I have read some news from the OI which was passed to developers not too long ago there in the forum. I guess in the light of these that we don’t have a bright future for the TAS.
I feel like the one thing holding back the 44M Tas from being added is probably the main gun situation, but we might actually already have what we need…
There are two questions to answer really:
- Will the Tas have the 75 mm gun, or the 80 mm gun, or two separate versions?
- Do we know enough about these guns to model them accurately in WT?
I will start by answering number 2. We absolutely have what we need to model the 75 mm gun accurately. We might have what we need to model the 80 mm gun accurately, so long as a few assumptions are true. In the spoiler below I outline this in detail:
Spoiler (how much we know about the guns/how to model them in WT)
So of course since the 75 mm 43.M cannon is already in WT, we have all that we need for that gun. Sources differ on whether the 44M Tas’ 75 mm 43.M temporary replacement cannon was an L/43 or an L/46. The 75 mm 43.M cannon already in WT is the L/43 version, so we know the exact in-game performance of the L/43 version. The L/46 version would perform almost the same as the L/43 version that is in-game, except it would have a bit higher penetration and muzzle velocity due to the increased barrel length. Since the 43.M gun was derived from the PaK 40, the L/46 version of it would likely have performance on par with the PaK 40/3 L/46 that is currently in-game on vehicles like the Marder III H. Therefore, whether the 75 mm 43.M temporary replacement cannon was an L/43 or an L/46, we have what we need to model it in WT.
The bigger question is what about the 80 mm main gun. Now we know that it would have been the 29/44.M DIMÁVAG L/58 cannon. This gun was an upgrade of the 29/38.M L/48 AA gun, and the 29/44.M L/58 AA gun was built and tested around October 1943, but it was deemed not yet ready and so they developed it further, expecting to start mass production of the gun in the summer of 1944. I can’t find much about what happened regarding this gun afterwards, it seems that mass production may have been delayed until 1945 and it is unclear whether any more 29/44.M L/58 AA guns were made. It seems like no 29/44.M L/58 cannon was made into a tank gun.
Therefore, you’d think that we can’t model the 80 mm gun of the Tas in WT as we don’t know exactly how the tank gun version would have performed when mounted on the 44M Tas. However, considering we have the data on the performance of the 29/38.M L/48 AA gun and the 29/44.M L/58 AA gun, and considering that usually (such as in the case of the legendary Tiger’s 88 mm main gun) when such an AA gun is converted into a tank gun the performance remains practically identical, we may actually be able to model the 80 mm gun of the Tas perfectly adequately.
The Tiger I’s 88 mm KwK 36 was a conversion of the 88 mm FlaK 36. The performance of the gun remained the same after it was converted to a tank gun from an AA gun. The 88 mm FlaK 36 AA gun was supposedly related to the 80 mm Bofors model 1929 AA gun (the same AA gun that the Hungarians modified and used as the 29/38.M L/48 and 29/44.M L/58) since both guns had related development and were apparently quite similar. As such, the 80 mm 29/38.M and 80 mm 29/44.M can be thought of as similar Hungarian equivalents of the 88 mm FlaK 36, and if the performance of the FlaK 36 remained the same after it was converted into a tank gun, we can assume that the same is true for the 29/38.M and 29/44.M. On top of that, with many tanks in WT that have a gun that was a tank gun conversion of something else (e.g. AA gun or anti-tank gun), the converted tank gun retains the stats of the original gun that it was converted from.
For the 80 mm gun of the Tas to be successfully modelled in WT, the following assumptions must be true:
- The 80 mm gun of the Tas was a tank gun conversion of the 29/44.M L/58 AA gun.
- The 29/44.M L/58 gun would perform practically the same when converted into a tank gun from an AA gun.
- The 80 mm gun would have fired shells that we know enough about, be it the old shells from the 29/38.M L/48 AA gun, or new shells that we can find out enough about.
- The performance figures we have for the 29/44.M L/58 AA gun and any associated shells are accurate and wouldn’t have changed on the Tas for any reason.
My insights on these assumptions (share yours if you have any):
Spoiler
- I think this is basically 100% confirmed. Almost every source that writes about the 80 mm gun says exactly this about what gun it is. One source mentions other potential 80 mm guns.
- I think this is likely to be true. Sources assume this too; none of them say that the performance of the gun would have changed during conversion. We should also consider how this was exactly the case with the Tiger’s 88 mm KwK 36 gun that was converted from the 88 mm Flak 36, and performed the same. I think this is a reasonable assumption to make unless any contrary evidence is found.
- I’m not sure whether this is true. I haven’t seen confirmation of exactly what shells the 29/44.M L/58 AA gun/80 mm gun of the Tas fired. I think we have enough information to model the old shells that the 29/38.M L/48 AA gun fired (e.g. 29/35.M páncélgránát), although there may have been new shells for the 29/44.M gun as one source talked about new shells like the 29/42.M and 42/44.M shells having been made. Firstly we need to know what shells existed and what shells the gun fired. Once we know the shells it fired, we need to see if we can find enough information about said shells, or if it could fire different, potentially weaker shells that we do know enough about.
