KV-4 design proposals

Posted on by

Source: http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/298430-hall-of-kv-4-design-proposals/
Author: Giganaut_EU

Silentstalker:

This was originally posted on the link above (I just corrected some typos). I repost this with Giganaut’s permission, because this is simpke too good to pass up. As some of you know, there were actually numerous KV-4 proposals – some relatively simple, while others were completely outlandish. Let’s have a look at them.

Giganaut_EU:

Note: I modelled these in Google sketchup, with existing plans provided in Battlefield.ru with their collected data given – somewhat proved to be a bit insufficient because it was missing a few things. This thread could be the official if not centralized discussion thread for all KV-4s.

This particular KV series is an interesting one in the Kliment Voroshilov heavy tank program. Its design purpose was to withstand any German gun and to destroy any opposing heavy German tanks. It was to remain unbuilt and its design proposals would be used if the time comes when it is needed.

Designers began to work on the KV-4 design in April 1941. Since the Kirov Plant did not have experience in this area, the chief of the SKB-2, J.Kotin, assigned almost all the engineers of his design bureau to the design of this tank and made the task a competition.

All the designers addressed this assignment with great enthusiasm. Their task was sufficiently difficult: the mounting of two cannons and 125-130 mm armor that had never been employed before on Soviet tanks led to the necessity to strengthen the chassis and required a sharp increase in the weight of the tank. Creative thinking of the participants in the design was not limited and the designers took advantage of this. When considering the required specifications, they developed and put forth a relatively diverse spectrum of ideas. They considered the design of 80-, 90-, and even 100-ton tanks. The lightest of the designs was submitted by engineer N.Dukhov – 82.5 tons. The heaviest was by the designer G.Kruchenykh – 107 tons.

The layout decisions were also very diverse. Designers K.Buganov, G.Kruchenykh, F.Marishkin, G.Moskvin, N.Strukov, and S.Fedorenko, each working on his own design, suggested single-turret variants of the heavy tank with the mounting of the 107 mm tank cannon in the main turret, and a 45 mm tank cannon in a small turret located above the main turret, a “second floor” of sorts.

Buganov’s proposal

Specifications: (estimated size scaled to fit with KV-1’s road wheel)
Length: 7.03m
Width: 3.3m
Height: 2.77m
Ground clearance: 0.52m
Combat weight: ? tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 5

Armor:
Hull: 130/80/130
Turret: 135/130/130
Sec. Turret: 50/50/50

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
2x 7.62mm DT
1x 45mm 20-K

kv_4_buganov_1_by_giganaut-d65fgui

kv_4_buganov_by_giganaut-d65fh1d

Fedorenko’s proposal

A single-turret variant with the 107mm gun in the main turret and a 45mm in a miniturret above it.

Specifications: (estimated size scaled to fit with KV-1’s road wheel)
Length: 8.8m
Width: 3.675m
Height: 3.635m
Ground clearance: 0.45m
Combat weight: ? tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 6

Armor:
Hull: 130/130/130
Turret: 140/140/140
Sec. Turret: 120/120/120

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
3x 7.62mm DT
1x unknown gun (receiver in plan loos too big for a DT.)
1x 45mm 20-K (AA purposes)

kv_4_fedorenko_by_giganaut-d65sdvf

kv_4_fedorenko_plan_by_giganaut-d65sesa

Pereverzev’s proposal

Designers A. Yermolaev, L. Sychev, L. Pereverzev, Bykov, and two workers whose signatures are missing from the working drawings, suggested a two-turret variant of the tank with the mounting of a 107 mm cannon in a large central turret, as on the SMK tank, and a 45 mm gun in a separate turret located in the bow portion of the hull.

Specifications: (scaled to KV-1 road wheel)
Length: 9.4m
Width: 3.57m
Height: 3.45m
Ground clearance: 0.5m
Combat weight: ? tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 9

Armor:
Hull: 140/125/130
Turret: 140 /130/130

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
1x 45mm 20-k
4x 7.62mm DT

kv_4_pereverzerv_compiled_by_giganaut-d66x3rb

kv_4_pereverzev_by_giganaut-d66x3k0

Proposal 11

KV-4 that was done by an unknown author. so I decided to name it the KV-4-11, since it is named after it’s plan’s filename. Also, the tank is scaled to KV-1′s roadwheel, since it had the secondary turret on the front hull, so I’ll place this in the same category as Perevezev’s proposal.

