Kirov IS Series

     Notes:  The IS series of heavy tanks were designed to counter the German 88mm guns on the Tiger tanks and field guns.  The IS series is named after a transliteration of Josef Stalin (Iosif Stalin), and is sometimes called the JS series for this reason.  Despite its heavy armor, the IS series was not designed to battle German tanks (at least not on purpose); the IS series was instead designed to combat strongpoints and entrenched positions, and act as a sort of assault gun.  The IS series was also intended to be more mobile than the KV series of Russian heavy tanks; the KV was continually criticized for being underpowered and having treads that were not wide enough for rough or sloppy terrain, and for being too expensive to build and maintain.  The IS-1 appeared in mid-1943, but had a short service life; it was quickly replaced by the IS-2, and the IS-3 was first used during the Russian Invasion of Germany in 1944.  IS-2s and 3s were used by the Russians until about two decades after World War 2, and some were used by other countries as late as nearly 1980.  Many were dug in as fixed pillboxes along the Soviet-Chinese border.  (It is believed that some working examples are still in service in North Korea and Cuba!)  Even today, the occasional working museum piece can be found here and there.

IS-1

     When Kliment Voroshilov fell out favor with Stalin due to the failures of his KV series of heavy tanks, his designs were handed over to the Kirov design bureau.  In the meantime, the Russians needed a new heavy tank quickly, if only as a stopgap measure.  Voroshilov’s upcoming design, the KV-85, was re-engineered into the IS-85, and then the name changed to the IS-1.  The primary changes were greatly improved protection including sloped armor, and an improved, better-shaped (in a ballistic sense) turret similar to that of the T-34 as opposed to the large, blocky turret of the KV-85.  Though still underpowered, the IS-1 had a 510 horsepower engine, better than that of the sluggish KV-85.  However, the IS-1 was a stopgap design, and was low-rate production for only a short time before being replaced by the more capable IS-2.  Most IS-1s were upgunned with the 122mm A-19 gun in early 1944.

IS-2

     As stated before, the IS-1 was a stopgap measure, but development of the IS-2 began before the production of the IS-1.  The primary reason for the IS-2 version was the installation of a more powerful gun and installation of heavier and better-sloped armor.  At first the BS-3 100mm gun was considered as it fired AP shells with better penetration, but ultimately, the 122mm A-19 was installed, due to the heavier caliber and the fact that the primary role of the IS-2 was as an assault breaker and bunker-buster.  The machinegun layout of the IS-2 is also quite different; one is a coaxial, the other is in the rear of the turret, while the commander has a heavy machinegun.  The A-19 was also a rather common gun in the Soviet inventory, as opposed to the BS-3, which was barely out of development.  The A-19 used a separate projectile and powder charges, which resulted in an increased loading time (only 4 rounds per minute in short bursts, and 2 per minute sustained) and a marked reduction in the amount of rounds able to be carried internally.  Reloading was also awkward due to a poor ammo storage configuration.  This was later rectified with the introduction of the D-25T gun, which had a much faster-loading drop breech and simplified acquisition of targets.  The glacis and lower front hull were also simplified in construction and had better armor sloping.  (Though this version is sometimes called the IS-2m, the proper designation is the IS-2 Model 1944.  The earlier version is the Model 1943.)  The actual IS-2M is an early 1950s development, with larger external stowage bins on the hull, larger dust skirts, and a few automotive updates; for game purposes, it is identical to the IS-2 Model 1944.

IS-3

     The IS-3, introduced in late 1944, featured a comprehensive update to its armor package, particularly in the glacis.  The turret also had a hemispherical one-piece cast turret with a shape that improved protection, along with an actual increase in armor thickness.  The turret had a lower profile than that of the IS-2; though this increased the overall height of the IS-3, it also seriously reduced the working headroom in the turret – beginning the Russian trend towards using smaller troops in their tanks.  It is a matter of debate as to whether the IS-3 actually saw combat service in World War 2 – some say small numbers were used against the Germans, some say it saw service against the Chinese in Manchuria, and some say it played a part in the invasion of Korea at the end of World War 2; there are just as many sources that say none of these were true.  Regardless, the IS-3 was unknown to the West until September of 1945, when it took part in a parade in Berlin.

     That low-profile turret severely limited the depression of the IS-3s main gun and coaxial machinegun; in fact, the IS-3 could barely depress its main gun and coaxial at all.  It also dramatically reduced the amount of machinegun ammunition which could be carried.  However, the height of the tank was reduced by some 300mm. The glacis has a distinctive pointed profile which earned it the nickname of Shchuka (Pike) among Soviet troops.

     In the early 1950s, IS-3s were upgraded to the IS-3M configuration.  This involved the addition of side skirts and generally thickened armor.  Most combat use of the IS-3M was in the Middle East; some were used by the Egyptians as late as 1973, though most were out of service after the 1967 war.  The Israelis also used some captured examples as late as 1973, where they served as dug-in fixed pillboxes along the Jordan River.  The IS-3s involved in the 1967 War were reportedly immune to hand-held rocket launchers as large as 90mm recoilless rifles from the front and side, and the Israelis’ M-48A2 were unable to penetrate the frontal armor of the IS-3M.  Unfortunately, engine breakdowns were common as they were not suited to the climate, the slow rate of fire was an impediment, and the poor fire control and stabilization made accurate shooting difficult.  The additional weight of the armor also slowed the IS-3 and made it less agile.  However, the IS-3Ms had been fitted with rudimentary night vision equipment, and fared better in night combat than during the day.

Intermediate IS designs

     IS series upgrades extended shortly before the end of World War 2 and shortly afterward.  The IS-4 was designed in tandem with the IS-3 by a different design bureau to compete with the IS-3 design.  In the end, both were built, though only 250 IS-4s were built, all during World War 2, as the IS-4 was discontinued at the end of World War 2.  The IS-4 was longer than the IS-3, with six pairs pf roadwheels instead of five.  The extra room was unfortunately not used to mount a larger turret, but instead used to store additional fuel and main gun ammunition.  The IS-4 was a heavy design that used the same engine as the IS-3, and was therefore slower and less agile than the IS-3.

     The IS-5 and IS-6 never made it off the drawing board; the IS-7, however, did make it to the prototype stage in 1946, with three built.  It was a monster heavy tank, weighing 68 tons and having a more powerful engine.  The IS-7 was to mount a vehicular version of a 130mm naval gun with an autoloader and stabilization in the elevation axis; in addition, a total of 8 machineguns were to be mounted, including the commander’s machinegun, two bow machinegun, a coaxial, a rear turret machinegun, machineguns on each side of the enlarged turret, a loader’s machinegun, and a remote-firing rear machinegun.  Armor was also to have been upgraded, and the crew would consist of five members. Active IR would be provided for the gunner.  In the end, the IS-7 was abandoned as impractical.

     The IS-8 and IS-9 again never made it off the drawing board, but the next version, the IS-10 renamed the T-10, did, and into production.

T-10

     Originally the IS-10, this heavy tank did not reach the production lines until 1952.  By then, Josef Stalin was both dead and discredited, and the IS-10 was therefore re-named the T-10.  It featured a long hull with seven pairs of roadwheels, a large turret with a new gun, an improved diesel engine, and increased armor protection.

