I’d like to suggest SU-101 which is a self-propelled gun developed in 1944.
The SU-101 is placing in Kubinka Tank Museum.
History
In 1944, Uralmashzavod began to work on new SPG. Previous SPGs like SU-100 or ISU-152 mounted their gun in the front of the hull, which increased the overall dimensions of the vehicle, also impaired their maneuverability. Later they consider to place the gun in the back of the hull base on the T-44 chassis. There are two weapon options. One with a D-10S 100mm gun called SU-101, another with a D-25-44S 122mm gun called SU-102. The engine was placed in the front of the right side, right beside the driver. The gunner and the commander were placed in the back of the left side, and the loader was in the right side. During the tests, the SU-101 showed a fairly high performance. On the highway, it accelerated to 50-54 km/h, on the ground to 25 km/h. Fuel enough for the march length 350 km. It could climb the 35-degree slope and move with roll to 25°. The 2.5m ditch and the 0.73m high ditch were overcome. The working condition of the crew was not good. The driver’s workplace was always too hot, and even worse when firing due to the shock wave acting on the roof. For that (and other reasons, like the progress of T-54), SU-101 stop devoloping after the war. Only one was built.
Data:
Crew: 4
Overall Weight: 31.4 tonnes
Length×Width×Height: 6.1m×3m×2.1m
Ground Clearance: 400mm
Armor: upper hull front: 90mm with 63°
lower hull front: 90mm with 53°
upper upper hull front: 120mm with 55°
lower hull side: 75mm vertical
middle hull side: 45mm with 60°
upper hull side: 90mm with 45°
hull rear: 40mm with 7°
lower roof: 15mm horizontal
upper roof: 20mm horizontal
hull floor: 15mm horizontal
hull floor side: 15mm with 60°
hull floor rear: 20mm with 60°
Weapon: 100mm D-10S with 35 rounds×1, 12.7mm DShK with 450 rounds×1, 7.62mm DT×1
Engine: 500hp V-2-34 V12 diesel engine
Endurance: 350km on highway
Maximum Speed: 54km/h on highway, 25 km/h on field
Horizontal Gun Targeting Angle: 22°
Gun Elevation: +18°
Gun Depression: -2°15’
I am not sure if the vehicle that cooks it’s driver and possibly creating concussions to it’s crew when firing should be in-game. It is functionally not viable and this exact same reason made the USSR to abandon this project.
I know War Thunder does not have a 100% track record of what vehicle should or should not be in-game, but I think this is the fine line where a vehicle could be disqualified to be added: if it can’t be operated, it should not be added to War Thunder.
We already have several vehicles in-game that would be dangerous or outright impossible to operate as represented in-game (see the Radkampfwagen 90 having no vision ports for the driver), I doubt this would be any different.
Isn’t the Radkampfwagen supposed to be driven with driver’s hatch open in it’s state (since it was just a concept demonstration prototype)? My guess is it didn’t receive any since the project got canceled. But I believe there is a diference in not having vision ports - that would be a relatively easy fix if the vehicle would be put in service - and having the tank killing you while operating it due to heat, gas/exhaust venting in the hull or any other vibrations that would disintegrate the vehicle and give a concussion or kill it’s occupants.
So we should talk about the Ajax and how it vibrated so bad and was so loud it caused tinnitus, nausea, and joint pain.
If we’re going to start adding negative effects to crew let’s not stop there, let’s add negative effects to vehicle suspensions and transmissions, looking at all late war German vehicles from WW2 XD.
In that case, we could talk about the WW1 tanks we have in-game, and the high levels of carbon monoxide from inadequate ventilation, the M551 had an issue where a round could prematurely detonate, I can’t think of many more off the top of my head admittedly, but they’re out there. I get your concerns, but War Thunder doesn’t model things like mechanical unreliability, otherwise I doubt the Tigers or early T-34s would be as popular as they are.
I wasn’t saying that we should add mechanical unreliability in game or crew debuffs due to noxes and concussions, I was talking about broken vehicles being added in War Thunder that could not be safely operated in real life and make them outperform vehicles that were in fact better to them. Or being almost useless and frustrating to play.
As for the Ajax example mentioned by Kingtiez-live, I agree, it shouldn’t be in game. The Brits had multiple Warrior improvement programs and other competitor proposals including one that had a turret with a 40mm gun and would not injure or kill the crew and would perform as well as the Ajax. And I feel the same for other vehicles as well.
As for specific examples like how Sturmtiger could not fire with doors closed due propeller gases venting inside or the KV-2 that had the exact same issue, I could forgive that since they can still be operated relatively safe with these small caveats (would be interesting to see the doors open to vent the crew compartment as well as a nod to this problem, but that might be too much for Gaijin and War Thunder to animate and model).
