Probus Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 For your viewing pleasure, the Chrysler TV-8: A 25-ton tank with a 90-mm gun. I'm sure if Cold War started just a few years earlier, we would have had a model for one of these bad boys. Chrysler’s nuclear-powered tank was the height of Atomic Age optimism (msn.com) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 18 minutes ago, Probus said: For your viewing pleasure, the Chrysler TV-8: A 25-ton tank with a 90-mm gun. I'm sure if Cold War started just a few years earlier, we would have had a model for one of these bad boys. Chrysler’s nuclear-powered tank was the height of Atomic Age optimism (msn.com) Pro: it never runs out of gas Con: if it gets hit, it will irradiate a grid square 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probus Posted February 3, 2022 Author Share Posted February 3, 2022 (edited) Pro: Generate your own depleted uranium rounds. Con: Risk of starting a zombie apocalypse. So do you put the reactor in the front or rear? Edited February 3, 2022 by Probus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeondTheGrave Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 As I recall from Hunnicutt's book the TV-8's unusual turret was supposed to give the tank a swimming capability. Think a DD Sherman, except the turret's buoyancy would be ensured by its design. Theoretically if the tank's crew compartment could be adequately waterproofed the TV-8 could 'sail' through open ocean in a mild sea state. While I haven't read this explicitly I always assumed that the TV-8 was intended to be an expeditionary tank for the Marines or for a channel crossing back into Europe as had been planned in OFFTACKLE. Anyway all thats to say the TV-8 project gave us one of, IMO, the funniest paintings of a tank ever. I like to think the TV sank that poor little destroyer down there. I also think there are no fish and plenty of withered vegetation thanks to a leaky reactor containment unit. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMac Posted February 3, 2022 Share Posted February 3, 2022 (edited) Yes...'Day the Earth Stood Still' (1951). Edited February 3, 2022 by JoMac 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 Pro: ??? Con: that turret is nearly all shot trap - the roof armour of the tank had better be really good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbsapp Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Probus Posted February 4, 2022 Author Share Posted February 4, 2022 PRO: Enemy too afraid to shoot at the tank in case they hit the reactor. CON: The crew too afraid to drive it since the enemy might hit the reactor. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeondTheGrave Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 21 minutes ago, Probus said: PRO: Enemy too afraid to shoot at the tank in case they hit the reactor. CON: The crew too afraid to drive it since the enemy might hit the reactor. Solution: Point it towards Moscow, throw a brick on the accelerator. Win? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawomi Posted February 4, 2022 Share Posted February 4, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, Probus said: PRO: Enemy too afraid to shoot at the tank in case they hit the reactor. Object 279 ->https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_279 Quote This special purpose tank was intended to fight on cross country terrain, inaccessible to conventional tanks, acting as a heavy breakthrough tank, and if necessary withstanding even the shockwave of a nuclear explosion. plus Quote The “Taran” project incorporated another avenue of development that was very “hot” at the time in the Soviet Union, the “missile tank.” The IT-1 tank was developed around the same time in the Soviet Union, which featured an anti-tank guided missile launcher as the primary weapon, as opposed to a traditional main gun. Combining these characteristics, the Taran project was to create a missile tank that could launch large tactical nukes, then follow up in the attack by firing Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGMs). The tank was to be based on the T-64 chassis. The turret was to be completely new and feature a rocket-gun (similar to those mounted on the German Sturmtiger). The tactical nuclear projectile itself was said to have a caliber of 300mm and a launch weight of 150 kg. The warhead weighed 65 kg and had a yield of 0.3 kilotons. Three of these projectiles were to be carried in each Taran. While requirements for the project required the system to be able to fire out to 8 km, calculations suggest that the rocket projectile could have reached up to 12 km. However, the rocket projectiles lacked any sort of guidance. In direct fire mode, the projectiles were expected to land within 100m of the aim point. Firing in indirect mode, this error would be increased by 2.5x. The Taran was also meant to carry around 10-12 ATGMs in addition to nuclear projectiles. The designers wanted the Taran to be able to attack with regular tanks to mop up surviving vehicles after firing its nuclear salvo, and the large caliber of the gun made it suitable to fire ATGMs, as the effectiveness of a HEAT warhead is mostly correlated to the diameter of the warhead. These ATGMs were estimated to be able to punch through 300mm of steel. -> https://www.19fortyfive.com/2021/07/this-is-crazy-russia-wanted-tanks-that-could-fire-nuclear-weapons/ Edited February 5, 2022 by sawomi 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted February 5, 2022 Share Posted February 5, 2022 20 hours ago, Probus said: Enemy too afraid to shoot at the tank in case they hit the reactor. 15 hours ago, sawomi said: This special purpose tank was intended to fight on cross country terrain, inaccessible to conventional tanks, acting as a heavy breakthrough tank, and if necessary withstanding even the shockwave of a nuclear explosion. It was only ever a matter of time before Objekt 279 turned up in this thread, but that was a very cool way to raise the curtain on it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultradave Posted February 8, 2022 Share Posted February 8, 2022 Slightly different but my first Radiation Analysis Section head as a civilian had previously worked on the proposed nuclear powered aircraft at Pratt and Whitney, the most "useful" version being a strategic bomber that could remain on station for days. The problem was that so much shielding was required to shield the crew from the reactor that you couldn't get it off the ground, requiring more power, which required a bigger reactor, which required even more shielding. You see the problem, eh? He said it was a really interesting project. Cutting edge at the time. Dave 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.