- I think this is quite likely to be true. I haven’t come across any reason why the performance figures wouldn’t be accurate.
So what about number 1? Historically, the Tas was designed with the 80 mm gun in mind, but after it was tested, it was decided that it wasn’t ready yet and needed further development, and thus it wouldn’t be ready on time for the testing of the prototype of the Tas. Due to this, the 75 mm 43.M was chosen as a temporary replacement gun for the prototype, and had it been finished, the prototype would have mounted this gun (at least until the 80 mm gun was ready). The Allied bombing raid destroyed the 44M Tas before it could mount either gun. Clearly the 80 mm gun was more powerful and preferred over the 75 mm gun which was seen as a temporary replacement. Therefore, the 44M Tas is one tank with two guns available. Both guns are eligible as they were both built as at least a functioning prototype.
The question is, do we add the 44M Tas with the 75 mm gun as it would have existed as soon as it is built, and in the form that it would have been the easiest to make, or with the 80 mm gun as it would have existed a while later once the intended gun is ready?
Alternatively, how about adding a version with the 75 mm gun and a different one with the 80 mm gun? Well, technically there was only ever one version of the 44M Tas, there were no separate 75 mm and 80 mm ‘variants’, and from what I understand, even the prototype vehicle that was being built was eventually intended to replace the 75 mm gun with the 80 mm gun when it was ready. If it is added as two separate vehicles, then the gun would be the only thing that changes, and it would technically be the same vehicle at two different points, rather than two distinct variants of a tank. In a way it could be like the T-44-85 prototype and the T-44-122 prototype, except the different guns are swapped on the same chassis, rather than each gun being built into a separate chassis. Or it could be like the Char 2C bis, which was a regular Char 2C with a new turret and gun temporarily, before it was converted back into a regular Char 2C.
On top of this, adding separate 44M Tas ‘Prototype’ and ‘Production’ versions might not work, since we don’t actually know whether the prototype vehicle that was being built would have been changed before being accepted into service. For example, the Turan III and Zrinyi I ‘prototypes’ were accepted into service without further changes. On the contrary, early tanks like the Turan I, early Toldis, the Csaba, etc. were changed a bit from their prototype forms before entering production. Considering how the early war tanks were changed from their prototype forms, but the later tanks weren’t, chances are, with how the war was going, Hungary would have rushed the 44M Tas into production without any real changes. Besides, they did spend over a year developing it, and it used conventional, proven components (e.g. engine, transmission, MG, radio, even the suspension design was based on a successful example). I think it is safest to just assume that the Tas would have been accepted for production without any significant changes, therefore I don’t think it makes sense to add separate ‘prototype’ and ‘production’ versions of it, not like we know how a ‘production’ version would have differed anyway.
So really, I don’t know what gun the Tas should get. The logical options are as follows:
- Adding the 44M Tas with only the 75 mm gun
- Adding the 44M Tas with only the 80 mm gun
- Adding two separate versions, but the only difference between them is the gun
Personally, I can see all 3 of these options working. Option 1 can be justified with “that’s how it would have been completed and been the easiest to mass produce and get into combat”. Option 2 can be justified with “the prototype would have eventually gotten the 80 mm gun, that’s how they planned to produce the tank, and that’s what the original design was”. Option 3 can be justified with “the Tas would have used both guns at some point, so why not add it in both forms so that both guns can be used at separate BRs”?
If someone has a reasonable explanation for why one of the guns may not be eligible for addition to War Thunder, then please provide it, because that would make the gun choice much easier.
I think for now, the 44M Tas should be added with the 75 mm gun, because we have the stats we need to model it in game already, and because it should be the least controversial gun choice to add considering the completed 44M Tas would have immediately mounted this gun. However, I don’t think the 80 mm gun should be ruled out. If enough information is collected to accurately model the 80 mm gun in WT, and it is established that the 80 mm gun is eligible for addition to WT, then it can be implemented then.
Having laid this out, I just need your opinions on the matter, and a vote:
Which gun should the 44M Tas get?
- Add the 44M Tas with only the 75 mm gun
- Add the 44M Tas with only the 80 mm gun
- Add it in two separate forms, one with the 75 mm gun and one with the 80 mm gun
0
voters
5 Likes
I learned a lot about this tank by watching a video in Spanish (my language) on a military vehicles channel. According to what was said in the video, the Hungarians during their visit to Germany could only see the Panthers but nothing else and only with that information they created this tank, simply incredible. +1
4 Likes
either the 80 or both, honestly. We have the gunner optic for the 80mm gun and a shell blueprint for an 80mm aphe. As the 75mm was only ordered but never mounted, i think the case for the 80mm is strong.