     Though not roomy by Western standards, the turret of the T-10 was larger inside and out than the rest of the IS series.  This turret housed an improved version of its predecessors, the 122mm D-25TA.  Two machineguns were provided, with both the commander’s and the coaxial machineguns being DShKs.  The overall larger size of the T-10 meant that it could carry more main gun ammunition and fuel than the rest of the IS series, and a more powerful 700-horsepower engine helped correct the power problems with the heavy IS-4.  In addition, while the armor gave more protection, it was more advanced and lighter than that of the IS-4, and the engine, though more powerful, was also lighter.  The gunner had primitive IR vision, and suspension in elevation axis as well as a coincidence rangefinder and a telescopic sight.

     The T-10M was an update of the T-10; it used a longer M-62-T2 gun with a huge five-baffle muzzle brake.  The main gun was stabilized in two planes, the coaxial DShK was replaced with a KPVT (which allowed it to function as a ranging machinegun if necessary), and it had a collective NBC system for the crew. 

     In 1963, the T-10s were equipped with deep-wading snorkel systems, and in 1967, APDS and HEAT ammunition was devised for their main guns.

     Though the T-10 was used by the Soviets until the 1967, and by Egypt, Syria, and North Vietnam until as long as ten years later, even the Soviets had to acknowledge that by the mid-1950s the T-10 was obsolete.  As more T-54s, T-55s, and T-62s became available, the T-10 gradually slipped down the food chain, finally being withdrawn or moving to Mobilization-Only status. By 1993, almost no T-10s remained in any sort of Soviet or Russian service.

Morozov T-34

     Notes:  The T-34 was perhaps the best tank of World War 2, and quite the rude shock to the Germans during their invasion of Russia and subsequent Russian invasion of Germany.  It introduced concepts that are now standard such as sloped armor and elimination of shot traps, and was designed for ease of operation and especially, ease of production – the result being a tank capable of taking on even the Tiger and Panther tanks, could be built in huge quantities quickly, and crews easily trained.  It was designed to replace both the T-26 light tank and the BT series of heavy tanks, unifying the concept of the infantry tank and a tank designed to fight other tanks, and do both better than its predecessors.  The design of the T-34 goes back to 1934, and it first appeared on the battlefield in 1940; by 1996, it was still in large-scale use with 27 countries, and small numbers are still in use here and there in the world as I write this (late July 2009).

The T-34/76

     The design concept of the T-34 was for the tank to be light and fast, yet mount a more effective main gun than most Soviet designs and still have decent armor protection.  The need for decent armor protection in a lightweight tank led the designer, Mikhail Koshkin, to go back to prototype versions of the BT series and the sloped armor they used to increase the armor protection without a great increase in weight.  Originally, Koshkin envisioned the T-34 to use less than an inch of armor maximum and a 45mm main gun, but by 1939, it was obvious to Koshkin that these concepts weren’t good enough against modern tank designs and the rapid armored vehicle evolution that was taking place, and the design changed radically before it left the drawing board.  Armor was almost doubled in maximum thickness, and the main gun was to be the then-new high-velocity L-11 76.2mm gun.  The 483-horsepower V-2 diesel engine was also a new idea in an era when most armored vehicle ran on gasoline; a diesel engine was chosen because it greatly reduced the possibility of the T-34 going up in flames if hit in the fuel tanks as well as increasing range and performance in cold weather.  The suspension was a very simple design pioneered by Christie in the US, but that was largely discarded by the Allies and the Axis powers by World War 2.  The Christie suspension was simple to build and maintain, and used wide “slack treads” that had large roadwheels instead of return rollers and tight treads.  The Christie suspension also decreased the height of the T-34.  T-34s usually carried external auxiliary fuel tanks; unlike later Soviet designs, the T-34’s auxiliary tanks were on the sides of the hull instead of the rear in sets of two on each side.  Ammunition stowage was horrible; only 9 ready rounds could be carried in the turret, and the rest were stowed under the floor and in bins in several areas of the tank.  This meant that there were usually hurried unpacking of main gun ammunition, with floor plates hurriedly pulled up and ammunition boxes laying all over the place, exacerbating the cramped interior conditions.

     The initial early production versions of the T-34 (commonly called the T-34 M-1940 or later, the T-34/76A) were hampered by a shortage of the diesel engines, and they instead had the MT-17 gasoline engines used by the BT tank, along with a difficult-to-use transmission that resulted from the fact that the MT-17 was a modified aircraft engine.  Radios were in short supply, and only tanks used by company commanders and up had them.  (The costs below assume the T-34 has a radio; if it doesn’t, subtract $500 from the price of the tank.) The L-11 main gun did not develop the hoped-for velocity and was a bit slow to reload.  The turret had room only for two men, so the commander had to double as the gunner or the loader had to also fire the main gun.  The main gunsights were in fact located at the commander’s station rather than in the place where a gunner would normally be, with the loader having relatively poor sights. The hull had space for a bow machinegunner/radio operator. 173 of these early-production T-34s were built.

     This quickly led to the main production version of the T-34 during World War 2, the T-34 M-1941 (or T-34/76B).  Production of the V-2 diesel engine and its simpler associated transmission had quickly ramped up, and all T-34 Model 1941s had these engines and transmissions.  The T-34 M-1941 used the improved F-34 76.2mm high-velocity gun and had heavier armor.  The turret was enlarged to allow the T-34 to have a loader and gunner, greatly increasing the rate of fire for the main gun. One of the famous stories about the T-34 M-1941 was its production at Stalingrad during the siege of that city; T-34s were literally rolling off the production lines unpainted with crews jumping into them at the end of the production line and driving them straight into combat.  The engine and transmission were simpler to build, and the F-34 gun also had two-thirds the parts of the L-11 gun; production time for the T-34 was cut in half as a result.  Nonetheless, the T-34 had its weaknesses, the most common being the unreliable transmission, with many T-34s going into battle carrying a spare transmission on their rear deck; others included a cramped interior, poor ammunition stowage arrangement, a loud engine, that two-man turret that made the T-34’s turret undermanned, and poor driver visibility.

     The next version, the T-34 M-1942 (T-34/76C) primarily incorporated improvements to make manufacturing cheaper and quicker without compromising the good features of the T-34 M-1941, and also had a much more reliable transmission.  By 1943, the design was largely frozen to keep up rapid production, but the T-34 did continue to evolve.  The T-34 M-1943 (T-34/76D, E, and F models) used a larger hexagonal turret that gave the loader more room to work (though the commander still had to double as the gunner), increasing rate of fire for the main gun.  The T-34 M-1943 had a manually-rotating turret for the commander, a hatch for the loader, and larger hatches; the Germans called it the “Mickey Mouse” version because when viewed from the front with both turret hatches open, the T-34 M-1943 resembled the cartoon character.  The T-34/76E, however, eliminated the commander’s cupola, but added a ring of vision blocks and the commander and loader entering the turret through an enlarged commander’s hatch.  The T-34/76F returned to the two-hatch turret, but without the commander’s cupola.