Specifications: tank scaled to KV-1s roadwheel

Length: 8.317m
Width: 3.572m
Height: 3.121m
Ground clearance: 0.561m
Combat weight: ? tons
Engine: Diesel M-40 outputting 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 6

Armor:
Hull: 135/130/135
Turret: 135/135/135

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
1x 45mm 20-k
3x 7.62mm DT

kv_4_11_by_giganaut-d6871a1

kv_4_11_elevations_by_giganaut-d6871nm

Kreslavsky’s proposal

Designers N. Dukhov (model existing ingame) and M. Kreslavskiy in their designs recommended pairing the guns in one turret, and engineer N. Shashmurin proposed mounting the 107 mm cannon in a casemate fashion in the hull on a mount with a 30-degree angle of firing to the horizon. This designer dropped the 45 mm gun and in its place mounted a 76 mm gun in a production KV-1 tank turret on an enormous hull with significantly lengthened chassis components.

Specifications: (direct from Battlefield.ru’s data sheet)

Length: 9m
Width: 4m
Height: 3.225m
Ground clearance: 0.6m
Combat weight: 92.6 tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 6

Armor:
Hull: 130/125/130
Turret: 135/140/135

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
3x 7.62mm DT
1x 45mm 20-K (Coaxial)

kv_4_kraslavsky_comparison_by_giganaut-d65c57v

kv_4_kreslavsky_by_giganaut-d65c5bo

Shashmurin’s proposal

Specifications: (estimated size scaled to fit with KV-1’s road wheel)

Length: 8.35m
Width: 3.53m
Height: 3.121m
Ground clearance: 0.5m
Combat weight: ? tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 6-7

Armor:
Hull: 135/100/125
Turret: 60/60/60

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6 (casemate/ hull mounted)
2x 7.62mm DT
1x 76mm L-11 (turret)

kv_4_shashmurin_by_giganaut-d65d0i4

shashmurin_kv_4_by_giganaut-d65d0oi

Mikhailov’s proposal

Two designers, P. Mikhailov and G. Turchaninov, in their designs recommended the mounting of the 45 mm Gun casemate fashion, having cut an embrasure for it in the frontal armor plate of the tank’s hull, and they placed the 107 mm Cannon in a standard tank turret on the vehicle’s hull.

Specifications: (direct from Battlefield.ru’s data sheet)

Length: 9.m
Width: 3.6m
Height: 3.m
Ground clearance: 0.5m
Combat weight: 86 tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 5
Max fuel load: 2800 litres (located next to the engine position and half way across the turret ring)

Armor:
Hull: 180/150/130
Turret: 140 (conical)

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
2x 7.62mm DT
1x 45mm 20-K

kv_4_mikhailov_compiled_3d_by_giganaut-d6699b3

kv_4_mikhailov_compiled_by_giganaut-d6699d7

Tseits’ proposal

Only engineer N. Tseits rejected the mounting of a second gun. He suggested the mounting of the 107 mm cannon in a standard tank turret, laying it out in circular form so that the entire basic load of 120 fixed rounds were stowed along the walls of the cylindrical turret. This design stood out for its originality and in the future created fertile soil for employment of an auto-loading mechanism.

Specifications: (direct from Battlefield.ru’s data sheet)

Length: 8.35m
Width: 4.03m
Height: 3.62m
Ground clearance: 0.55m
Combat weight: 90 tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 7

Armor:
Hull: 130/125/125
Turret: 140 (cylindrical)

Armaments:
1x 107mm Zis-6
2x 7.62mm DT

kv_4_tseits_1_by_giganaut-d6588ji

kv_4_tseits_2_by_giganaut-d6588m0

kv_4_tseits_kv_1_comparison_by_giganaut-d658bj3


Tarapantin, Kuzmin & Tarotko’s proposal

In a collective design submitted by three authors (P. Tarapatin, K. Kuzmin, and V. Tarotko), the 107mm cannon was positioned in the turret with a limited angle of traverse (130°). The designers V. Pavlov and D. Grigorev reached the same decision, but for the 45mm gun and not the 107mm cannon. Outside of the design parameters, some designers recommendedmounting a flamethrower on the tank.

Specifications: (direct from Battlefield.ru’s data sheet)

Length: 9.26m
Width: 3.79m
Height: 3.175m
Ground clearance: 0.5m
Combat weight: 88 tons
Engine: Diesel M-40, 1200hp
Radio: 10-R series
Crew: 6

Armor:
Hull: 130/125/125
Turret: 130 (cylindrical casemate)

Armament:
1x 107mm Zis-6
3x 7.62mm DT
1x 45mm 20-K

kv_4_reworked_compiled_by_giganaut-d57jbkh

There were also some original suggestions for the armor of the KV-4 tank. For example, K. Buganov and F. Marishkin selected a means of armor plating the tank turret in a form so that its ring was deep in the hull, which excluded jamming when being hit by projectiles and shrapnels the way it happened during the tests of the KV-1 tank at Kubinka.

