Would you like to see T-55 Enigma in-game?
- Yes
- No
0
voters
How would you like to see T-55 Enigma in-game?
- As an Event Vehicle
- As a Squadron Vehicle
- As a Premium Vehicle
- As a Tech-Tree Vehicle
- I said No
0
voters
Iraqi T-55 “Enigma”/“Al-Faw”
History
Spoiler
The T-55 is one of the most iconic and widely produced main battle tanks of the 20th century, developed by the Soviet Union as an evolution of the earlier T-54 series. Introduced in the late 1950s, the T-55 incorporated several upgrades, including improved NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) protection, better engine reliability, and enhanced ammunition storage. Its simple design, ease of maintenance, and rugged construction made it highly exportable, with over 100,000 units built across various countries. It served as the backbone of many Warsaw Pact and allied armies during the Cold War and saw combat in nearly every major regional conflict from the 1960s onward, including in Vietnam, the Middle East, Africa, and the Balkans. Its widespread availability and adaptability led to countless local upgrades, making the T-55 a platform that remained in active service in some countries well into the 21st century.
The T-55 Enigma, developed by the Iraqi Military Industrialization Commission in the late 1980s, was a field-engineered attempt to upgrade Iraq’s aging fleet of T-55 and Type 59 tanks. Officially known within Iraq as the “Al-Faw” modification, the vehicle gained the NATO nickname “Enigma” due to the unusual and initially unknown nature of its angular armor modules. These were most prominently seen during the Gulf War, where several were captured and studied in detail by coalition forces.
The most distinctive feature of the Enigma was the set of large, bolted-on armored boxes fitted around the turret, hull front, and side skirts. These appliqué blocks were designed to counter shaped-charge munitions, such as rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) and anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), which were common threats in both urban combat and open desert warfare. Their irregular shapes and non-standard positioning raised questions in the West about whether they were functional or merely psychological tools meant to intimidate opponents or boost crew confidence.
Combat History of Iraqi T-55s and Enigma Variants
Spoiler
Iraq began acquiring T-55s in the 1960s from the Soviet Union and China (in the form of Type 59s and Type 69s). These tanks formed the backbone of Iraq’s armored forces for decades, serving in multiple major conflicts across the region.
Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988):
During this prolonged and brutal conflict, Iraq fielded large numbers of T-55s and their Chinese counterparts. These tanks were widely used in conventional armored assaults and defensive operations across open desert and marsh terrain. Their shortcomings against Iranian infantry-carried anti-tank weapons became apparent, leading to battlefield improvisations and armor modifications. Iraqi tank crews often faced threats from TOW missiles, RPG-7s, and recoilless rifles, which inflicted heavy losses on lighter armored vehicles like the T-55. In the late 80s, in response to these vulnerabilities, and with access to newer Soviet equipment restricted, Iraqi engineers developed an up-armored variant of the T-55: the Al-Faw.
Gulf War (1991):
The T-55 Enigma saw its only confirmed major combat use during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. These tanks were deployed as part of Republican Guard units or elite mechanized brigades near key defensive positions in southern Iraq and around Kuwait. These vehicles were issued for the commanders at brigade level. Coalition forces, particularly British and American armored units, encountered and destroyed several Enigma tanks during the ground phase of the war.
Despite being outclassed by M1 Abrams and Challenger 1 tanks, the Enigma’s improvised composite armor did provide limited success. In at least one documented case, an Enigma survived multiple MILAN ATGM hits before being knocked out by a larger-caliber kinetic round. However, most were destroyed by air strikes or high-velocity sabot rounds that easily bypassed the added protection. Coalition analysts who examined destroyed Enigmas post-war were initially surprised to find that the add-on armor was real and functional, rather than a bluff or dummy system.
Post-Gulf War and 2003 Invasion:
After Desert Storm, Iraq retained some surviving T-55s, but few if any Enigmas. During the 2003 U.S. invasion, standard T-55s were again deployed, though by then they were extremely outdated and mostly relegated to second-line or militia units. No operational use of Enigmas was confirmed during this conflict, suggesting most had been destroyed or captured after 1991.
