Kharkov's Object 490 Buntar, Bokser and Object 477 "Molot" advanced tanks

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It'd also be interesting to find out the tonnage of 'Rebel'.

According to the quotes by author of the article at Russian forums: Buntar under 60 tons, Boxer/Molot 52-55 tons, Nota 61-62 tons.

Short tons or metric tonnes? Makes quite a difference.

 

[dan_inbox]

Do Russians ever speak in English tons rather than metric tonnes?

 

[LVisingr]

It'd also be interesting to find out the tonnage of 'Rebel'.'

According to the quotes by author of the article at Russian forums: Buntar under 60 tons, Boxer/Molot 52-55 tons, Nota 61-62 tons.

Short tons or metric tonnes? Makes quite a difference.

Sorry, my fault, everything is in metric tonnes, of course. I am Czech and I have sometimes little mess in all these weight units...

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

After the first, low profile Izdeliye 490 version was abandoned, 490A and 477 were as tall and as heavy as their Western rivals it seems. All credit to Kharkov though for continuing their history of radical designs. If they'd managed to put some 490A prototypes into May day celebrations in the late 80s, I'm sure it would have caused quite a stir!


The major barrier to these tanks entering production was really the required electronics being beyond the capacity of Soviet industry.

 

[LVisingr]

Revised info about the weights:


490A Buntar - under 60 tonnes
477 Bokser/Molot (with the old conveyor loading system) - 51-55 tonnes
477A Molot (with the new drum loading system) - 57 tonnes
477A1 Nota - 61-62 tonnes


With steel armor (as in older types), Nota would have been even much heavier, about 67-69 tonnes, but thanks to using advanced titanium armor, the weight was eventually "only" 61-62 tonnes. However, in terms of Soviet/Russian tank design school, this thing was a MONSTER that would ruin Soviet/Russian army logistics, created to support tanks with weight under (or maybe very slightly over) 50 tonnes. This was probably one of the main reasons for terminating these too-much-ambitious projects. Also Object 195 (T-95) was too heavy (52-58 tonnes) and the engineers of Uralvagonzavod were tasked to create something lighter. The final result is T-14 Armata with combat weight of 48 tonnes (the kit for urban operations adds 5 tonnes more).

 

[jsport]

Revised info about the weights:


490A Buntar - under 60 tonnes
477 Bokser/Molot (with the old conveyor loading system) - 51-55 tonnes
477A Molot (with the new drum loading system) - 57 tonnes
477A1 Nota - 61-62 tonnes


With steel armor (as in older types), Nota would have been even much heavier, about 67-69 tonnes, but thanks to using advanced titanium armor, the weight was eventually "only" 61-62 tonnes. However, in terms of Soviet/Russian tank design school, this thing was a MONSTER that would ruin Soviet/Russian army logistics, created to support tanks with weight under (or maybe very slightly over) 50 tonnes. This was probably one of the main reasons for terminating these too-much-ambitious projects. Also Object 195 (T-95) was too heavy (52-58 tonnes) and the engineers of Uralvagonzavod were tasked to create something lighter. The final result is T-14 Armata with combat weight of 48 tonnes (the kit for urban operations adds 5 tonnes more).

thank you again

 

[hs1216]

The information posted implies that the Soviet Union developed a 152 mm cannon for these designs and possibly reach some level of hardware. Am I mistaken?

 

[jsport]

The information posted implies that the Soviet Union developed a 152 mm cannon for these designs and possibly reach some level of hardware. Am I mistaken?

thank you for reemphasis
appears to be the issue/question.

 

[LVisingr]

The information posted implies that the Soviet Union developed a 152 mm cannon for these designs and possibly reach some level of hardware. Am I mistaken?

Yes, definitely, there are at least four Soviet/Russian tank guns with 152mm caliber, created in 80s and 90s:


1. LP-81 gun, created by CNII Burevesting, project name Buntar *, used in Object 477 Bokser/Molot
2. LP-83 gun, created by CNII Burevesting, project name Taran **, used in Object 477A Molot and Object 292 (T-80U-based testbed)
3. 2A73 gun, created by OKB-9 Uralmash, ammo project name Zaraysk, used in Object 477A1 Nota
4. 2A83 gun, created by OKB-9 Uralmash, ammo project name Grifel, used in Object 1?? (T-72-based testbed with 2A83 in a small unmanned turret; this thing probably spawned the first rumors about T-95) and, of course, Object 195 (T-95) itself


* not to be confused with Object 490A Buntar tank, armed with 125mm 2A66M gun
** not to be confused with Object 120 Taran self-propelled gun, armed with 152mm M-69 gun (from 1965)

 

[Lightning]

The information posted implies that the Soviet Union developed a 152 mm cannon for these designs and possibly reach some level of hardware. Am I mistaken?

