I hope we get it in the state it was intended to be, but Gaijin has this bizarre habit of adding test vehicles in their test configuration not their planned combat one (like how the Obj292 has a test turret on, VT1-2 is made of structural steel, 120S has an under-powered engine, etc) so we might get the TTB but with structural steel for armor…
cool tank. +1
Abrams if it was Russian, +1
I think it better. Very light and with powerful engine.
1 Like
That makes no sense tho, like going to war in a vehicle filled with dummy equipment made of plastic…
Light tank Abram.
I have heard base M1 with some armor stripped down (for transport) hit 70mph on highway. With no heavy armor on this one, may be able to go similar speed
We play in game. If it will protect against 12.7 - it would be cool semi light tank with fast reload, unmanned turret and 120mm gun.
2 Likes
Yes, I read about this too, but as far as I know, the speed limit in game is set according to the manufacturer statement or manuals.
Should be based on max trial speed/governor removed speed, at least for prototype stuff. I don’t know if they hit 70 in GDLS trials but I heard they did 60-something
They just removed the R2y2s, what is the standard for vehicles in this game even is anymore?
+1 but only if we get it in the tested state. I’d love a boof-ass Abrams light tank.
1 Like
Unmanned turret? Going to be so OP like AGS.
1 Like
M1 TTB never had composite in the state it was intended to be. They had plans to add it but the final prototype never came with it.
1 Like
The TTB is not a tank, not a military vehicle, its a tracked test bed, if it is to come into war thunder, a game about military vehicle, it should be in its actual military combat configuration. For all we know it could be a husk with no targeting systems, no seats for crews, nothing but a demonstrator for an auto-loader. Adding test beds in the game in their test bed configuration is just ridiculous, this is a combat vehicle game not a 3d model collection, if a vehicle is to be added it should fit the criteria of being a historical MILITARY vehicle.
AGS is not a unmanned turret. It’s very articulated and cleft, but the crew is still operating in the turret below the gun and turret ring, and being rotated by the turret, like in the stryker.
A unmanned turret means the gunner is not in the turret, but outside the rotation of the turret compartment, with most designs having the gunner in the hull compartment by the driver, and REMOTELY operating the gun.
2s38 and anything later based on the Au-220/M Platform is a unmanned turret, Pantsir is an unmanned turret, HSTV-L and RDF/LT are unmanned turrets. (Commander is in the turret for observation purposes, but it’s being remotely operated by a gunner in the hull in normal circumstances, it can operate independently of commander if needed, so yes, it is classified as a “crewless turret”) AGS is not, as the crew are still being rotated with the turret.
1 Like
We know for a fact before they stripped the TTB of parts, it did have a targeting system? Why? Because they made, one, potentially more prototypes before the M1 TTB testing just that. The M1 SRV was a test on a smaller scale to get the gist of what would need to be improved.
Alongside that, the stabilizer was fully functioning on the turret.
The HSTV-L was a test bed, but it had everything functional. Like most HIMAG projects, the likelihood is, and I say likely, not exactly, they would use this as a basis to garner more funding to develop a more practical and logistically easier platform if things went well, which was in this case supposed to be the FASTDRAW and the CAT TTB, which would be tested further before being dropped.
Why did they make it unmanned? It probably was because the USSR was doing the same. Object 490 and Object 477 were all unmanned prototypes doing the exact same thing at the same time. And the future was looking towards just that. The USSR collapse was unexpected to most people, outside and inside the ring of intelligence. After that, Russia lost a bunch of their factories, and due to a few wars breaking out in former-USSR countries, they had their hands tied when it came to the already limited production capability. China didn’t pursue any unmanned turrets either, still in catch up at the time.
If the cold war continued, chances are we would’ve seen a giant push for a practical M1 TTB due to their crew survivability, alongside other factors. Just like the RDF/LT was to the HSTV-L. However, the M1 TTB on it’s own would’ve never seen combat. Just like the HSTV-L wouldn’t of either.
1 Like
I feel like although it’s a bit dated, this is more or less a great Armata counterpart! Really want to see this ingame in the tech tree, and hopefully other vehicles like the Chally 2 with the Falcon turret show up as well!
best armata counter(part) would be an F-15EX with GBU-53 or CBU-105
but I would love to see this as a stripped down speedy abrams
1 Like
Would be a neat event/Bp vehicle in tradition of that other american vehicles at this ones aprox BR have been
i really like unmanned turrets, +1.