Internal Composition and Design of the Iraqi T-55 Enigma Armor
Spoiler
Once coalition forces recovered several Enigma tanks, a clearer picture emerged. Contrary to earlier speculation that the blocks were empty, filled with concrete, or packed with sand, thorough inspection revealed a deliberately layered composite structure. Each armor block consisted of an external mild steel shell, approximately 5 mm thick, containing multiple internal modules or “sandwiches.” These sandwiches typically consisted of a layer of aluminum alloy, a sheet of natural rubber, and a thin steel plate. These were stacked with air gaps between them, forming a layered structure that mimicked non-explosive reactive armor (NERA).
The Enigma was equipped with a total of 36 composite armor blocks: four on each side of the turret, four forming the rear turret counterweight, eight along each side of the hull, and four additional plates mounted on the front hull. Most of the Enigma’s armor blocks were uniquely shaped to conform to the specific contours and angles of the tank, with each module tailored to its position on the turret or hull for optimal coverage and fit. On some Enigma variants, both infrared projectors were fitted with additional armor plating designed to protect against small arms fire and shrapnel. The rear turret ballast on the Enigma was also outfitted with a stowage box.
The rubber served a key role: when struck by a shaped-charge jet, the rubber allowed the surrounding metal plates to deform and bulge outward, disrupting the energy and cohesion of the jet. This so-called “bulging plate effect” is the same principle behind many forms of modern NERA, as used in later Soviet and Western tank designs. While Iraq lacked access to advanced materials like ceramics, textolite, or explosive reactive bricks, the engineers demonstrated a functional understanding of how layering materials with differing elastic properties could degrade a HEAT warhead’s effectiveness.
The materials used, aluminum, rubber, and steel, were chosen for their availability and ease of manufacturing. No evidence has ever been found of exotic materials such as fiberglass, plexiglass, or ceramic inserts, nor was there any use of explosive reactive armor elements. This was a fully passive armor system. The use of aluminum offered a light and deformable middle layer, while the rubber acted as an energy absorber, and the steel provided hardness and structural integrity. These layers worked best against HEAT munitions; tests and anecdotal battlefield reports suggested that Enigma tanks could sometimes survive multiple hits from RPGs or ATGMs like the MILAN before being knocked out.
However, the Enigma armor had serious limitations. Against kinetic energy projectiles, such as APFSDS rounds fired by modern tank guns, the added protection was minimal. The layered aluminum and rubber could not offer meaningful resistance to high-velocity penetrators. Additionally, the added weight of the armor, up to 4–5 tons, placed significant strain on the T-55’s already outdated engine and drivetrain, further reducing acceleration and maneuverability. The armor was so heavy that the add-on module on the rear of the turret was likely not only intended for protection, but to also serve as a counterweight to balance the increased frontal mass. This made Enigma tanks less agile than their standard counterparts, which was a critical disadvantage in high-intensity armored warfare.
From a production standpoint, the Enigma kits were manually assembled, with varying levels of build quality. Photos of knocked-out Enigma tanks show inconsistent welds, uneven fitting of armor boxes, and imprecise bolt placements. Some captured tanks showed signs of corrosion or water damage within the armor blocks, indicating limited sealing or quality control. Nonetheless, these modifications represented a notable effort by Iraqi engineers to adapt Cold War-era tanks to more modern battlefield threats.
The Enigma armor was also part of a broader trend within Iraqi armored doctrine during the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War, where the focus shifted toward improving survivability against infantry-carried anti-tank weapons. With Iraq’s limited access to newer Soviet or Western armor technologies due to arms embargoes, domestic innovation became necessary. The Enigma was likely inspired by Soviet tank upgrade kits like the T-55AM and T-62M “Brow” packages, which used composite and spaced armor to improve HEAT resistance. However, unlike those professionally designed Soviet systems, the Enigma relied on more primitive methods and materials, prioritizing practicality over sophistication.
