Jump to content


T-62A

Characteristics of T-62A

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
321 replies to this topic

Highway_Star #41 Posted 10 July 2012 - 06:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Beta Tester
  • 17182 battles
  • 1,798
  • Member since:
    09-23-2010
Glad I'm getting the M48 Patton instread hehe.

Torchedpig #42 Posted 10 July 2012 - 06:19 PM

    Private

  • Beta Tester
  • 22418 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostBrandmon, on 10 July 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

How can you fit a 1050HP engine inside a tank that small? This is absurd. At this rate, the Leopard will eventually have a 1500HP engine.

Quite simple actually, the T-62As engine is actually just renamed. It´s real name is SG-1000, and it´s from this little thing called T-80B...

Brandmon #43 Posted 10 July 2012 - 06:57 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 4114 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    07-29-2010

View PostTorchedpig, on 10 July 2012 - 06:19 PM, said:

Quite simple actually, the T-62As engine is actually just renamed. It´s real name is SG-1000, and it´s from this little thing called T-80B...

It's a matter of dimensions. You can't simply fit a chassis meant to handle a 600HP V-12 diesel with a 1000HP Gas Turbine. That is why the Red army had to introduce a new chassis (T-80B) and not merely refit the current ones. If it were possible to fit such a relatively light tank with such an engine, then you would have a vehicle that could go at about 80kmph - how could Cold War engineers not miss such an opportunity?. But this is World of Tanks after all and WG has been strolling through the realms of fantasy for a while. Wouldn't be surprised if the devs allow the maximum speed of 80kmph.

BacardiC0la #44 Posted 10 July 2012 - 08:31 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9895 battles
  • 432
  • Member since:
    07-04-2011
Guys the 1000HP engine was a bug, Storm confirmed that:

http://forum.worldof...16#entry2223016

So the T62 may get a better engine but thats unknown right now, its just sure that it wont get 300 additional horsepower.

Edited by Fluffyman9, 10 July 2012 - 08:31 PM.


lilov #45 Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:04 PM

    Corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 31768 battles
  • 198
  • [EPIC] EPIC
  • Member since:
    07-08-2010
Т-62А will get an engine with 580 hp. Confirmed.

Redneck #46 Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:18 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 20110 battles
  • 974
  • Member since:
    08-17-2010
Source please?

koberko #47 Posted 10 July 2012 - 09:49 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 14486 battles
  • 65
  • [-CMP-] -CMP-
  • Member since:
    05-15-2011

View PostFluffyman9, on 10 July 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

Guys the 1000HP engine was a bug, Storm confirmed that:

http://forum.worldof...16#entry2223016

So the T62 may get a better engine but thats unknown right now, its just sure that it wont get 300 additional horsepower.
Says who? This what guys posted as quote in Russian say this:
"SW. developers, the top 3 will be an instrument of Patton "katabatic" or it will have to swing through 90 mm?
If the pump - it will be worse than in the d25t is4, or 90 mm would be more or less appropriate settings?
Or you can stick a barrel of conventional top Patton?
You will be able to stick the barrel top conventional Patton."


I know it's a mess of translation (google translate), but still, there is no mention of eider bug, or T-62, or engine or horsepower.... And there is no mention of that being bug in that topic, other than that guys post....
So, where did he get that it's a bug, and who is he so that we have to believe him?

View Postlilov, on 10 July 2012 - 09:04 PM, said:

Т-62А will get an engine with 580 hp. Confirmed.
Same here; where did you get that info, and why should I believe you, and not official video with clearly seen info about engine?

Bolterman #48 Posted 10 July 2012 - 10:05 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 21154 battles
  • 42
  • [V4DER] V4DER
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
If that stats ever become true... I'm eager to kick T110 arses.

BacardiC0la #49 Posted 10 July 2012 - 10:08 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9895 battles
  • 432
  • Member since:
    07-04-2011
Sorry got a bit confused and postet the wrong link, this is the right one:

http://translate.goo...7/page__st__640

Look at SerB´s answer at #652.

Bolterman #50 Posted 10 July 2012 - 10:26 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 21154 battles
  • 42
  • [V4DER] V4DER
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011
Maybe it's some kind of weird russian... sarcasm. At least I hope so. :S

koberko #51 Posted 10 July 2012 - 11:05 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 14486 battles
  • 65
  • [-CMP-] -CMP-
  • Member since:
    05-15-2011

View PostFluffyman9, on 10 July 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

Sorry got a bit confused and postet the wrong link, this is the right one:

http://translate.goo...2Fpage__st__640

Look at SerB´s answer at #652.
So, if it will be historically accurate, then we are talking about 700 HP engine:

Quote

The OKB-520 design bureau of Uralvagonzavod provided another design, the Ob'yekt 167, which was the Ob'yekt 166 with a new more powerful V-26 engine using a charger, developing 700 hp (522 kW). Two prototypes were built in the middle of 1961 and passed the trials. This time the GBTU decided not to wait for the new main battle tank to pass trials and send the Ob'yekt 166 into mass production on July 1961. The Ob'yekt 165 also entered service in very small numbers, under the designation T-62A


BacardiC0la #52 Posted 11 July 2012 - 12:41 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 9895 battles
  • 432
  • Member since:
    07-04-2011
Maybe there was another weaker prototype engine?

SerB confirmed on the same page that the T62a will get a 580hp-581hp engine so I wouldnt doubt that, dont know what kind of engine that is.

koberko #53 Posted 11 July 2012 - 12:55 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 14486 battles
  • 65
  • [-CMP-] -CMP-
  • Member since:
    05-15-2011

View PostFluffyman9, on 11 July 2012 - 12:41 AM, said:

Maybe there was another weaker prototype engine?