     The T-34/57 was a rare (only 324 built) version, designed as a tank destroyer.  It used the same design as the T-34 M-1942, but mounted a high-velocity 57mm main gun (either a ZiS-4 or ZiS-4M).  A few were available for the Battle of Moscow in 1941, but most were produced between 1943 and 1944.

     Nailing down which World War 2 version of the T-34/76 was seen can be difficult; they were continually updated during the war, and most T-34s had a mix of old and new features as older tanks were refurbished and updated, and battle-damaged T-34s were restored to working order.  Some also used appliqué armor made from scrap metal; I have used the intended layout of these armor plates below, but individual T-34s with appliqué armor may not have been equipped with the entire intended appliqué armor setup.  T-34s with appliqué armor were appended with the suffix s ekranami (sometimes simply called “ES”) which translates roughly to “with screens;” they were called screens because the appliqué armor was produced in a tight-knit waffle pattern to save steel and weight.  This appliqué armor adds 2 points of armor to the glacis, turret front, and turret sides, and weighs 500 kg; it costs $1870 for a full set of plates.

     When the Germans were able, they happily used captured T-34s; the Germans called these the Panzerkampfwagen T-34 (r), and sometimes sported sheet-metal VISMODs to make them resemble Tiger or Panther tanks, reducing the chance of friendly fire.  These T-34s could be any of the various models of the T-34s used during World War 2.

     In mid-1944, production of the T-34/76 ended, replaced by the T-34/85.

T-34/85

     Despite the success of the high-velocity 76.2mm gun, the German 88mm and long-barreled 75mm guns still out-ranged the T-34’s main gun, and penetration of the frontal armor of the Tiger and Panther tanks was a matter of luck more than anything else.  At first, the Soviets began to design a new tank to replace both the T-34 and the KV-1 heavy tank called the T-43 which had 70% parts commonality with the T-34.  The T-43 prototypes, however, proved to be a bit slow and none-too-agile; the T-43 had heavier armor and a heavier 85mm D-5T gun adapted from an antiaircraft gun.  The T-43 was quickly cancelled in favor of a T-34 armed with the same 85mm gun, called the T-34/85 M-1943.  The 85mm gun had a long barrel and could almost match the range of the German 88mm gun; it could easily handle a Tiger, though it was still no match for a Panther from the frontal arc.  The T-34/85 M-1943 had a relatively roomy turret, a side-effect of the new gun; the turret was roomy enough that if the T-34/85 was equipped with a radio, it could be mounted in the turret within easy reach of the commander; unfortunately, the T-34/85 was still hampered by a two-man turret crew.  The T-34/85 again The T-34/85 M-1943 had only a short production run from February to March of 1943, replaced by the T-34/85 1944.

     The T-34/85 M-1944 had a number of changes, the primary change being the replacement of the main gun by the easier-to-manufacture and longer ZiS-S-53 gun.  The turret had an improved layout; it was roomier, and the radio was moved back to the hull with controls placed in the commander’s cupola.  The main gun had a gunner and a loader.  The armor was again thickened, particularly on the turret front, and the gunner was given a coincidence rangefinder and a telescopic gunsight. 

     After World War 2, further improvements were made to the T-34/85.  One of the first was the replacement of the ZiS-S-53 main gun with the ZiS-S-54, which had gyroscopic stabilization in the elevation axis.

     The T-34/85 was produced in large numbers until well after World War 2, and is known to have seen action as late as May 1995 when an upgraded Serbian T-34/85 M-1944 attacked UN outpost in manned by British combat engineers.  In the Kosovo War, T-34/85s were used as decoys to draw fire from NATO aircraft.  They were occasionally seen during the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001-2002. Several African countries still use them.  China produced the T-34/85 for a short time, calling it the Type 58, though such production soon stopped when the Type 59 became available.  T-34/85 production largely ended in 1950, though low-rate production continued until 1964.

T-44

     In late 1944, a rare variant of the T-34 was introduced: the T-44.  Initially meant to be merely a T-34/85 with a more powerful 512-horsepower engine, thicker armor, and a torsion bar suspension, the 85mm gun was replaced before production with a 100mm D-10S gun, a modified naval gun.  The turret of the T-44 proved to be a poor fit for this larger gun, and the already cramped turret became far worse in that respect.  The heavier gun and armor also dramatically increased the weight of the tank and effectively negated the advantage of the more powerful engine.  Production was always conducted at a low rate, and after World War 2, production stopped as the T-54 was already being developed.

Morozov T-54/55

     Notes:  One of the oldest continually used armored vehicles in the world; the prototype T-54 was first produced in 1946 and production began in 1947. One of the oldest continually used armored vehicles in the world; the prototype T-54 was first produced in 1946 and production began in 1947.  Since then it has been continually improved, and there were almost 50 variants available in the world by 2000, in addition to the numerous variants of the Chinese version of the T-55, the Type 59.  It is the archetypical Russian tank, small, light, easy to produce and maintain, and available almost anywhere.  Though it would be over five years before the existence of the T-54 and T-55 were known in the West, the appearance of these tanks spurred development in the West of tanks such as the M-60 series, the Chieftain, the Leopard 1, and the AMX-30.  So many T-54s and T-55s were built in so many countries worldwide that exact production figures are unknown, but at least 100,000 were built.  Though the versions below include only Soviet and Russian versions, there are dozens of other T-54 and T-55 versions built all over the world, and even more home-grown modifications.  Ammunition for its main gun has likewise been continually improved over the years, and in some versions, the T-55 can fire ATGMs through the main gun tube.  They were continually upgraded during and after production, and upgrade kits are still being sold and devised; it is likely that, despite its inferiority to even 1970s-era tanks, that the T-55 will be around for a long time to come.

     The T-54 and T-55 introduced the slightly-oval, saucer-shaped turret that became a hallmark of Soviet and Russian tanks for decades to come.  The turret has hatches on the deck for the commander and loader; the addition of a loader crewmember was greatly welcomed to Soviet tankers more accustomed to the T-34 series.  The hull is a basic sort of affair, with the turret in the middle of the hull and a Christie suspension that used roadwheels with large spokes to reduce weight and slack treads.  The driver is on the front left of the hull.

The T-54

     By the end of World War 2, the T-44 variant of the T-34 was in low-rate production, with its 100mm gun.  However, even before the first T-44 prototype was produced, it was realized that the 100mm D-10S (or any gun of a similar caliber) was an uncomfortably-tight fit in any turret that could fit on the T-34’s hull, and that due the size of the T-34 series’ turret ring, the size of the turret could not be increased very much.  In October of 1944, designers at the Uralvagonzavod facility at Nizhny Tagil began work on the larger T-54, with the first prototype being built in February of 1945.

     The first T-54 used an enlarged T-44 hull, with an almost identical drive train.  The new V-54 diesel engine, however, was slightly more powerful at 520 horsepower, and had a transmission that, while still manual, gave the driver somewhat less of a workload.  A tradeoff was made between fuel capacity, armor, and ammo carrying capacity.  More main gun ammunition could be carried, but machinegun ammunition was cut by more than half.  The internal fuel capacity grew, and the armor a got little bit thinner. The tradeoffs were deemed worth it – the T-54 had a more powerful main gun than almost any main battle tank in the world at the time.