Yes, definitely, there are at least four Soviet/Russian tank guns with 152mm caliber, created in 80s and 90s:


1. LP-81 gun, created by CNII Burevesting, project name Buntar *, used in Object 477 Bokser/Molot
2. LP-83 gun, created by CNII Burevesting, project name Taran **, used in Object 477A Molot and Object 292 (T-80U-based testbed)
3. 2A73 gun, created by OKB-9 Uralmash, ammo project name Zaraysk, used in Object 477A1 Nota
4. 2A83 gun, created by OKB-9 Uralmash, ammo project name Grifel, used in Object 1?? (T-72-based testbed with 2A83 in a small unmanned turret; this thing probably spawned the first rumors about T-95) and, of course, Object 195 (T-95) itself


* not to be confused with Object 490A Buntar tank, armed with 125mm 2A66M gun
** not to be confused with Object 120 Taran self-propelled gun, armed with 152mm M-69 gun (from 1965)

Actually,the object 292 was based on the chassis of t-80bv instead of 80U.
I was interested in these Soviet's 152 Gun, is there any detail about the object 187a?

 

[Lightning]

I drew a pic about the Soviet super tanks after the 80's

 

[Andrei_bt]

Revised info about the weights:
490A Buntar - under 60 tonnes

It was in weight of T-80UD i.e. 46 tonnes

 

[Andrei_bt]

After the first, low profile Izdeliye 490 version was abandoned, 490A and 477 were as tall and as heavy as their Western rivals it seems. All credit to Kharkov though for continuing their history of radical designs. If they'd managed to put some 490A prototypes into May day celebrations in the late 80s, I'm sure it would have caused quite a stir!


The major barrier to these tanks entering production was really the required electronics being beyond the capacity of Soviet industry.

The only radical design was 2 man 490 by Evgeniy Morozov. 490A and 477 were rather conventional design. In 490A all electronic questions of FCS were solved. 477 was another story - computer on the wheels.

 

[Andrei_bt]

I've only just learned of this Object 490 now, how does it fit in with the other array of Soviet/Russian "next-gen" tanks? By my count:

Object 292 (T-80 hull and new turret with 152mm gun)
Object 299
Object 477 "Molot" (the FST-2 NATO intel guys were worried about)
Object 490 "Buntar" (probably another part of the overall FST-2 picture)
- Object 490A (same as above or some variant?)
Object 195 (commonly referred to as the T-95, maybe a later program than the others, started after the collapse of the USSR?)
Object 640 "Black Eagle" (competing design with the Object 195)

Did the Soviets intend to continue their practices of building multiple designs concurrently as they did with the T-64, T-72, and T-80? Or was one design to be standardized upon?

Chronologicaly
early 80-s
490 and 490A
Built in 1985

477 "Molot"
2-nd part of 80-s
Built about a dozen, 1-st in 1987.


There was a single tank planned.

others (195, 640 and so on) were after UssR collapse.

 

[Andrei_bt]

I drew a pic about the Soviet super tanks after the 80's

very good, but it is better to place them chronologicaly.

 

[Lightning]

I drew a pic about the Soviet super tanks after the 80's

very good, but it is better to place them chronologicaly.

WOW, Thank you ,Andrei.
Of course I will redraw them later,but now there are too less informations and pictures about those 80's concept tank especially 477 and 490, .And besides I know there are some mistakes in that picture what I get from Mr.Feng's advice~ ;D

 

[stashandr]

From Paralay forum

 

[shkval]

We saw Nota and Molot,but has any Ob.477 Bokser prototype been made?

 

[stashandr]

477 was renamed to Molot before the first prototype has been built.

From Paralay

 

[Grey Havoc]

Via Mr King over at TankNet, an apparent model of the Object 299:


EDIT: Though another commentator is claiming that it is actually a model of the RDF/LT with the 75mm HV autocannon.

 

[kwato]

We saw Nota and Molot,but has any Ob.477 Bokser prototype been made?