In summary, the T-55 Enigma’s armor was far more than a visual gimmick. It was a genuine, albeit rudimentary, attempt at creating a composite armor system using layered metals and rubber to counter shaped-charge threats. Though it could not stand up to modern kinetic penetrators, it provided a noticeable improvement in protection over stock T-55 armor in close combat or urban fighting scenarios. As such, it occupies a unique place in armored warfare history as one of the few indigenous armor upgrade programs in the Middle East that successfully implemented NERA-like principles with minimal resources.
The Russian Study
Spoiler
A recent Russian study, authored by V.V. Sychev, focused on the use of non-explosive reactive armor (NERA) within БДЗ (Additional Protection Blocks), on a T-72B3M, as a practical alternative in scenarios where standard ERA elements are limited or unavailable. The research evaluated the performance of steel-plexiglass-steel “sandwiches” inserted into “БДЗ” containers, modular armor boxes much like those used on the Iraqi T-55 Enigma. These NERA inserts were designed to deform upon impact, disrupting the shaped charge jet by leveraging material elasticity and layered spacing.
Testing was conducted using RPG-based warheads such as the PG-7L and PG-9S, striking the armor at battlefield-relevant angles. Results showed that side armor blocks filled with these NERA configurations reached 92% of the protective value typically provided by ERA, while turret modules achieved about 69%. When used in combination with remaining ERA elements, the total protective effect could reach as high as 86%. This demonstrated that БДЗ modules with NERA-style inserts, despite lacking explosives, offered meaningful defense against HEAT threats. The study also reinforced that using sand or concrete as filler in such containers was largely ineffective, offering only 10–40% protection and severely burdening vehicle weight.
First Image turret, second image hull sides.
Effectiveness: Explosive, NERA, Sand, Empty
In conclusion, the research validated the combat relevance of designs like the Enigma’s NERA: a low-tech but effective solution leveraging layered materials and spacing to disrupt anti-tank munitions without the complexity of ERA. It proved that even under resource constraints, such armor systems can be built to achieve real protective gains on the battlefield.
Implementation
Spoiler
In War Thunder, the T-55 Enigma would function as a significantly more HEAT-resistant variant of the standard T-55A, trading speed and agility for improved survivability against shaped-charge munitions. Thanks to its layered applique armor the Enigma would be far more capable of shrugging off common threats like ATGMs, and HEAT shells. However, the trade-off comes in the form of reduced mobility: with an additional 5 tons of weight and no engine upgrade, its acceleration and top speed would be noticeably worse than other T-55s, making it more sluggish in maneuvering and repositioning. The turret traverse will most likely be slower than on the base model T-55A. It would also still be vulnerable to kinetic penetrators and high-caliber APFSDS rounds.
In my personal opinion, the in-game representation of the T-55 Enigma should feature the complete configuration. This includes not only the distinctive modular armor layout, but also the armored infrared projectors, the DShK turret, the unditching log and the external 200-liter fuel drums mounted at the rear. These elements are essential for accurately capturing the tank’s unique silhouette and battlefield presence, and would enhance its visual appeal in-game.
Disclaimer: All aspects of this suggestion are ultimately up to Gaijin’s discretion to decide and implement. This includes the vehicle’s battle rating (BR) , ammunition types , visual features, and nation (tree).