     The main gun was a 100mm D-10TK, an upgraded version of the D-10S of the T-44.  The T-54 had a pair of bow machineguns.  The T-54, unlike earlier Soviet designs, had external auxiliary fuel tanks that could be pre-connected to the T-54’s fuel system, keeping the crew from having to exit the T-54 and empty the contents of the auxiliary tanks into the main fuel tanks.

     However, this was not to be the final prototype/limited production version of the T-54.  After field trials, several design changes were made.  These included an updated main gun, the LB-1, and the addition of a coaxial machinegun as well as a commander’s machinegun.  Fuel capacity was further increased, and numerous small changes were made to the electrical system, transmission, and suspension to increase reliability.  Armor was heavier on the turret front and sides.  In total, some 1490 modifications were made; low-rate production lasted from 1947 to 1949.  This version was called the T-54-1.

     And yet, this was still not the production form of the T-54.  Some armor improvements were made (particularly on the hull sides, turret and hull decks, and the floor armor).  The turret became more circular than oval, and rails were added to the sides of the turret for the crew to tie their equipment to.  The pair of fender-mounted bow machineguns were removed, replaced by a single bow machinegun that was to be fired by the driver.  The transmission was further modernized and wider tracks fitted.  This version was the T-54-2.  The T-54-3, which replaced the T-54-2 in production in 1951, had a reshaped turret without any side undercuts and an improved telescopic sight for the gunner, and it had another rare feature for tanks of the time – it could generate a smoke screen by injecting diesel fuel into its exhaust.  At the same time, a command version of the T-54-3 was built (the T-54K); the only difference was the addition of a second radio. The T-54-3 was the first major production version of the T-54. (The T-54-2, T-54-3, and T-54K are otherwise identical for game purposes.)

     In the early 1950s, there were several personnel changes at Nizhny Tagil, including the chief designer, who was replaced twice by March of 1953.  The new designer for the T-54 decided to make several changes to the T-54’s design, resulting in the T-54A, which entered service in 1954. Foremost of these was the replacement of the main gun with the new D-10TG, which was a D-10T stabilized in the vertical axis.  The driver was also given an IR vision block which could replace his central vision block as needed; this was paired with IR headlights.  The main gun of the T-54A was originally to have a small counterweight at the muzzle, but this idea was discarded and the main gun was fitted with a fume extractor instead.  The radio of the T-54A was updated.  The engine received several improvements, including in the radiator and oil pump.  The T-54A had a fire extinguishing system which required only a pull on a small handle in the turret.  A bilge pump was also added (earlier models of the T-54 proved to be leaky when fording).  A command version, the T-54AK, was designed based on the T-54A; this version had an additional, long-range radio added in the turret, an inertial navigation device, and a small 0.5kW APU.  The additional equipment in the turret and hull required that the main gun ammunition load be reduced by five rounds.

     In 1957, the T-54B version began production.  The T-54B had two-axis main gun stabilization (changing the designation of the main gun to the D-10T2S), and an IR searchlight was added forward of the commander’s position; he or the gunner could aim the searchlight.  The T-54B was also the first Soviet tank able to use APFSDS ammunition.  A T-54BK command tank version was also built, which was a T-54B with the additional equipment found on the T-54AK.

The T-55

     After the Soviets gained the atomic bomb, they found out that the T-54 could survive a 15-kiloton blast at a range of only 300 meters from the center of the explosion.  Unfortunately, while the T-54 would survive, the crew would be dead from the radiation and concussion.  A lot of good that does.  This began the road to the improved T-55, which entered service in 1958.  The T-55 was radiation shielded, and had a collective NBC system.

     But the Soviets did not stop there, not by a long shot.  They installed the 581-horsepower V-55 diesel engine, which also had fuel injection and a new, more efficient fuel filter.  The hatches over the engine compartment were modified to allow easier access.  The engine was equipped with an electric starter that made starting the T-55 in cold weather easier, and the crew was also given a heater.  Ammunition rearrangement and the new smaller engine allowed main gun ammunition storage to be increased dramatically; 18 of these rounds were actually stored in the center of the hull fuel tanks.  The commander and gunner had night vision at last, but the commander’s machinegun was deleted, since it was felt that it was not effective against fast jet aircraft and helicopters did not have the important place on the battlefield they have today.  The T-55’s turret armor was thicker than that of the T-55, but frontal armor was actually reduced to save weight, and the armor on the rear of the hull was also reduced.  The main gun, the same as on the T-55B, was also stabilized in two dimensions.  The T-55 was essentially a modernized T-54, but to “wow the West,” it was given a new designation of T-55.  A command variant, the T-55K, was also built starting in 1959; this had an additional long-range radio, 0.5 kW APU, and more advanced night vision for the commander.  The additional equipment meant that the main gun ammunition load had to be decreased, and the bow machinegun had to be removed.

     Also in 1959, some T-55s had fittings added so they could mount the PT-55 mineclearing flail system or the BTU or BTU-55 dozer blade.

     In 1961, deployment of the T-55A began.  While the NBC protection of the T-55 was effective against gamma rays, it did little to stop energetic neutrons. The POV plasticized lead lining was added to address this deficiency.  An indication that you are looking at a T-55A are the crew hatches; they are noticeably larger and bulged.  (A side effect of this was in increase in protection to the crew from fragments and bullets.)  The collective NBC system was also improved, with more efficient filtration.  The coaxial SGMT machinegun was replaced by a PKT machinegun, and the bow machinegun was completely deleted from the design; in its place, six main gun rounds were stored.  The hull is 16cm longer, allowing for an increase in glacis armor.  Unfortunately, this made the T-55A heavier than its predecessors.  A T-55AK command version was also built, with the same extra equipment as the T-55K, and the same reduction in main gun ammunition.  The T-55A could fire the new BM-8 APFSDS round, which had a longer-rod penetrator.

     The T-55A was upgraded several times during its service.  In 1965, new tracks were fitted which had a longer life than the old tracks; this also required the fitting of a new drive sprocket.  In 1970, the commander’s machinegun was restored.  In 1974, a laser rangefinder was fitted to the T-55A, as well as an improved telescopic gunner’s sight.  Also in 1974, radios were upgraded, as was the night vision suite.  Optional rubber side skirts and a driver’s windshield could be fitted.

     In 1983, the T-55M model was introduced.  The major change was the installation of the Volna fire control system, which added thermal imaging for the gunner, allowed the laser rangefinder to double as a laser designator, and allowed the T-55M to launch the new AT-10 Bastion ATGM through its gun barrel.  In addition, stabilization of the main gun was improved (though not enough to be reflected in the Twilight 2000 rules) and the engine installed was the same V-55U engine of the T-62, developing 620 horsepower. Radios were also updated.  Protection was increased with the addition of side skirts and appliqué armor for the glacis, turret front, and turret sides.  On each side of the turret four smoke grenade launchers were added, and the interior of the T-55M had an automatic fire detection/suppression system.  A cheaper version of the T-55M, the T-55AM2, was also designed; this is a T-55M without the Volna FCS or ATGM capability.