Some sources say that several (2-3) prototypes were built, but others - none.

http://militarium.net/radzieckie-i-ukrainskie-czolgi-nowej-generacji-od-obiekt-450-do-obiekt-477a1-nota/

 

[Kat Tsun]

Via Mr King over at TankNet, an apparent model of the Object 299:


EDIT: Though another commentator is claiming that it is actually a model of the RDF/LT with the 75mm HV autocannon.

It is 299. Most certainly it isn't RDF/LT. The RDF/LT had a mere five roadwheels, the overhang of the gun was greater, and the engine was in the back rather than the front, as is the case here. There was also an infantry fighting vehicle, an armored breaching vehicle, and VLS missile carrier planned to accompany the tank. LKZ managed to build a couple mobility prototypes of the new chassis (APC model) and a robotic(?) mine clearing vehicle, but it never progressed further than that. There are pictures/concept images of the 152mm ammunition and cannon that was planned for the 299, too, but who knows if it was actually ever seen in the steel.

The interior layout always struck me as odd, though. Surely the crew should be behind the gun, with as much mass of the tank in front, but I suppose that would make optronics somewhat complex (since 299 is a pre-fiber optic tank design) and direct vision mostly impossible without a complicated series of mirrors.

Below, in order respective, is the Obj. 299 tank, missile/VLS tank destroyer, some sort of engineering vehicle, and a combat mobility vehicle, all based on the 299 as I understand. There is some stuff on Gur Khan's blog which has the same pictures in colour too, where he says that the last vehicle is actually called Object 232, but was related to 299 in some manner. He also has pictures, again in colour, of concepts of the 299 IFV (it carried 8 dismounts, 2 crew, and had a robotic turret with some large caliber [57mm?] automatic cannon) and a few other vehicles, but I don't know if it would be polite to post the images here without his permission.

 

[jsport]

Via Mr King over at TankNet, an apparent model of the Object 299:


EDIT: Though another commentator is claiming that it is actually a model of the RDF/LT with the 75mm HV autocannon.

It is 299. Most certainly it isn't RDF/LT. The RDF/LT had a mere five roadwheels, the overhang of the gun was greater, and the engine was in the back rather than the front, as is the case here. There was also an infantry fighting vehicle, an armored breaching vehicle, and VLS missile carrier planned to accompany the tank. LKZ managed to build a couple mobility prototypes of the new chassis (APC model) and a robotic(?) mine clearing vehicle, but it never progressed further than that. There are pictures/concept images of the 152mm ammunition and cannon that was planned for the 299, too, but who knows if it was actually ever seen in the steel.

The interior layout always struck me as odd, though. Surely the crew should be behind the gun, with as much mass of the tank in front, but I suppose that would make optronics somewhat complex (since 299 is a pre-fiber optic tank design) and direct vision mostly impossible without a complicated series of mirrors.

Below, in order respective, is the Obj. 299 tank, missile/VLS tank destroyer, some sort of engineering vehicle, and a combat mobility vehicle, all based on the 299 as I understand. There is some stuff on Gur Khan's blog which has the same pictures in colour too, where he says that the last vehicle is actually called Object 232, but was related to 299 in some manner. He also has pictures, again in colour, of concepts of the 299 IFV (it carried 8 dismounts, 2 crew, and had a robotic turret with some large caliber [57mm?] automatic cannon) and a few other vehicles, but I don't know if it would be polite to post the images here without his permission.

Great stuff thank you for posting.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

GDLS also developed a concept for the RDF/LT which used their external gun mount (which eventually found a home on the Stryker AGS) and a forward engine. But it has the gunner and commander rotating inside the turret ring not sitting in front of it as in this model. So very unlikely to be a USA proposal.

 

[TomS]

GDLS also developed a concept for the RDF/LT which used their external gun mount (which eventually found a home on the Stryker AGS) and a forward engine. But it has the gunner and commander rotating inside the turret ring not sitting in front of it as in this model. So very unlikely to be a USA proposal.

I'm pretty sure the comment on Tanknet was a joke, referring to the superficial similarity between Obj. 299 and the RDF/LT.

 

[Grey Havoc]

GDLS also developed a concept for the RDF/LT which used their external gun mount (which eventually found a home on the Stryker AGS) and a forward engine. But it has the gunner and commander rotating inside the turret ring not sitting in front of it as in this model. So very unlikely to be a USA proposal.

I'm pretty sure the comment on Tanknet was a joke, referring to the superficial similarity between Obj. 299 and the RDF/LT.

Wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Kat Tsun]

Via Mr King over at TankNet, an apparent model of the Object 299:


EDIT: Though another commentator is claiming that it is actually a model of the RDF/LT with the 75mm HV autocannon.