G. Kruchenykh and N. Strukov recommended a tank turret that was rhomboid-shaped with rounded angles and engineer S. Fedorenko designed a turret with a non-traditional curved form with the mounting of two DT machine-guns and a 45 mm Gun on an original turret mounting, which permitted a rifleman to conduct fire without exposing himself from the hatch.

In their designs these workers frequently resorted to other methods that had not been encountered earlier in tank design. For example, engineer P. Mikhailov developed an original tracked loop for their vehicle.

Five designers placed the engine and transmission in the front portion of the hull, which was an unusual decision for heavy tanks. Engineer N. Tseits suggested the placement of the engine in the back and the transmission in the front. L. Pereverzev recommended the pair of drive sprockets in the stern of the vehicle be removed from the hull and fastened to mounts, which gave some economy in the armor protection of the vehicle as a whole but at the same time made this most important component of the vehicle particularly vulnerable.
An analysis of the preserved drawings (about 20 variants of the KV-4 tank design have reached us) attests that many of the designs contain valuable from the design point of view decisions and fully deserve patenting at the inventor level. Work on the KV-4 project was conducted in the troubling prewar days and therefore authorship of the most interesting suggestions remains unconfirmed.

79 thoughts on “KV-4 design proposals”

  1. Well atleast the designers had a very good sence of humor xD

    I never understood how on earth they could design such ugly tanks, but okay its USSR ofcourse

    nice job on the articel tough!

    • Tanks are not designed to be pretty-looking. They are designed to destroy and kill in the most efficient ways.

      • Actually, tanks ARE designed to be pretty looking.

        If tanks look ugly, who would want to join the cavalry? Yeah, nobody.
        If soldiers are going to die, they want to die in a cool looking tank, not in a heap of junk.

          • Actually, people who have a lot to do with tanks, lets say people who play a certain tank-based game, develop an instinct for what kind of armor layout works better, therefore considering these tanks “prettier” as they have proven more effective. Also streamlined tanks tend to have better armor due to angling, and we consider streamlined stuff prettier anyway. If a tank performs badly, we automatically regard it as crappy looking, especially if its a driving box made out of vertical box, which we usually consider bad-looking anyway because it isnt aerodynamic and streamlined.

            And if we see new tanks we can say at first glance whether the tank appeals to our standards of a good tank or not. If there is a tank with lot of vertical faces on the front it of course performs bad in terms of armor protection, unlike a design made out of mainly sloped armor.

            • Aerodynamics and streamlining aren’t exactly a critical consideration for heavy ground vehicles with top speeds well under 100km/h you know… armour sloping *is* for AFVs, but isn’t quite the same thing.

              Also if you don’t mind the weight penalty involved vertical armour plating works just peachy if thick enough; ask the KVs, the Tiger or the later-Mark Churchills about that and I’d remind you that the best British “cruiser” design of the war (and actually a decent platform unlike most of the branch), the Cromwell/Comet, has been accurately described as “resembling a child’s sketch of a tank” in profile.

    • Because looking good is most important in a war ….

      Tbh I like quite some of the designs, and a Tank isnt meant to look good but to be effective in combat situations.

      • Last one looks realy cool I like shape of it’s turret (i’m a fan of German tanks I have about 50% of all battles on tanks of this nation and I have also bat chat which takes me many battles)

      • To be fair, historically a lot of warrior-aristocrat types went to great pains to be at their best when they hit the battlefield; psychological value (and signaling unmistakably that you were worth capturing for ransom instead of killing outright) aside, well, it was just one of those things. “Leave a good-looking corpse” I suppose, and some rounded it off by having hairdos that would make their severed heads easy to carry around – none of that undighnified “make hole in the ears for a rope” thing for me, thanks.
        Yeah, fantasy authors and the like tend to kind of fail at capturing the peculiar mindsets of ancient warrior-class types.