     Trying to help make the T-55 more survivable, the Soviets devised an appliqué armor package for the T-55’s turret.  Called bra armor or horseshoe armor, this is simply a large block of cast steel that fits over the front and sides of the turret, with appropriate holes and cutouts to fit the main gun, coaxial machinegun, and sights.  Hits to the front of the turret are 85% likely this additional armor; hits to the sides of the turret are 50% likely to hit this armor.  At the same time, the armor of the hull floor was thickened somewhat.  This version of the T-55 is designated the T-55AM; it is based on the T-55M.  (The designation T-55AM is sometimes used for a version of the T-55A with the DShK machinegun moved over to the loader’s hatch; this version is the same as the T-55A 1970 or 1974 version except for the position of the machinegun.) The T-55AMV is a version of the T-55AM that has lugs for ERA on the glacis, turret front, turret sides, hull sides, and the forward one-quarter of the turret front; this version dates from the early 1980s, and does not use the bra armor package.

     Two later versions (circa mid-1990s or so), the T-55AMD and T-55AD, replaces the ERA lugs and system with the Drozd active protection system.  This system includes a small, short-range radar system on the turret roof to detect incoming missiles and rockets (it doesn’t work fast enough to stop tank and autocannon rounds), and launches special rounds in the path of the missile that quickly break up into a cloud of tungsten pellets, destroying the missile before it can hit the tank.  The Drozd system has 20 of these rounds available, and the special rounds are 50% likely to stop the incoming missile; the missile will be destroyed about 10 meters from the tank.  (The primary problem with the Drozd is in the limitations of its radar system and not the special rounds.)  The T-55AMD is based on the T-55M; the T-55AD has the Drozd system, but not the Volna FCS or ATGM capability.

Flamethrower Tanks: The OT-54 and TO-55

     Both the T-54 and T-55 were modified into flamethrower tanks.  The OT-54 was the first, modified from the T-54A, and first saw service in 1954.  The second, the TO-55, first saw service in 1960, and was based on the basic T-55 chassis.  The OT-54 used the ATO-1 automatic flamethrower; the TO-55 used the ATO-200 automatic flamethrower.  In both cases, however, the specifications of the flamethrower are basically the same.  The flamethrowers fire short bursts of flaming jellied gasoline, about one every three seconds, until the gunner takes his thumb off the trigger or the flamethrower runs out of fuel.  Both carry 460 liters of jellied gasoline, and the flamethrower is mounted coaxial to the main gun in place of the coaxial machinegun.  The bow machinegun is also deleted.  The ATO-1 has a base T2K range of 40 meters, while the ATO-200 has a base T2K range of 50 meters; both flamethrowers have enough fuel to allow for 13 bursts.  The flamethrower’s fuel tank and equipment are mounted in the front right hull, next to the driver, where six rounds for the main gun are normally stored.  (This must make the driver feel real good…)

     Twilight 2000 Notes: The T-55AMD and T-55AD are very rare in the Twilight 2000 timeline.  T-55s and T-55As in Russian service are found primarily in Category 2 and 3 units, though in other armies they can be main-force tanks.  In Russian service, T-54s are mostly found in Category 3 or Mobilization-Only units; elsewhere in the world, they can still be found in front-line units, though this is also rare.  Few OT-54s exist anymore in the Twilight 2000 timeline; TO-55s are a little bit more common.

*The bra armor on the turret front and sides is not guaranteed protection; incoming rounds are 85% likely to hit the front bra armor and 50% likely to hit the side bra armor.  If the bra armor is not hit, armor for the TF is 60 and 21 for the TS.  In addition, floor armor for the T-55AM if AV 6.

**The Fire Control and Stabilization figures do not apply to the flamethrower.

Morozov T-62

     Notes:  After the appearance of the T-54 and T-55, the West responded with new tanks of their own; these tanks, like the M-60, Chieftain, Centurion, Leopard 1, and M-48 had better armor, maneuverability, and fire control than the T-55.  In addition, the Soviets realized that the 100mm D-10T gun of the T-55 could not penetrate the frontal armor of these newer Western tanks.  Soviet 100mm HEAT ammunition could, but the Soviets, due to their limited manufacturing capabilities, could not manufacture 100mm HEAT ammunition quickly in large quantities or at a reasonable cost. The Soviets also knew that the new Western 105mm guns could easily out-do the Soviet 100mm gun.  (The main reason the Soviets knew all this was the defection of an Iranian officer to the Russians; he drove his then-new M-60A1 tank across the border to the Soviet Union.)

     At first, the Soviets decided that the simplest solution was to re-gun the T-55 with a newer 115mm gun called the U-5TS (later called the 2A20).  It was quickly discovered that the T-55’s turret was not up to snuff with the recoil and power of the U-5TS.  This meant that a larger turret was required, which meant that a larger turret ring was needed, which meant that a larger hull was necessary to mount the new turret – and you have the T-62, an evolutionary upgrade of the T-55.

     The T-62, though produced from 1961 to 1975 and in service in Russia until the mid-1990s, did not have the great success of the T-55.  It was never produced in the huge numbers of the T-55; real-world production costs were over twice those of the T-55, and the APFSDS ammunition for the new gun was also quite expensive at the time.  The T-62 was deemed an improvement over the T-55, but not a big enough improvement for most countries to immediately begin replacing their T-55s with the T-62.  Most Warsaw Pact and other possible export customers passed on the T-62 until they were essentially out of date and could be had at a relatively cheap real-world cost.  The only countries that built the T-62 under license were Czechoslovakia, from 1975 to 1978, and North Korea, who obtained a license in 1980 are reportedly still producing them.  During production in the Soviet Union, the T-62 was built at plants in both the Ukraine and near the Ural Mountains, and the Ukrainians still build upgrade kits for the T-62 today.  Today, over 20 countries are in fact using the T-62; most of these are Third World countries who got them cheap in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

The First-Generation T-62s

     The actual first “T-62s” were the prototype Obyekt 165 versions; these were simply stretched T-55s hulls with a new turret ring, a new 100mm D-54TS gun, an automatic spent shell ejector, and upgraded stabilization and fire control.  The few that entered field testing were quickly withdrawn.

     The first true T-62 entered service in 1961.  It was equipped with the new U-5TS Rapira gun; this was the first smoothbore gun employed in large numbers by any army in the world.  The main gun was stabilized in two planes, and fire control consisted of a coincidence rangefinder with telescopic day/night sight.  Though a small tank, the T-62 carried a respectable main gun ammunition load; unfortunately, the machinegun ammunition situation was the opposite.  (This went along with Soviet doctrine of the time – tanks were supposed to fight tanks and not meant to support infantry.)  The commander’s cupola was slightly raised, but non-rotating, and had no commander’s machinegun; it has four vision blocks to the front, and two facing opposite directions in the turret hatch.  The commander has a small hand-trained spotlight mounted externally near his hatch, and a large searchlight is mounted over the main gun.  On the right side of the turret, in a small armored box, is a Geiger counter.  The V-55A diesel engine developed 581 horsepower, which gave the T-62 decent mobility due to the light weight of the tank.  A smoke screen can be laid by the T-62 by injecting diesel fuel into its exhaust.  Much larger fuel tanks were fitted; these are under the armor of the right fender, but if you hit the T-62 in that fender from slightly below, the armor thickness is only about half that of the rest of the hull sides. External fuel tanks can also be fitted at the rear.  It should be noted that, while overall, the armor of the T-62 is about 5% thicker than that of the T-55, the armor on the T-62’s sides near the floor and on the armor on the turret and hull decks is actually a little thinner than that of the T-55.