It is 299. Most certainly it isn't RDF/LT. The RDF/LT had a mere five roadwheels, the overhang of the gun was greater, and the engine was in the back rather than the front, as is the case here. There was also an infantry fighting vehicle, an armored breaching vehicle, and VLS missile carrier planned to accompany the tank. LKZ managed to build a couple mobility prototypes of the new chassis (APC model) and a robotic(?) mine clearing vehicle, but it never progressed further than that. There are pictures/concept images of the 152mm ammunition and cannon that was planned for the 299, too, but who knows if it was actually ever seen in the steel.

The interior layout always struck me as odd, though. Surely the crew should be behind the gun, with as much mass of the tank in front, but I suppose that would make optronics somewhat complex (since 299 is a pre-fiber optic tank design) and direct vision mostly impossible without a complicated series of mirrors.

Below, in order respective, is the Obj. 299 tank, missile/VLS tank destroyer, some sort of engineering vehicle, and a combat mobility vehicle, all based on the 299 as I understand. There is some stuff on Gur Khan's blog which has the same pictures in colour too, where he says that the last vehicle is actually called Object 232, but was related to 299 in some manner. He also has pictures, again in colour, of concepts of the 299 IFV (it carried 8 dismounts, 2 crew, and had a robotic turret with some large caliber [57mm?] automatic cannon) and a few other vehicles, but I don't know if it would be polite to post the images here without his permission.

Great stuff thank you for posting.

You're welcome.

It should be taken with a caveat, I do not speak nor read Russian, and I have no primary source documentation to back up the claims. Most of it is just based on people from other web forums and the rest a Google translate filter run on Gur Khan's blog plus knowledge that he can be considered fairly reliable. I suspect one of the members of the forum who speaks Russian, like andrei-bt, would be a much better source to ask about this thing.

Honestly, I just like how the tank looks more than anything. The gunpod is cute. It reminds me of Stryker's gunpod in the profile drawing.

GDLS also developed a concept for the RDF/LT which used their external gun mount (which eventually found a home on the Stryker AGS) and a forward engine. But it has the gunner and commander rotating inside the turret ring not sitting in front of it as in this model. So very unlikely to be a USA proposal.

Are you sure that Expeditionary Tank (from what it sounds like you're describing) was based on RDF/LT, and didn't simply reuse automotive components or something? They were separate contractors, the RDF/LT was a private venture light tank by AAI, Inc. (when it wasn't owned by Textron) and the Expeditionary Tank was a Teledyne/GD joint project using a GD hull and Teledyne turret. The roadwheels of Expeditionary Tank and RDF/LT are quite different, for example. M8 used a Detroit Diesel powerpack, and later M113s appear to have 6V53s which seems have to been a common strand in American light tanks post-Yom Kippur, but I think Expeditionary Tank used a different, Cummins-based powerpack, too.

If you're not talking about the GD/Teledyne tank, then apologies. I'm merely curious because I've never heard of such a radical modification of the RDF/LT hull, although I'm aware AAI tried to market a four-man (three-in-turret) vehicle using the same 76mm cannon to Taiwan to replace their Walker Bulldogs.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Yep was referring to the Teledyne GD light tank. And yes the requirement was no longer caĺled the RDF/LT by the time this vehicle was made public. But its a much better name than the later ones. Interstingly GD also sketched a couple of MBTs with the same config, armed with a notional (?) 145mm gun. The 1980s... Stranger Things were known to exist in this decade...

 

[Kat Tsun]

We saw Nota and Molot,but has any Ob.477 Bokser prototype been made?

Some sources say that several (2-3) prototypes were built, but others - none.

http://militarium.net/radzieckie-i-ukrainskie-czolgi-nowej-generacji-od-obiekt-450-do-obiekt-477a1-nota/

btvt.narod says one or two vehicles were built, that Object 477 "Hammer" and "Boxer" are apparently the same programs, but Boxer was renamed to Hammer almost immediately due to a leak of information overseas, and possibly before the construction of prototypes began. It may be the grainy, Bigfoot-esque image of Molot is also Boxer, but only because the tank program had been renamed by the time it was built. This was already well covered by Overscan, andrei-bt, and LVisingr, though.

Hammer as built was a KMDB project. Obj 299 and Obj 187 were its competitors, and of the three, the Armor Directorate apparently preferred LKZ's Obj. 299.