T-55 Enigma – Specifications
Spoiler
Origin: Iraq
Base Model: Soviet T-55A (or Type-59)
Crew:
- 4 (Commander, Gunner, Loader, Driver)
Dimensions (Approximate):
- Length (gun forward): 9.00 m
- Hull length: 6.20 m
- Width: 3.27 m
- Height: 2.40 m (with armor modules)
Weight:
- Standard T-55A: ~36 metric tons
- T-55 Enigma: ~41 metric tons (approx. +5 tons due to armor modules)
Armor Protection:
- Hull (frontal base): ~100 mm cast steel
- Turret (frontal base): ~200 mm cast steel
- Enigma Composite Blocks:
- Modular armor with 5–6 layers of aluminum, rubber, and steel
- Provides significantly improved protection against HEAT warheads
- Estimated equivalent to ~400–450 mm vs. shaped charge (in ideal cases)
- Little to no added protection against APFSDS rounds
- Enigma Armored Projectors:
- Provides protection against small arms fire and shrapnel for both IR projectors
Main Armament:
- 100 mm D-10T2S rifled gun
- Rate of fire: 4–6 rounds per minute (manual loading)
- Ammunition types: AP, HE, HEAT, APHE
* T-55 Enigma Turret Traverse**
T-55A Standard Turret Traverse:
- Manual traverse: ~16–20 seconds for full 360° rotation (depends on crew strength)
- Powered traverse: ~15 seconds (at max engine RPM; using electro-hydraulic system)
- Traverse speed: ~24 degrees/second (max)
Assuming no upgrade to the turret ring, bearings, or traverse motor:
- Traverse speed could drop by ~20–30%
- New powered traverse speed: ~17–19 deg/sec
- Manual traverse would feel noticeably heavier and slower for the crew
Disclaimer: This is a calculated assumption based on available data and estimated mass distribution. Actual performance may vary, and the figures are subject to error due to limited official documentation.
Secondary Armament:
- 7.62 mm SGMT coaxial machine gun
- 12.7 mm DShK (AA mount on loader’s cupola)
Engine:
- V-55 12-cylinder diesel
- Power output: 580 hp (432 kW)
- Cooling: Liquid-cooled
- Transmission: Manual, 5 forward gears, 1 reverse
Mobility (T-55A vs. Enigma):
- Power-to-weight ratio (T-55A): ~16 hp/ton
- Power-to-weight ratio (Enigma): ~14.1 hp/ton (reduced due to weight)
- Top speed road T-55A: ~50 km/h
- Top speed road Enigma: ~44–45 km/h
- Operational range: ~400–500 km (less on Enigma)
- Suspension: Torsion bar
- Ground clearance: ~0.43 m
In actual operations, the Enigma’s bulkier profile and added frontal armor may have caused even further performance degradation due to increased rolling resistance and strain on the suspension/ transmission. In practice, the Enigma would have felt slower in acceleration and mobility, especially off-road.
Disclaimer: This is a calculated assumption based on available data and estimated mass distribution. Actual performance may vary, and the figures are subject to error due to limited official documentation.
A source claims that the T-55 Enigma may have been based on the T-55AD-1 variant, which was reportedly equipped with the 695 hp V-46-5M engine, a derivative of the T-72’s more powerful 780 hp V-46-6. Such an increase in power could have not only compensated for the Enigma’s additional armor weight but may have even made the vehicle slightly faster in certain conditions. However, due to the lack of verifiable documentation and the limited number of Enigmas produced, this claim remains highly speculative and difficult to confirm with certainty.
Miscellaneous:
- Night vision: Infrared spotlight and passive optics (basic)
- NBC protection: Yes (basic Soviet filtration system)
- Smoke system: Not present (Variant 1 had smoke launchers)
Sources:
Spoiler
Medium tank Al Faw / Enigma. Simple modernization of the T-55 in Iraqi
In Development: T-55 Enigma | Armored Warfare - Official Website
T-55 series of main battle tanks
T-55 Main Battle Tank (1958)
T-55 Enigma tank, medium, 100mm
T-54/T-55 operators and variants - Wikipedia
Non-explosive reactive armor - Wikipedia
СТАЛЬ И ОГОНЬ: СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ И ПЕРСПЕКТИВНЫЕ ТАНКИ: Применение невзрывной реактивной защиты в защитных устройствах танков в условиях ограниченного количества или недостаточного обеспечения элементами динамической защиты