5 Likes
Wait even the 75 mm wasn’t mounted? I delete my vote then.
ordered but the turret was being assembled when it got bombed. I dont remember if the 75 was manufactured and delivered tho.
3 Likes
I found an in-game situation pretty similar to that of the 44M Tas:
I think the closest comparable case is the Swedish Sav m/43 (1944) and Sav m/43 (1946). The Sav m/43 was designed with a new 105 mm howitzer, but this intended gun was not ready on time and was delayed for a while, so the first few Sav m/43s were given a temporary 75 mm replacement gun until the 105 mm howitzers were ready. Later when the 105 mm howitzers were ready, the old 75 mm guns were removed on the existing Sav m/43s and replaced with the new 105 mm howitzers. New Sav m/43s were also built, but with the new 105 mm howitzers already installed.
In War Thunder, the Sav m/43 was added in two separate forms. The 1944 version has the 75 mm temporary replacement gun, while the 1946 version has the intended new 105 mm howitzer. Other than their guns, these two ‘versions’ are identical.
This situation is almost the same as that of the 75 mm and 80 mm guns of the Tas:
- Both vehicles were designed with a new gun
- Both new guns were not ready on time
- Both vehicles were given older guns as temporary replacements
- Both vehicles would replace the older temporary guns with the new guns when ready
- Both vehicles would be further/mass produced with the new gun
Considering how the Sav m/43 75 mm and 105 mm situation is the same as the 44M Tas 75 mm and 80 mm situation, and how the Sav m/43 was added to War Thunder in both 75 mm temporary form and 105 mm intended form, I think it is safe to say that the 44M Tas should follow this precedent. Therefore, we can conclude that the Tas should be added in both 75 mm temporary form and 80 mm intended form.
The different gun versions of the Sav m/43 were named Sav m/43 (1944) and Sav m/43 (1946). This can’t be used with the 44M Tas. Instead, we could use “44M Tas (43.M)” and “44M Tas (29/44.M)”, or maybe “44M Tas (75)” and “44M Tas (80)”. We could also call the 80 mm Tas just the regular “44M Tas”, while we give the 75 mm Tas the longer name, such as “44M Tas (7.5 cm 43.M)”. All of these naming conventions are already used on various tanks in-game.
What should the 75 mm armed Tas be called?
- 44M Tas (75)
- 44M Tas (43.M)
- 44M Tas (7.5 cm 43.M)
- Something else
0
voters
What should the 80 mm armed Tas be called?
- 44M Tas (80)
- 44M Tas (29/44.M)
- 44M Tas
- 44M Tas (8 cm 29/44.M)
- Something else
0
voters
6 Likes
A rare beast that need to come to the game!
5 Likes
Why just not 44M Tas (early) and (late)?
6 Likes
nevermind. i thought the images were broken again
dad: panther, mom: t-34
4 Likes
So I made a War Thunder Wiki page for the 44M Tas (75 mm), to show how much of the details and numbers we have to model it. To clarify, this is the 44M Tas armed with the 75 mm 43.M L/46 gun, as the prototype would have been armed upon completion. I made sure to use the most accurate data and numbers that I could:
If any more information is found or you think any of the numbers need changing, I can always update it.
Now that a whole WT Wiki page can be filled out for the 44M Tas (75 mm), I think we essentially have all that we need for it to get passed to the devs, and be modelled in the game. Considering several vehicles have already been modelled by the community which Gaijin then chose to add to the actual game, I think the 44M Tas is ready to join them! So if anyone can use these stats to model it in-game, or knows someone who could model it, that would be awesome.
(Also, I made an updated statcard for the 44M Tas (75 mm) to better show what form and with what stats it would likely be added with. The new statcard is in the spoiler below:)
12 Likes
The 43M is L/43
The 43.M gun for the Tas was ordered in L/46 calibre.
Something doesn’t add up with the amount of armor and the mobility itself.
2 Likes
This ungodly creation is why you shouldn’t let a lady panther and gentleman AMX 50 have too many drinks at the nightclub.
Yes I would like to see this affront to god in War Thunder
8 Likes
The CodeofArc video has brought up this point as well, comparing to the Jumbo.
1 Like
Do you think the variant with the 80 mm cannon has any chance at being added as well? Maybe as a premium vehicle perhaps?
2 Likes
Well the only known still existing part of the vehichle is the sight for the 8 cm gun, so who knows…probably not even gaijin themself. (Hopefully yet)
3 Likes
Yeah… makes sense. Anyway, i just really hope one day this vehicle will be added in some form one day, would play it a lot honestly. The 200 mm turret front would be awesome for this. The lower front plate is either 100 mm or 120 mm as I see, the latter would be better of course… but meh both are fine, plus its a bit angled too.
5 Likes