Object 279 armor values / (bug report )

[Scärlett]

Hello this topic about the object 279 armor values UFO !

( this topic only about the armor values) for a bug report !
will be closed after finding good info thank you !

this information could be wrong !

If you have better information feel free to post them!

Object 279 have wrong values !

I will provide sources / books and bug report !

Book sources

1- Отечественная бронетехника. XX век, том 3 (1946–1965)

2- Российские танки и специальная бронетехника (1905-1995 гг.)

3- Технологии и вооружение: Древние бронетанковые машины 1945-1965 гг.

4- Советский тяжелый танк Т-10 и его варианты: Джеймс Киннер, Стивен Сьюэлл.

5- А.Г. Солянкин, М.В. Павлов, И.В. Павлов, И.Г. Желтов – Отечественные бронированные машины. XX век. 1946–1965.

Object 279 armor in game vs irl

In game
160/80/80

it should be 192mm front hull instead !?
side should be more than 100mm instead of 80mm?
turret front should be 305mm??
skirts should have more?
roof armor is wrong

these info could be wrong !
but it seems armor is wrong in game

Side note:
if you from Russia and can translate these page please feel free to comment it will help in bug report.

i tried to translated to the book updated i use google translate.
Note this could be wrong please correct me if it’s wrong !

Armor Protection Breakdown

Correct values of hull armor:

Front (rounded): 269 mm ( thick rolled armor plate).

Side plates: 192 mm thick.

Rear plate: 92 mm thick.

Side hull parts (lower): 65 mm thick.

The hull was welded from rolled armor plates of large thickness. The front upper hull plate (the glacis) was a 269 mm rolled plate, joined to the 192 mm side plates and 92 mm rear plate by welding.

Hull armor angles:
The schematic labeled “Схема броневой защиты танка «Объект 279»” shows the hull plates at pronounced angles:

Upper Front Hull (glacis):

The rounded glacis was sloped at approximately 55–60° from vertical (depending on the exact strike point).

This slope dramatically increased the effective armor thickness — a 269 mm plate at ~60° gives an effective resistance of over 500 mm RHA equivalence against horizontal fire.

Lower Front Hull:

Also sloped, but at a shallower angle (~45°).

Side Hull:

The upper sides were slightly sloped inward (~30°), while the lower sides were more vertical.

Object 279 armor in game

i don’t understand why it’s 21mm it should be 50mm to 80mm

Bug report: (closed) will reopen again am having hard time reading this book page to understand.
there should be 2 bug reports to get the armor to right values !
1-bug report for turret armor
closed.
2-bug report for hull armor
closed.

this topic only about armor / bug report please don’t discussion performance about tank here please or will be flagged as off topic thank you !

the point of this post is just finding more info about the armor to fix it.

discussion about BR / performance in other forum threads. !!!

thanks for reading :D

[Zephoid]

@Scärlett

and turret ring is also weak and the object 279 was moved from 8.3 to 8.7 to 9.0 BR the armor mean nothing against Dm 23 / Dm33 / heat rounds !
object 279 armor was made against high pen adps round and 300m+ heat rounds but armor is struggling against apds rounds which is weird.

Christ ppl, the 279 is still the single best 9.0 tank in the game. If you want better armor, you are going to go up in br and have the armor be even less effective.

If you are expecting to be unpennable by dm23s while having one of the best cannons at 9.0, faster acceleration than any armored mbt of your br, and the best bomb resistance in the game… yeah, thats just a fantasy. Try comparing the 279 to the Chieftan 10 and its laughable how favored the 279 is.

[БЕИ]

@Zephoid

Christ ppl, the 279 is still the single best 9.0 tank in the game. If you want better armor, you are going to go up in br and have the armor be even less effective.

If you are expecting to be unpennable by dm23s while having one of the best cannons at 9.0, faster acceleration than any armored mbt of your br, and the best bomb resistance in the game… yeah, thats just a fantasy. Try comparing the 279 to the Chieftan 10 and its laughable how favored the 279 is.

The entire hull is green for dm23, even if it does get buffed the increased protection (very tiny) will make little to no noticeable differences to its current state, it will still not stop dm23, maybe slightly more resistant to apds and ap at more angles, it’s about as significant as .1s reload buff for autoloaders imo

Don’t underestimate Chieftain MK10, it’s one of the strongest 9.0 for a long time and it’s hull down offences is unmatched thanks to the turret armor, good gunner sight zoom and good ammunition, it’s a vehicles that could trade fire with anything as the turret is quite resistant to something as strong as the 3bm42.

