the US and Japan. No American car company does or would build weapons under their brand name today, most sold off their defence divisions when the cold war ended anyway
@@penskepc2374 They sold them because they had no money. Chrysler isnt "afraid" to say they made the abrams
Pls make a vid about the heaviest of the IS family (4and7) and compere there specific data with each other and the western countr parts........I was requisting this for too long....best of future for you
It sure be nice to movie into the fusion age.
We almost became a real life Fallout video game.
Another good video
Wild how with Cummins, we’re finally maybe getting a hybrid tank.
"The R32" I think thats how Nissan got the idea to make the GTR😮
I'm surprised world of tanks hasn't added this TV series of tanks yet.
the object 278 is in war thunder.
Made to withstand nuclear shockwave, not the blast. If it was anywhere within a couple km of the blast it’s instantly disintegrated
the soviets developed 152mm nuclear shells which could be fired from their normal artillery units, the kv-2 had a 152mm cannon, we need to develop a time machine just to see a kv-2 fire nuclear artillery.
These tanks look so uncanny
I thought it was a war thunder video and skipped 1 minute not understanding where the gameplay :)
But it was interesting and i stayed to wath the video
Now combine the two to make the ultimate tank (impossible)
7:40 Soviet infrastructure was designed to only allow 50 ton vehicles to pass. bearing in mind the western tanks sent to Ukraine were 70 tonnes. the majority will not be able to cross the bridge and have to do snorkeling
Brodící tanky jsou snadný cíl.
I hear a snail coming for your TV
I mean ..there s a little difference between nuke powered and nuke proof
I was a Cold War m60 tanker
I found weakness with obj 279
I love how th TV-8 would not even be a good tank even if it didnt run the risk of producing micro meltdowns on the battlefield.
There is a reason why modern tanks try to minimize vital parts in the turret and even put all the crew into the hull, cause the turret is the part that is gonna get shot the most. So even when hull down this thing exposes the entire crew and powerpack. Not only that but with the gun mounted this load it has to expose basically everything but the tracks to get a shot off.
Imagine this thing getting shot down in the middle of a street and you are now tasked with getting past it without having your hair fall out.
Meanwhile the Swedes bringing back the hull mounted gun in style
The tank was never meant to stop a nuclear blast
Anyone else just see the video with the Obj. 279 running then this video came up
Gaijin, TV-8 when?
How about VK 16 02 leopard?
Can you tell us why the machine gun equipped tank never made it to production and it's flaws ,advantages,dis-advantages and other stuff about it plese
VK16.02 were never planned to have a 2cm gun mounted, instead a 5cm gun the same mounted on a Panzer 3 and it was designed to be a Mini Panther but was cancelled in favour of producing more Panther tanks
0:50 Fallout lore be like:
Umm Super heavy tank T-8 at the Armor museum Ft. Benning GA has 4 tracks
Interesting video. Did either have a toilet? Stereo system? Gay fish?
looks like a shrunken Mous 1:55
Are you using the term nuclear and atomic interchangeably between the mentioned bombs?
No (at least I don’t think I do) - all atomic bombs are nukes but not all nukes are atomic bombs.
TV 8 look like a M VI Yoh and a M VII Yoh
"i am here to hellp you"
**Police i swear to god not simping for a child only instruments**
Fighting through an atomic wasteland to reach their objective..basically a pile of ash. So strange even now to think that there could have been a winner in this..and the billions and billions of money manpower ingenuity wasted. What a sad strange race we humans are😢😢😢
1 gram of diesel has the same energy density as 1gram of uranium . Because E=mc2 .
If our modern AFVs ended looking like the TV-8, I would seize up and die
did they not want a lay in?
Getting some real fallout vibes
looks like the tank i drew in 5th grade
A weapon to surpass metal gear
The object 279 was actually built compared to American concepts
Object 279 will always be a half dissolved bar of soap
the tanks in a childrens book about why war is bad. dr suess tank. goober tank. these were the many names of these behemoths
Nothing can withstand bureaucracy lol
Ofc gaijin doesn’t add Chrysler tv-8
Time is not "where". Time is "when".
(what)
Imagine this being in war thunder lol 2:08
I am glad that Ron Swanson was there to stop this madness!
Object 279 was not nuclear nor intended to be !
The real ones know that there is one one REAL Atomic Tank... The Mk 3 Centurion
Add it to war thunder US one I already know the Russian ones in but it is limited edition, and you can’t get it anymore
''Chrysler tee vee iit''
Meanwhile, the UK just used the Centurion.
why do you say eit and not eight
?
I’m from Northern Ireland :)
@@RedWrenchFilms oh ok sorry
I was born on July 16th if anyone used to dare oppose me I would remind them about that
Chrysler, look like yoh tank from wot
glad even the americans laughed at it before tossing it in the trash to Project pluto
The 279 is not an atomic tank and has never been one, it's just a project of a heavy cross-country tank
Very dishonorable to not mention how all these weirdo's got countered by some Aussie Centurion Mk.V
Point being, the Cent crew would have died from the shock wave as the tank wasn't designed to fight on a nuclear battlefield in the same way as the 279 was.
If only we continued the nuclear research to advance our society 😔
3m
249kw
6.7kl
270E271c
Chrysler made a gas turbine automobile back in1959 I believe not real powerfull but it ran nice.
No funds to R&D such odd ptojects these days
Funny how, after all of the work that went into all these different tanks, mediums, heavies, lights, nuclear, aluminium rocket tanks, etc etc, they'd already knocked it out the park with Centurion in 1945.
Tanks like Obj. 279 had quantifiable advantages over Centurion, but suffered in other departments as would be expected for an exotic prototype. Chrysler TV-8 never made it past concept stage.
Also it's hard to "smoke" the competition when your vehicle is one of the slowest on the field and by a considerable margin.
The "nuclear Centurion" was more of a fluke and a vehicle expressly designed for a post-nuclear battlefield would certainly fare better.
Fallout tanks be like:
And they want to build nuclear cars for us civilians to enjoy that sweet sweet nuclear fumes mmmmmmmmmmmmm
The 1950s when science was king not like today with computer generated AI .
It was a time of nuclear game of Chicken.
💣😮
We need to send these to Ukraine ASAP. Imagine these could float right over to Crimea.
ua-cam.com/video/hmkMTKZt9J4/v-deo.html Here is the restored and working Object 279!