Finnish T-50 up armoured : a T-50 with a UFP stronger than a T-34

[warner7]

[Would you like to see this in-game?]

• Yes
• No

T-50 up armoured:

Implemented how?

• Finnish Techtree
• Soviet Techtree
• Other ways in Finnish tree
• Otherways in Soviet tree
• Dont want

What br?

• 2.7
• 3.0
• 3.3
• 3.7
• other br

History:

The T-50 was put to production in 1941 due to the demand for a new light tank to replace the old T-26’s, the T-50 was an advanced design for its time with innovative slope armour and a commander’s cupola. The T-50’s captured by the Finns had some parts of the tank up-armoured T-50 had 14mm armour screens, so the total thickness of the armour increases to 51mm. The applique armour is only known to cover the large upper front plate (excluding the cheeks) and both the sides of the turret. These Up-armoured T-50s were used in combat by the Finnish troops.

Place in war thunder:

The T-50 with up-armoured can sit well at 2.7 br, it has more armour and people will have to take more time to aim, but the weak spots still exists. Shoot the gun mantlet (still same amount of armour as the in-game T-50) to knock the vehicle out. It trades off a bit of acceleration due to additional weight. I have used a steel calculator I found online and the T-50 up-armoured adds on about 1.1 ton weight compared to the base model, the power to weight has dropped from 21.7hp/t to 20.13 - 20 hp/t. This vehicle is a trade off for better armour for acceleration compared to the original T-50.

Specifications:

Dimentions:

Length: 5.20 m (17 ft 1 in)

Width: 2.47 m (8 ft 1 in)

Height: 2.16 m (7 ft 1 in)

Crew: 4 (driver, loader, gunner, commander)

Armament: 45mm 20K, all specifications are same as the in-game T-50.

Mobility:

Power: 300 hp V4

Top speed: 52-37.5 km/h (Sources depend)

Power to weight: 20.13 - 20 hp/t

Weight: 14.5 tons

Armour differences compared to the in-game T-50:

Upper front plate: High hardness 37mm + 14mm (excludes the cheeks)

Turret sides: High hardness 37mm + 14mm (the turret front, gun mantlet and turret rear has no applique armour)

Pictures: These are photos of the Finnish captured ones, shown by the Finnish head lights.

A drawing of T-50 up-armoured. Although hard to see, if we squint our eyes we will see the bolted on armour on the turret.

An other photo of an up-armoured T-50

The Finnish captured T-50 “Niki” in parola. This pictire can help us see where the add on armour’s positions are at, as the added on armour are in the same places and areas . Also shows us there are no add-on armour at the rear areas of the tank.

Another picture with the up-armoured T-50. It is Finnish since it has the distinct headlights installed.

Bibliography:

T-50 light tank (1941)

T-50

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Т-50#Проекты

The Unluckiest Next Generation Tank

Лёгкий танк Т-50

The Finnish armoured vehicles 1918 - 1997, Esa Muikku & Jukka Purhonen, 2003, ISBN 952-5026-33-7

Sorry for bad english, it is not my first language. Hope you enjoyed and make sure to vote and share your thoughts!

[RoadRunnerdn]

As I commented on the old forums. This is likely the Finnish vehicle.

And further research proves it is the Finnish vehicle.

Almost all of the black and white pictures in this post can be found in the Finnish military web archives SA - kuvagalleria. And the ones not present there can be deduced to be finnish due to the headlights, as it was the Finns who installed those foldable, protected headlights. They installed them on some of their other vehicles too including T-26 and T-34.

I’ve seen no convincing proof that the Soviets up armoured these themselves. Only poor sources. This vehicle should absolutely not be added, well, only as Finnish.

[DMYEugen]

+1 but not for Russia since there really isn’t evidence that these pictures are of a Russian operated vehicle, All evidence points to them being of the Finnish Niki.

[DMYEugen]

@warner7

Some of my sources seem to suggest the Soviets themselves up-armoured some of those T-50’s, then the Finnish captured an up-armoured variant.

That’s great and all but that still means that, most likely, none of the above pictures are of Russian operated uparmored T-50s, as evidenced by their Finnish headlights, and thus shouldn’t be labled as such. Also, that drawing of an uparmored T-50 comes from a modeling kit of a Finnish T-50.

[warner7]

True, an overwhelming amount of the evidence are suggesting this vehicle is Finnish. Changes were made. My bad for not digging deep enough, this suggestion was made some time ago and my researching skills were limited. I just transferred it from the old forums and didn’t check again, my apologies.

[warner7]

Changes were made. My apologies for not checking. Please reconsider your vote.

[JamesPond1200-psn]

With this tank now set as Finnish, I fully support it. +1

[RoadRunnerdn]

The thing is, there’s nothing convincing that the soviets ever produced an up armoured version.

The only sources of yours that mention it are maximietteita.blogspot.com and tank-afv.com. Both are quite poor sources, with no trust that they too haven’t made assumptions based on the Finnish vehicle.

The Finnish vehicle was also clearly modified by the Finns and did not possess the extra armour upon capture, as the Finnish army archives (SA - kuvagalleria) have pictures of it in a state without the extra armour. Which again proves what is said by maximietteita.blogspot.com and tank-afv.com

One uparmored T-50 was captured by Finnish forces and was used by them in 1944.