     Two command versions of the T-62 were built.  The T-62K, introduced in 1964, had an additional long-range radio fitted, as well as a 1kW APU.  To make room for this additional equipment, ammunition for the main gun and coaxial machinegun had to be decreased.  The T-62K was for use by commanders at company and battalion levels.  The T-62KN, for use at higher than battalion levels, was outfitted like the T-62K but also had inertial navigation.

     In limited issue to T-62 crews was the ZET-1 armor system, first deployed in 1964.  This was a stretchable screen with about the strength of a chain-link fence but with a tighter net-like structure that was used on the front of the tank to pre-detonate HEAT rounds.  Another part of the system was a set of thin steel-backed rubber side skirts that flipped upwards for suspension maintenance.  Unfortunately, the side skirts were not ready for prime time, as they tended to get ripped off the tank in wooded terrain; also in wooded terrain, the net armor up front would become clogged with vegetation, eventually reaching the point where the driver could not see.  (In open terrain, the ZET-1 system actually proved to be quite effective.)  The system was withdrawn in early 1964.  The frontal screens work like spaced armor, but are only 50% likely to stop 2d6 of penetration; the rest of the time, they stop only 1d6 of penetration.  The side skirts add 1 AV to the hull side armor.  The entire system weighs 500 kg and costs $1000.

     In 1967, the T-62’s rear deck was modified to ease access to the engine.  This version is called the T-62 M-1967; for game purposes, it is identical to the T-62, T-62K, or T-62KN (whichever applies). 

     The T-62 had a number of problems, not all of which were ever addressed.  The turret itself carries only 4 ready rounds; the rest are in front of the engine compartment and alongside the driver.  Turret rotation was slow; a 360-degree turn of the turret took 21 seconds, almost twice that of Western tanks of the time.  To reload the main gun, the gun must be elevated to +3.5 degrees; since the sights elevate and depress with the gun, the gunner can’t look for new targets during the reloading of the main gun, and the sudden change in elevation of the main gun to 3.5 degrees is a signal to an alert enemy that the T-62 is reloading and relatively vulnerable.  The fact that the turret could not be traversed during reloading did not help matters.  Though the main gun can hit at 4000 meters during the day, the relatively primitive night vision equipment limits the main gun’s range to 800 meters.  Though the T-62 is capable of 4 rounds per minute when it is stationary, and fire on the move is possible, the tight confines of the turret and the bouncing around of the tank meant that reloading while on the move was very difficult.  Perhaps the biggest problem with the T-62 was the automatic spent case ejection system.  The port was never properly aligned with the main gun’s breech, which led to lots of cases missing the port and hitting the sides instead.  Case ejection was violent, and spent shells could laterally ricochet off the edges of the port and injure the turret crew.  (Later, a deflector would be added to protect the commander, but this did not help the gunner or loader.)  The poor design of the case ejection system also tended to cause the turret to gradually fill with carbon monoxide from the main gun rounds.  That small hatch for case ejection, though spring-loaded, also meant that the T-62 could not be completely NBC sealed; the crew would have to wear full MOPP gear in an NBC environment.  Finally, though the T-62 had relative agility for a Soviet tank, it still could not keep up with the then-new BMP-1 IFV.

The Second-Generation T-62s

     Some problems with the T-62 were later addressed and either fixed or partially fixed; some never got fixed because the production lines were already well-established and making major changes was deemed to be too costly, especially since the T-62s successor (the T-64) was already in service and the successor to the T-64 (the T-72) was already in the initial design phases.

     The first of these new modifications was noticed in the West in 1972, and called the T-62 M-1972.  (It, like most of the Soviet designs, was probably in service 2-5 years earlier.)  The T-62 M-1972 had a DShK machinegun, but it was installed on a pintle in front of the loader’s hatch.  This meant that the T-62 finally had an antiaircraft machinegun, but using it was problematic since it meant that the loader had to do double duty as a gunner for the machinegun and a loader for the main gun.  New, longer-lasting tracks (the same as those on the T-72) were fitted, which also meant that a new drive sprocket had to be added.  Special equipment meant that deeper fording could be done without having to resort to a snorkel attachment (though not as deep a level of fording as if a snorkel was used).    The T-62 M-1975 was similar, but added a KTD-1 or KTD-2 laser rangefinder to the gunner’s equipment (mounted in an armored box over the main gun next to the searchlight), and upgraded the night vision suite.  The bolts for the commander’s cupola, which tended to work loose, were also countersunk and covered with caps; the pintle mount for the DShK could also be shifted to the commander’s cupola, and usually was.

     In 1983, the T-62M was introduced.  First seen by the West in Afghanistan (and at first called by them the T-62E), the T-62M had the Volna fire control system, which included an upgraded night vision suite for the gunner, as well as a laser rangefinder that could double as a laser designator.  Like the T-55M, this allowed the use of an ATGM fired through the gun tube; this ATGM was a variant of the AT-10 Stabber (9K117 Bastion), one that had a special housing to allow it to be used with the larger-diameter gun.  The missile is the 9K117-1 Sheksna, or the AT-12 by the West. The version of the Volna system fitted to the T-62M also had a ballistic computer. The commander’s auxiliary sights were also upgraded, making them the equal to the gunner’s sights (though the commander could not launch an ATGM or use the gunner’s thermal imager).  The main gun received a thermal sleeve, updated radios, and the V-55U diesel engine developing 620 horsepower.  On each side of the turret, four smoke grenade launchers were added.  The new equipment, unfortunately, took up enough room that main gun ammunition load had to be slightly decreased.

     Protection-wise, the T-62M also received several changes.  The T-62 was fitted with the BDD appliqué armor package, which increased the belly armor, added armored side skirts (backed with rubber), a large steel plate bolted to the glacis, and bra armor similar to that of the T-55AM.  The BDD armor package also included a liner to absorb energetic neutrons from nuclear explosions.  While the T-62M is more survivable, it is also much heavier, negating the advantages given by the more powerful engine.

     Variants of the T-62M include the T-62M-1, with a 690-horsepower V-46-5M engine.  The T-62M1 (not to be confused with the previous version of the T-62) has a revised, more effective hull armor layout, but no Volna FCS or ATGM capability.  The T-62M1-1 (gets confusing, doesn’t it?) is the same as the T-62M1, but with the V-46-5M engine.  The T-62M1-2 is a T-62M1 without the BDD armor package.  The T-62M1-2-1 is a T-62M1-2 with the V-46-5M engine.

     Command versions of the T-62M were also built; the T-62MK is for the most part similar to the T-62M, but has no ATGM capability (though it does have a thermal imager for the gunner).  The T-62MK has an additional medium-range and long-range radio, and a 1kW APU.  Inertial navigation equipment is also fitted.  Like the T-62K, the T-62MK has a lower ammunition load.  The T-62MK-1 is the same, but uses the V-46-5M engine.