SerB confirmed on the same page that the T62a will get a 580hp-581hp engine so I wouldnt doubt that, dont know what kind of engine that is.
According to Wikipedia, that type of engine was used on T62, while T62A is production name of Object 165.
In my last post, I got it wrong; 700 HP engine was used in Object 167, not 165, later know as T62A.
I guess that we will have to wait to see what engine will T62A get...

In mine opinion, 580 HP (15 HP/t) looks small in comparison to M48A1's 810 HP (16 HP/t). And M48A1 has 6 degrees slower traverse speed... If traverse speed for T62A is correct (and not "bug" as 1050 HP engine), then I think to get that kind of traverse, it will need way more then 580 HP engine....
In comparison, T54 has 700 HP engine, it's lighter and it still has 48 traverse speed... So I don't see how can T65A get 56 traverse with 580 HP engine, or even with 700 HP engine...

So, again, just mine opinion, they eider mess up all stats in that video, so it will be week engine and low traverse, or they made it all correct; because they can't get just one wrong, without other being wrong to....

Brandmon #54 Posted 11 July 2012 - 02:06 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Beta Tester
  • 4114 battles
  • 98
  • Member since:
    07-29-2010

View Postkoberko, on 11 July 2012 - 12:55 AM, said:

According to Wikipedia, that type of engine was used on T62, while T62A is production name of Object 165.
In my last post, I got it wrong; 700 HP engine was used in Object 167, not 165, later know as T62A.
I guess that we will have to wait to see what engine will T62A get...

In mine opinion, 580 HP (15 HP/t) looks small in comparison to M48A1's 810 HP (16 HP/t). And M48A1 has 6 degrees slower traverse speed... If traverse speed for T62A is correct (and not "bug" as 1050 HP engine), then I think to get that kind of traverse, it will need way more then 580 HP engine....
In comparison, T54 has 700 HP engine, it's lighter and it still has 48 traverse speed... So I don't see how can T65A get 56 traverse with 580 HP engine, or even with 700 HP engine...

So, again, just mine opinion, they eider mess up all stats in that video, so it will be week engine and low traverse, or they made it all correct; because they can't get just one wrong, without other being wrong to....

The thing with modules allowed on certain tanks is that they are allowed even if not originally meant for the said tank. Hence why, for example, the Tiger was allowed to have the 88mm L/71 gun even though it was never fitted with it in real life. Same for the Jagdtiger with the long 12.8cm. In most cases they are often mere proposals of the tank being fitted with the said module, which would qualify it for inclusion in the game.

The 1050HP engine would be overkill and make it an OP vehicle - remember that agility is more of a force multiplier than any possible armour. The vehicle would be relatively the same weight as the T-54 as only with the later models of the T-62 (which included either modernised equipment or increased armour) did it get heavier. So the 700HP engine would still be viable. More so considering the suspension upgrade. I would say that a level of about 800HP will be as far as it can go without making it a T-50-2 with a MBT gun on it.

In the end, of course, they are only pre-release details and will inevitably change. But I guess it is safe to speculate on what would be a balanced arrangement, as that is what the developers would aim for.

Or at least I hope so.

the_other_guy #55 Posted 11 July 2012 - 07:10 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16168 battles
  • 333
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011
how much XP is needed to get this?

Squadman45 #56 Posted 11 July 2012 - 09:16 AM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 47860 battles
  • 2,810
  • Member since:
    01-20-2011
Ok. what is this??? first say 1050hp engine that is excesive for a 40 ton tank and now say 580hp that is to few for a med... is like a damn Type59!!!!, only a little better.

I think that T-62A need only a small buff of 50hp in T-54 engine and nothing more over this or under this is show that WG doesnt know WTF they are doing.

Fluffy_Nuke #57 Posted 11 July 2012 - 09:24 AM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 29761 battles
  • 136
  • [B__G] B__G
  • Member since:
    04-18-2011
I hope 1050 hp engine is a joke... bad joke... :(

CuddlyPanda #58 Posted 11 July 2012 - 12:55 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 21298 battles
  • 1,635
  • Member since:
    07-06-2011

View Postthe_other_guy, on 11 July 2012 - 07:10 AM, said:

how much XP is needed to get this?

Around 200k exp, give or take. And around 4.5m (US forum info), but more likely 5-6m creds.

Anthoniusii #59 Posted 11 July 2012 - 01:39 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23972 battles
  • 1,312
  • Member since:
    03-25-2011
The real profit wont be the T-62 for WG.
In order someone to unlock it he/she will have to play hundreds of battles with that aufull T-54 !
To do that he/she will have to pay day by day huge ammounts of credits to buy ammo and repair the tank.
Credits will finish in no time playing with T-54 so the players wil turn to real money in order to lfight long enough togather that exp.
Afcourse in the end T-62 will be the worst tier 10 med as it will be run out from M48 and Leo 1!
But some will buy that new failure and simply they will regret their desision for a long time.
D-54-2 will NEVER reach the efectiveness of L7/105mm simply because that if WG would like Soviet tanks to have decsent guns it will never
create those failures that listen to names like D10T or D-54!
So imagine a T-62 comming accross with a M48...what a night mare.
WG loves everything NON soviet and it shows it in everycase.
I like M48 also but has anyone ever thing why WG did not put in game M47 and skip it in favor of M48?

Legault #60 Posted 11 July 2012 - 02:31 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 14706 battles
  • 2,342
  • Member since:
    10-11-2010

View PostBrandmon, on 10 July 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

How can you fit a 1050HP engine inside a tank that small? This is absurd. At this rate, the Leopard will eventually have a 1500HP engine.
I'm guessing you're one of those simple "heuheuhe3uhehuehe leo" people, so I'll tell you this; it wouldn't need 1500 HP because it has shit for armor.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users