The Object 279-Would It Have Worked?

I think it is pretty basic question, but I will make my question more specific.

For those of you who do not know what an Object 279 is, here is the Down-Low.

In 1957, a prototype Super-Heavy tank was developed by an engineer named L.S Toryanov that was, to say the least, unusual. It is probably the only tank in the world designed specficaly to survive a nuclear exposion.



As you can see, the tanks most unique features were two pairs of two connected treads, and a thin, round saucer-like main chasis. This was a design feature to help protect against HEAT rounds, but most importantly to keep the tank from flipping over from the force of the nuclear explosion. The tank was armed with a 130MM cannon and was loaded with 24 shells and a 14.5MM Anti-Air MG in a classic turret ring. However, how this would not be blasted off with the force of an explosion is beyond me. Maybe they would put it on after the explosion or something. The tank weighed sixty tons, was about seven to eleven meters long, with armor 266-305MM thick. It used a 2DG-8M 1000 Horsepower Engine and had a crew of four.

The project was cancled in late 57 and only one example resides in an armor museum in Russia.

So, here are my questions.

-Is the design fesable?

-What use could the tank have in a post-nuked battlefield?

-Outside of a Nuke situation, would the tank be efective?

-Were any similar notions pursued by NATO?

IMO that tank was prolly built during an era when people thought low-yield battlefield tactical nukes would be used. For an example, the US developed weapons such as the M-388 Davy Crockett for infantry, and AIR-2 Genie & AIM-26 Falcon nuclear AAM's for the air force.

Is the Object 279 design feasible? Let's look at the wiki entry for Davy Crockett:


The Davy Crockett could be launched from either of two launchers: the 4-inch (120 mm) M28, with a range of about 1.25 mi (2 km), or the 6-in (155 mm) M29, with a range of 2.5 mi (4 km). Both weapons used the same projectile, and could be mounted on a tripod launcher or carried by truck or armored personnel carrier. They were operated by a three-man crew.

Both recoilless rifles proved to have poor accuracy in testing, so the shell's greatest effect would have been its extreme radiation hazard. Even at a low yield setting, the M388 would produce an almost instantly lethal radiation dosage (in excess of 10,000 rem) within 500 feet (150 m), and a probably fatal dose (around 600 rem) within a quarter mile (400 meters).

So even if the tank doesn't flip from an explosion, the crew might not survive the radiation exposure.

Also, this tank was estimated at 60 tons, which makes it a heavy tank, but not a super-heavy tank like the T-28/T-95 @ 95 tons. Or, the WW2 German Panzer VIII Maus @ 188 tons.

Ah. Thanks for that correction. Most of my information came from a Russian Armor site (that was not, to my information, Russian). I imagine that the 'Super Heavy' idea came from the size of the gun.

But I find your claim to be a bit of an asumption, not to be offensive. I have not seen any information as to wether the Object 279 was sheilded from radiation. If I have missed something, let me know, and if I am incorrect, then I apologize.

By the way...I can't help but ask if you thought of mentioning the Davy Crocket because of the relation between that and Metal Gear Solid: 3, since I first learned of Object 279 playing that game (and research inspired me to write this topic)

Kampfwagen said:

Ah. Thanks for that correction. Most of my information came from a Russian Armor site (that was not, to my information, Russian). I imagine that the 'Super Heavy' idea came from the size of the gun.

But I find your claim to be a bit of an asumption, not to be offensive. I have not seen any information as to wether the Object 279 was sheilded from radiation. If I have missed something, let me know, and if I am incorrect, then I apologize.

By the way...I can't help but ask if you thought of mentioning the Davy Crocket because of the relation between that and Metal Gear Solid: 3, since I first learned of Object 279 playing that game (and research inspired me to write this topic)

Click to expand...

You're correct. The T-55 was built in the same era, and it was fitted with NBC protection system, including radiation detection, anti-radiation liner, overpressure, air filter, etc. So the object 279 would prolly have the same, or better NBC protection.

Almost any material (air, dirt, metal) can reduce radiation, given sufficient distance or thickness. If the crew is completely encased within a shell of 300mm-thick (1 ft) steel, it can reduce radiation exposure by factor of 17-halves. (100->50->25->12.5>etc).

Then it comes down to how much radiation is being produced, vs. how much protection your tank offers, and how much radiation your crew will be exposed to. @_@ Thank goodness I'm not in the tank.

p.s. I never played Metal Gear Solid 3.

Ah. Thanks

The Davey Crocket and the Object 279 are both featured in Metal Gear Solid 3.

not to be pickey but during world war II the germans and russian had different standards for "heavy tanks". the germans most important factor was thickness of armor and thus wieght, however the russians generally considered gun size to be of greater importance. so weight was less important. sorry for that rant!

Thanks, Max. Rant though it may be, it helps.

Anyone think it would preform well in a non-nuclear situation? It's supousedly possessing of great traction on swampy and snowy ground.

Basically the Obiekt 279 was designed to prevent the tank from being disabled and otherwise rendered combat ineffective (through overturning, etc) by the nuclear blast shockwave and high speed winds it generated. So, it was made specifically to resist overturning by giving it an aerodynamic shape and hydropneumatic suspension to lower its CG.