[Scärlett]

this topic is not about the performance of the tanks (it’s bug report and only about armor values.).
please keep these discussion in the right place and i won’t talk about the tank and how it’s performance.
discussion about BR / performance in other forum threads.
will close this topic after finding better sources about the armor.

[Big_Djck_Sergey]

Hello, I cannot add you ingame to send you the materials that you needed for the bug report or general research. Please get in touch if you want the files (through forum or ingame DM).
I can make a new bug report but wont be today since I am busy with other stuff. Also note that I found another potential mistake in the frontal hemisphere of the vehicle, which could use addressing. The thing is I do not have this vehicle and I have no ingame experience with it so I need some information to further investigate this.

[Scärlett]

thank you for the answer but if you can make the bug report it’s better you have better info about the 279 armor / books !

the only info i had it was from the book page i provide before which said the hull armor was not cast armor !
but other source says it’s cast and other say it’s 4 cast parts i can’t make a bug report with guesses !
but that’s why my old bug report was:

object 279 Armor (Manual Data / book with Construction Type)

• Front plate (glacis): 182–192 mm @ 60° → rolled, welded
• Side section (upper): 265 mm @ 43° → rolled, welded
• Middle side section: 192 mm → rolled, welded
• Rear section: 182 mm → rolled, welded
• Roof: 30 mm → rolled plate
• Bottom: 20 mm → rolled plate

The hull was entirely welded from rolled armor plates, despite its rounded appearance.
Soviet manuals explicitly list plate thicknesses and angles, which is characteristic of rolled/welded construction !?

turret (all cast armor)

• Front: 305 mm @ 60° → cast
• Sides: 182 mm @ 30° → cast
• Rear: 45–65 mm → cast

The turret was a single cast piece, which allowed complex rounded shapes and very thick frontal armor !?

• Hull = welded rolled plates (front, sides, rear, roof, bottom).
• Turret = cast armor (front, sides, rear)

Spoiler

Terminology in manuals from book page / diagrams !?
Soviet documents explicitly use words like катаная броня (rolled armor) and литая броня (cast armor).

In Object 279’s case, the hull sections are described with exact plate thicknesses and angles (e.g., 265 mm at 43°”), which is typical of rolled plates welded together.
The turret is described as a single massive thickness (305 mm cast front), which matches cast armor construction.
Construction method clues

Rolled plate hulls:When manuals list multiple plates joined at angles (front, side, rear, roof, bottom), that indicates welding of rolled plates. !!???

Cast turrets: Soviet heavy tanks (IS‑series, T‑10, Object 279) consistently used cast turrets because complex rounded shapes were easier to produce by casting than by welding thick rolled plates.

Shape vs material :
The Object 279 hull looks rounded, which led some Western sources to assume it was cast.
But the manual specifies differentiated plate thicknesses and angles — that’s only possible if it was
rolled armor welded into a rounded form.
The turret, on the other hand, is explicitly listed as cast, and its rounded dome shape confirms that.

Finalized / fixed armor Object 279 Construction !!

• Hull: Welded from rolled plates (front 182–192 mm @ 60°, sides up to 265 mm @ 43°, rear 182 mm, skirts 65 mm).
• Turret: Cast armor (305 mm front, 182 mm sides, 45–65 mm rear).
• Screens: Thin rolled plates (20–30 mm) mounted externally as anti‑HEAT spaced armor.

from the manual only / book page.

Spoiler

Armor Protection / angles (from the manual / book page :

• Hull front plate (glacis):

  • Variable thickness: 182–192 mm
  • Sloped at 60°

• Hull side section (upper):

  • 265 mm
  • Sloped at 43°

• Hull middle side section:

  • 192 mm

• Hull rear section:

  • 182 mm

• Hull roof:

  • 30 mm

• Hull bottom:

  • 20 mm

• Turret front:

  • 305 mm
  • Sloped at 60°

• Turret sides:

  • 182 mm
  • Sloped at 30°

• Turret rear:

  • 45–65 mm

All of this info from that page i used google photo translate !
i could be wrong !
translation could be also wrong.

maybe if you have free time you could make a bug report with better source and get armor fixed. !?

[Scärlett]

book pages provided by Sergey:

in English google translate