     The T-62MV replaces the bra armor of the T-62M with lugs for ERA and the Kontakt-1 ERA package (the ERA itself is not included in the price below).  These lugs are on the glacis, hull sides, the turret front, and the forward one-quarter of the turret roof.  The T-62MV-1 is the T-62MV with the V-46-5M engine.  The T-62M1V is the T-62MV without the Volna FCS.  The T-62M1V-1 is the T-62M1V with a V-46-5M engine.

The Third-Generation T-62s

     In the late 1980s, the last major upgrade by Russia to the T-62 was made.  The T-62M was used as a base; the bra armor was removed, and instead, the Drozd active protection system was installed. This system includes a small, short-range radar system on the turret roof to detect incoming missiles and rockets (it doesn’t work fast enough to stop tank and autocannon rounds), and launches special rounds in the path of the missile that quickly break up into a cloud of tungsten pellets, destroying the missile before it can hit the tank.  The Drozd system has 20 of these rounds available, and the special rounds are 50% likely to stop the incoming missile; the missile will be destroyed about 10 meters from the tank.  (The primary problem with the Drozd is in the limitations of its radar system and not the special rounds.)  This model is called the T-62MD; a version with the V-46-5M engine is called the T-62-MD-1.

The TO-62

     The TO-62 is the same idea as the TO-55, but on a T-62 chassis.  The coaxial PKT machinegun is replaced with an ATO-220 automatic flamethrower; the flamethrower fires one burst every three seconds as long as the trigger button is depressed.  The ATO-220 flamethrower fires at lower pressure and uses less fuel on each burst; therefore, though the fuel tank still carries 460 liters, more bursts are available, but the base T2K range is 25.

*Turret and hull deck armor for most of the T-62 series is only 3.  However, floor armor for the T-62M series is 6.

** The bra armor on the turret front and sides is not guaranteed protection; incoming rounds are 85% likely to hit the front bra armor and 50% likely to hit the side bra armor.  If the bra armor is not hit, armor for the TF is 60 and 20 for the TS.

***The rangefinder and fire control bonuses do not apply to the flamethrower.

Morozov T-64

     Notes:  The T-64, despite the relatively small numbers in which it was produced, was a rather radical advance in tank design; it is similar to the technological leap that the T-34 made in World War 2.  The design of the T-64 sprang from two seemingly diametrically-opposed desires of the Red Army: the desire to dispense completely with heavy tanks as a class, and yet keep the protection and heavy armament that those heavy tanks provided.  The result was a design much more advanced in the mid-1960s than the West realized – one so advanced that until the T-90 series, subsequent Soviet and Russian tanks have merely been evolutionary upgrades of the T-64’s design.  The T-64 entered Soviet service in 1966, and was first identified in the West in 1970.  It has long been replaced by later designs in the Russian Army, and was never exported, even to other Warsaw Pact armies, and deployments outside the Soviet Union did not even start until 1976.  The Russians still employ some 3000 of the latest versions of the T-64 in lower-readiness units in 2009; the Ukrainians have almost 2000 in service, though most of theirs have been improved even beyond the capabilities of the last Russian versions.  The T-64 is also still used by Belarus and Uzbekistan.  The chief designer, Alexander Morozov, received the Lenin Prize for the T-64.  Production of the T-64 (in all versions) ended in 1987, though upgrading of the T-64 continues in Ukraine, and several T-64s have been modified for other duties ranging from engineer vehicles to recovery vehicles to even odd variants like heavy APCs.

The First T-64: The T-64R

     Morozov began with a new turret and hull design, but still using a version of the 115mm U-5TS gun called the D-68.  The main gun, however, was fed by an autoloader, dramatically increasing the rate of fire.  The autoloader was fed by a double-row carousel-type rack in the floor of the turret; the autoloader gunner would select the ammunition type, and the autoloader would rotate the carousel to the appropriate place, retrieve the ammunition and ram it into the breech, then close the breech.  After the round was fired, the autoloader opened the breech, removed the spent shell, and put it back into the carousel.  The autoloader carousel holds 30 rounds; additional rounds are carried to the right of the driver. Fire control was also updated from that of the T-62, including a high-magnification coincidence rangefinder that could be dialed in faster than that of the T-62.  The Night vision suite was a bit more advanced than that of the T-62; another difference was that the searchlight was on the left side of the main gun instead of over the gun.

     As one of the problems with the T-62 was its inability to keep up with the BMP-1, the T-64 was equipped with 5TDF 700-horsepower engine; unlike previous designs, this was a multi-fuel engine.  The 5TDF was also more compact than comparable Western tank engines of the time.  The suspension was also very different from previous designs; the primary shock absorbers for the roadwheels were actually inside the hull floor, with the first, second, and sixth roadwheels having additional external shock absorbers to further smooth the ride.  The suspension also used shorter torsion bars than standard tank designs of the period.  This not only gave the T-64 a smoother ride, it made the T-64’s suspension considerably lighter (and unfortunately, more complicated and prone to problems).

     The armor package was also innovative; it consisted of an outer and inner layer of steel plate, with ceramic in between the two.  The ceramic armor itself, inside the steel, was encased in a thin layer of aircraft-quality aluminum.  This form of spaced armor (sort of a very early form of composite armor) gave the T-64 superior protection against HEAT rounds; at the time, most anti-armor rounds were in fact HEAT rounds.  The side skirts (called Gill armor) actually sprang out when hit; this gave a bit of additional protection against HEAT rounds (though not enough to register with the Twilight 2000 rules).

     While the T-64 was a large advance in tank design, it did have its problems.  One of the biggest problems was the new autoloader.  The T-64, like most Soviet tanks, was very cramped inside, and the new autoloader didn’t really take into account just how small the turret’s interior was.  The result was an autoloader that was prone to jamming and worse – all it took was a hanging sleeve for the autoloader to grab the gunner’s arm and shove it into the breech; some gunners on the early T-64 actually suffered from injuries so severe they required amputation of the limb, and some were killed by the autoloader.  If the autoloader broke down, reloading the main gun was an ergonomically horrible concept – you might be lucky to get off one round a minute.  Like most Russian tanks, a hull-down position was difficult to take, as the main gun could depress to only -6 degrees (that’s about the maximum depression for almost every Russian built tank since the T-34, in fact).  This is due to the small size of the turret.  Like most Soviet/Russian tank designs, the amount of machinegun ammunition was nothing to write home about, but on the T-64, the machinegun ammunition supply was skimpier than virtually any other Soviet or Russian tank.

     Another problem was the complicated suspension; roadwheels could actually travel enough to damage them, the torsion bars, or the shock absorbers.  The transmission used two clutches instead of one, making driving a difficult task, and the steering system was so sensitive that driver’s could easily oversteer the T-64, to the point that track throwing became a problem.  The Gill armor track skirts were also a problem; their mountings proved to be quite fragile and the individual plates that composed the skirts could easily be ripped off the T-64R as it moved through wooded terrain.  (Many crews removed them to keep them from getting damaged, or rattling around if they were damaged but not totally ripped off their mountings.)

     Nonetheless, some 600 of these early T-64s were built and put into service.  However, as problems and complaints mounted, virtually all of these early versions were rebuilt using improvements resulting from these initial problems as well as improvements that the Morozov team had also come up with.  To avoid confusion with later versions, this early T-64 was re-designated the T-64R.