 

[Andrei_bt]

Hammer as built was a KMDB project. Obj 299 and Obj 187 were its competitors, and of the three, the Armor Directorate apparently preferred LKZ's Obj. 299.

Actually 299 and 187 appeared after molot and were not it's competitors in Soviet time, but after USSR collapsed Russia madi it's bet on local projects, resilting into T-95.

 

[Andrei_bt]

https://btvtinfo.blogspot.com/2018/10/95.html

 

[paralay]

http://paralay.world/477/500%20(50).jpg

 

[GTX]

Below, in order respective, is the Obj. 299 tank, missile/VLS tank destroyer,

Re the missile/VLS tank destroyer shown, any ideas regarding the missile types planned?

 

[paralay]

Most likely, the development of vertical launch missiles did not begin. The main version with a gun 152 mm

object 490B

 

[edwest4]

The 195 design is quite crowded.

 

[Andrei_bt]

Future tank of 80s with maximum protection, firepower and crew safety. One of the most unusual developments of the Soviet tank construction in the post-war period was the project of a two-cannon tank by Evgeny Morozov. The works were carried out in the late 70s and were presented to the customer along with other promising directions for the development of the layout for the promising tank. Among the proposed options were also considered:
- tower tank with two operators (490 option 1)
- reckless tank (with limited system guidance over the horizon)
- articulated (two-link) tank
- tank with rendered weapons.
The layout of the tank was unusual, the hull was divided into isolated compartments, the first - the transmission compartment, the second - the fuel compartment divided by partitions, the third - the engine compartment. The crew consisting of two operators was placed in the stern of the hull in an isolated stationary capsule.

Äâóõïóøå÷íûé òàíê (490 «Òîïîëü»)

 

[Andrei_bt]

Object 488. Tank with troop compartment

BMPs with anti-bullet and anti-fragmentation armor protection cannot accompany tanks on the battlefield, due to the vulnerability of virtually all types of anti-tank weapons. The armament of modern infantry fighting vehicles also does not provide the solution to all the fire tasks on the battlefield. Consequently, modern infantry fighting vehicles cannot solve combat missions on their own, without the support of tanks. In this regard, it became necessary to create a new type of infantry fighting vehicles. The creation of infantry fighting vehicles on the basis of tank units (transmissions, running gears, etc.) makes it possible to combine in one vehicle the qualities of a tank (weapons, protection, mobility) and infantry fighting vehicles (troops). This allows for close interaction of tanks and motorized infantry with the most complete use of their strengths in the course of combat operations. The performance characteristics of a new infantry fighting vehicle with tank weapons and protection allow it to act on the battlefield independently without the use of tanks.
http://btvt.info/2futureprojects/object488.htm

 

[Andrei_bt]

Some more details about Soviet future tank project of 1980-s.
Main projects of Next generation MBT from 1980 to 1985 –
Object 490 3 men variant, Object 490A “Rebel” and the same designation but completely different 152 mm armed Object 490A “Boxer” (same index, different “name” and completely different design).



http://btvt.info/7english/490A_eng.htm

 

[Avimimus]

Future tank of 80s with maximum protection, firepower and crew safety. One of the most unusual developments of the Soviet tank construction in the post-war period was the project of a two-cannon tank by Evgeny Morozov. The works were carried out in the late 70s and were presented to the customer along with other promising directions for the development of the layout for the promising tank. Among the proposed options were also considered:
- tower tank with two operators (490 option 1)
- reckless tank (with limited system guidance over the horizon)
- articulated (two-link) tank
- tank with rendered weapons.
The layout of the tank was unusual, the hull was divided into isolated compartments, the first - the transmission compartment, the second - the fuel compartment divided by partitions, the third - the engine compartment. The crew consisting of two operators was placed in the stern of the hull in an isolated stationary capsule.

Äâóõïóøå÷íûé òàíê (490 «Òîïîëü»)

Thank you. I read the article (with the help of machine translation). I was wondering if there is any information on the expected performance (e.g. number of rounds per gun).

I also wonder about the asymmetric forces from firing just one gun? My impression from the article is that the guns are for redundancy, rather than primarily for firing in salvoes (as is the case with the twin-gun German casement projects).

 

[Andrei_bt]

English version of FST 2000 article.
The new version of Object “490” was under development in parallel with the Object “477”. This led to the creation of the most unusual projects in the history of post-war tank design, characterized by unmatched levels of protection, mobility and firepower

Future Soviet Tank of the 21st century. Object “ 490”