Most were opposed to Finnish forces, and one, up-armored, was captured and reused in 1944.

as false. Giving them even less credibility. Less than 100 (as low as 69) T-50’s were built in total. Many were destroyed before the turn of the new year. And the ones that survived longer have no signs of any up armouring attempts. There were plans to up armour them to 50mm coming out of the factories, but it was never implemented as it would’ve affected their production even more.

I can’t see any reason to believe there ever was an up armoured variant produced by the Soviets.

Sources:

1. Tank Archives: The Unluckiest Next Generation Tank
2. Tank Archives: Long Living T-50

[warner7]

I have again changed the suggestion, I am not sure what will qualify as a poor or good source. Now the Soviets have nothing to do with the up-armoured T-50’s. Please reconsider your vote.

[Teh0]

Think I’m going to repeat what others said, but I’ll put it in one post to be more clear.

Few months ago I also went through tankarchives looking for information about the up-armored T-50. I think it was in 1942 when they suggested building an up-armored version, so that the production would not be ceased. I couldn’t either find where that 40+17=57mm thickness comes from. Some years ago people actually measured the armor of T-50 “Niki” in Parola and results were 37+14=51mm on front. All claimed 40mm plates were actually 37mm.

It is very apparent that Finnish added the armor on this T-50 by themselves. First of all the records tell that only a single T-50 was send from Leningrad to Finnish front. There are those clear photos in SA archive of an abandoned T-50, which appears to be practically intact. Only apparent damaged parts are the bend mudflaps and missing headlight. The first known photos of “Niki” are over two years later. It comes with three unique things not seen in photos or drawings of any other T-50s: Two folding frog style headlights, square mudflaps and the add-on armor on turret sides and hull front.

The add-on armor is also attached with unique bolts. I haven’t seen such used in any of the Soviet tanks with add-on armor. However the same type of bolts were used on the armor upgraded T-26 “Viku”, which only appears in those photos where it’s sitting next to “Niki” in a garage and in this one I posted. The add-on armor layout on “Viku” is also slightly different to Soviet T-26E. Most certainly these two tanks were up-armored together in the same depot. Both “Niki” and “Viku” were used as command tanks.

I think “Niki” would well fit to any of these three spots in Sweden & Finland tree:

1. As normal vehicle on rank II between T-28 and T-34. Rank II is empty between them.
2. As gold eagle premium on rank II. There are no gold eagle premiums on Sweden rank II.
3. As a new starter pack premium on rank II. Strv m/41 S-I there just isn’t interesting.
   

[Teh0]

The Finnish armoured vehicles 1918 - 1997, Esa Muikku & Jukka Purhonen, 1998

This book confirms the 14.5 ton weight and states the usual 52km/h top speed. I see jaegerplatoon website listed just 37.5km/h top speed to this modified T-50, but honestly that large drop doesn’t make sense to me. It is almost low enough to be the 3rd gear top speed. Maybe it could be top speed on dirt road or Finnish had some strange testing standards.

[RoadRunnerdn]

I don’t think it’s unlikely to have been a conscious choice by the Finns to govern the top speed.

The T-50 already seems to have had issues with both the engine and transmission in soviet service. And the extra armour certainly wouldn’t have helped. Tuning the gear ratios and perhaps downtuning the engine in order to increase its lifespan wouldn’t be an odd choice.

[Teh0]

I agree they could have limited the engine RPM mechanically or restricted the driver from going over certain temperature limits. I rather meant the weight increase on itself doesn’t seem high enough for such top speed drop. Other possibility are engine or transmission parts they weren’t able to fix.

[BoveyBadBoy69]

I made big noises about cut and paste and my dislike for the Finland tree but I am seeing great suggestions now. Your Stu40 suggestion was excellent.I would certainly support that kind of thing and similar vehicles.

[RoadRunnerdn]

And what I meant was that even without any weight increase, there were reasons to limit the top speed anyways. And with the weight increase even more.

[Teh0]

I tried to search for more information and photos to find out who did the armor upgrade. Unfortunately there doesn’t seem to be certainty.

In June 1941 Soviets proposed to increase T-50’s armor, but there is nothing indicating if this was carried out or even approved. Usually Soviets kept good records of things, thus it’s hard to see why this information would be missing. I think the only option would be if the upgrade was carried out by an army depot. Even that option is unlikely, since none of the other 12 photographed T-50s, have no additional armor or signs of having it before. That is 12 out of the 48 completed T-50s. It would not be efficient work to only upgrade one tank. Furthermore the proposed armor upgrade does not match the Finnish T-50.

“Finnish armoured vehicles” book doesn’t have anything about this, but strangely enough a Russian book “T-50. The best light tank of the Great Patriotic War (2019)” claims the upgrade was done by Finns. The same thing is said in the article in Tank Archives.

It appears Finnish don’t have their records available online and they can only be accessed in Helsinki. It could be possible to ask from that person running jagerplatoon website as he seem be a regular visitor in there. There exists five photos of what is claimed to be К-11217 abandoned on roadside bank, photographed by Finns. It is the only abandoned T-50 photographed by them.

Spoiler

[BlockbusterVHS]

i like this idea <3

[Teh0]

Glad to see the ingame T-50 armor thickness was adjusted and top speed also reported. This should make it easier to add Niki. The way those ammo racks deplete still remain very random, but that doesn’t seem to be a big issue. It doesn’t seem to have total of 150 rounds in there.

[Ghostmaxi]

While not a T-50, i have a pic of a Finnish uparmored T-26

[warner7]

Would also be fun to play. They should implement more of these fun mods to the Finnish tech tree.