The First “Real” T-64s

     Design work on upgraded versions of the T-64 began at about the same time as large-scale production of the T-64R started in 1965.  The then-new D-81T 125mm gun was to be fitted to this new version, which was given the designation “T-64,” and the original T-64 becoming the T-64R.  The serious problems with the autoloader of the T-64R at first led the Morozov team to dispense with the autoloader, but it was quickly realized that the combination of the larger main gun and a fourth crewmember would severely limit the amount of main gun ammunition that could be carried.  Therefore, the designers had to almost completely redesign the autoloader, and it became an almost totally-reliable mechanism (there was still the occasional jamming of the mechanism, and every now and then the autoloader would still grab the gunner, but such problems dropped to the point that accident rates were acceptable).  The new autoloader had a capacity of 28 main gun rounds; it still used the turret floor-based carousel system, and additional rounds were still carried to the right of the driver.

     The Gill armor, unfortunately, was still used, with its attendant problems.  The suspension, transmission, and engine remained the same.  The armor package was changed somewhat, with heavier steel being used for the outer layer of the armor, and a layer of fiberglass added to the armor package in between the ceramic interior and the aluminum jacket around the interior of the armor package.  Some concessions were made to the storage of equipment; starting at the front left side and moving to nearly the center of the turret side, three boxes were added tor crew gear and tools.  A compartment was added near the front right fender for the same purpose.  The hatches were also widened.

     The T-64 had a collective NBC system for the crew, as well as considerable radiation shielding based largely on lead-impregnated plastic and foam contained in a small space between the armor and the interior walls of the tank.  The T-64 could use a snorkel to conduct deep fording if necessary. 

The T-64A

     Design work on an upgraded T-64 began, like the T-64 and T-64R, almost as soon as the T-64 started rolling off the production lines, and first entered service in 1967.  The T-64A featured an upgraded fire control system with a better coincidence rangefinder (not enough to be reflected in the Twilight 2000 rules), and better stabilization (again, not enough to be reflected in the game rules).  The radios were also updated, as was the night vision suite.  Perhaps the most noticeable change was the commander’s station; the commander was given a rotating cupola with a machinegun that could be aimed and fired from within the turret.  The commander also had sights and stabilization for his machinegun equivalent to that of the main gun and coaxial machinegun.  The commander also had full controls for the main gun and coaxial machinegun, should he see a target that the gunner had overlooked.  The front of the T-64A had provisions for the attachment of a KMT-6 mine plow.

     At the same time, a command version of the T-64 was produced, called the T-64AK.  It differed in having an additional long-range radio, plus another longer-range radio that could be used only when the T-64AK was halted, as it required the erection of a 10-meter telescopic antenna mast.  The commander’s cupola was equipped with a PAB-2AM artillery aiming circle to assist in calling for artillery strikes quickly.  The T-64AK also had a TNA-3 inertial navigation system.  The additional equipment could be powered during a halt by a 1 kW APU. The T-64AK is not equipped with a commander’s machinegun.

     In 1976, a modernized versions of the T-64A and AK began to appear.  The 1976 modernizations included the use of the improved D-81TM gun (later renamed the 2A46-1), along with an associated modified stabilization system, improved autoloader, and sights. (These modifications produce no changes by Twilight 2000 rules.) In 1981, a cluster of six smoke grenade launchers was added to each side of the turret, and the troublesome Gill side skirts were replaced by simpler, yet tougher rubber side skirts backed by aluminum. (In game terms, the T-64A M-1981, in addition to adding the smoke grenade launchers, merely adds $1000 to the price of a standard T-64A or AK.) In 1983, the T-64AM and AKM versions appeared; these versions have all of the preceding improvements, plus the replacement of the engine by the 6TD 1000-horsepower diesel engine, making the T-64AM and AKM very fast and agile indeed, especially since the transmission and steering mechanisms were updated at the same time.  The new engine, however, made the T-64AM and AKM rather fuel-hungry in relation to its predecessors. 

     In 1985, The T-64A series was equipped with lugs for Kontakt-1 ERA on the glacis, hull sides, turret sides, and turret front (and the front quarter of the turret roof), resulting in the T-64AV and T-64AVK.  These versions were also equipped with new smoke grenade launchers, being a pair of 4-round clusters on the left side of the turret.  The T-64AM and AKM were also equipped with ERA lugs, resulting in the T-64AVM and T-64AVMK.  For game purposes, these are otherwise the same as base vehicles, but cost $1500 more (and that’s only for the lugs and framework).

The T-64B

     At about the same time that the modernizations of the T-64A and AK began, a new upgrade of the T-64 also began service: The T-64B.  In some ways, the T-64B was same as the T-64AM and AKM that would eventually appear, but it also had several new systems not found on the T-64A.  The T-64B used the original T-64 engine and the associated transmission and steering system; however, it had the new commander’s cupola, the provisions for the mounting of a mine plow, the replacement of the Gill side skirts by rubber/aluminum side skirts, and the addition of smoke grenade launchers.  Armor was also upgraded, particularly on the glacis and turret front and sides. The armor layout and composition was also redesigned, yielding even more protection.

     However, there is an important difference between the T-64A’s gun and the T-64B’s gun: the T-64B’s main gun can fire the 9M112 Kobra (AT-8 Songster) ATGM through it, and has the appropriate associated fire control equipment for the use of this ATGM. The gunner loads the Kobra into the gun tube, and has to leave his station, remove the Kobra from its stowage position, and load it manually into breech to do it, then return to his station and aim, fire, and control the ATGM.  The Kobra cannot be used with the autoloader.  Associated equipment added to the T-64B includes a radio transmitter to control the Kobra (mounted in front of the commander’s cupola), a thermal imager, a higher-magnification day sight, and special stowage provisions for the missiles.  In addition, the gun tube is replaced by one designed for use with the ATGM, a radio command unit and ballistic computer have been added to the main gun fire control equipment, and the main gun has a crosswind sensor.  The main gun ammunition is limited to those rounds that fit into the autoloader, but some internal rearrangement has allowed the coaxial machinegun ammunition amount to be increased.  A command tank version, the T-64BK, was also built, similar in concept to the T-64AK but with the improvements of the T-64B. 

     In 1981, the smoke grenade launchers were replaced with ones that used only four barrel clusters on each side of the turret.  In 1983, the engine was upgraded to the then-new 1000-horsepower 6TD, yielding the T-64BM and T-64BKM.  Versions of the T-64B and BK were produced with lugs for Kontakt-1 ERA on the glacis, hull sides, turret sides, and turret front (and the front quarter of the turret roof) were produced, resulting in the T-64BV and T-64BVK tanks.  Versions with ERA lugs have all eight smoke grenade launchers on the left side of the turret.  Versions with the 6TD engine are called the T-64BMV and T-64BMVK.

     A pair of lower-cost versions of the T-64B were also produced: The T-64B1 and T-64B1K.  These are essentially the same as the T-64B and T-64BK, but do not have the capability to fire the 9M112 Kobra ATGM.  Versions of the T-64B1 and T-64B1K with 6TD engines were not produced (at least not by the Russians).  Versions with ERA are called the T-64B1V and T-64B1VK.