        Ofc in modern warfare practicality kind of trumps pageantry (far longer engagement ranges having a lot to do with that) and since the principles were mainly worked out with conscript armies anyway…

    • What are you talking about, the USSR has tons of beautiful looking tanks. France and the u.s. on the other hand…

  2. Kreslavsky’s model reminds me a bit of a Panther.
    And Mikhailov’s proposal is just Maus’ lost brother.

  3. While some look.. ridiculous, other look incredibly, and i would LOVE to have them in game.. Especially the MAUS-like design

  5. they shurely look interessting, though our ingame kv-4 seems better than any other proposal. is the ingames kv-4 armor buffed?
    looks like wg could build a whole army of kv-4-variant-premiums…

    • How come you don’t have a clue, but write something nonetheless?

      Of some 20 designed projects Giganaut just posted 8. There is no need to make a new 3D model for the ingame KV-4 since, well, it’s in game!
      The KV-4 we have in the game is a project by Strukov.

      • Bullshit. Strukov’s design is only vaguely similar to ingame KV-4 with second turret. Turret shape is different, number of road wheels is different…

        What we have is a fantasy creation made from several design features taken from different proposals. Armor scheme is probably even more fantastic.

        • The only major difference is the number of roadwheels. Which is explained very simply – wheels from KV-1 were taken to fit the lenght of the proposed vehicle.

          Regarding the turret – well, what would you suggest? Each proposal had only one turret. In the game most vehicles have two turrets, for gameplay reasons. Obviously some other turret had to be taken for stock.

  12. Michailow is the best proposal – cool looking with best armor, definitely want to see it in the game. Rest of course should appear too but looking at armor spec it should be strong tier 7 and Michailows tank looks like weak tier 9 (putting aside a gun of course).

  15. Tseits’ proposal is just a KV-5 with round turret.
    Tarapantin, Kuzmin & Tarotko’s proposal would make a great tier 7 TD.
    Mikhailov’s proposal proposal is like a Tortoise with turret. Would be a great tier 9 tank.
    Buganov’s proposal is… meh.
    Fedorenko’s proposal is massive… would make a fine tier 7 tank, next to KV-3.
    Pereverzev’s proposal. If you put a worse gun than the ZiS-6, you might get a fine tier 5 premium with good armor but bad gun and high HP, like the TOG II.
    Proposal 11 is close to what we got in game… tier 8 for sure.
    Kreslavsky’s proposal – tier 8 again.
    Shashmurin’s proposal could be tier 7 TD if it only uses the hull gun or tier 5 heavy if it uses the small turret.

    You could populate an entire tier 7-8-9 tree with these tanks. Awesome.

    • Mostly agree, except for Pereverzev – you cannot remove ZiS-6, since it was the requirement for the entire project. And above that, tier 5 with 140mm armour? Not really.

      I’d love a whole branch composed of KV-4, but I think for tier 9 and especially 10 there is a large gun problem. Unless thy put BL-10 in one of them (possibly non turreted one), which is the only potent gun not too far from the time KV-4 was designed.
      Or possibly the C-70 from IS-7 which is basically just a prewar naval gun, although quite the same gun (B-13) on SU-100Y hav only 196 pen.

      • Well maybe they can put machine gun auto loader in that huge turreted KV-4 *scrolls up to check* – Tseit’s

      • B-13 and S-70 were very much NOT the same gun. S-70 ammo was based on necked down 152mm Canet ammo, and had almost 50% more propellant than B-13 ammo.

        S-70 was ballistically similar to post war 130mm M46 field gun and 130mm SM-4 coastal gu, even if those used somewhat different ammo. B-13 had lower ballistics.

  19. “this is simpke too good”
    SS, you need to correct that.

    About the designs, imho a lot of them look like crazy German designs at the end of the war. Totally don’t make sense and are a waste of resources.

  24. When they add Alternate Hulls, maybe they’ll model all the extra Turrets for the KV-4 and pair them to their Hulls.

    Then we can spend all day just playing KV-4 variants :-)

    • +1
      I hope they are going to add more than only two researchable turrets and hulls per tank.

  26. Gimme all dem KV4s. Seriously some of these could be hilarious tier 10 candidates if given some buffs to be as ridiculous as their german superheavy cousins. I want to see a super KV4 with fantasy 130mm naval gun exchange blow for blow with a Maus, just to satisfy my need for ridiculous tank warfare.

  27. Thy can make a fully line of multi-turret soviets tanks. TG and T-35 figure like premiums in all “full tech trees”, but it can be a nice tier 4 and 5, then KV-4 proposal end to tier 10 :P. It would be a really extrange line, i say that the version with 180MM armor can be a tier 10 with a lot of buffs. Its something like a maus prototypes line

  30. So this is what happens when military puts up ridiculous requirements to start with and tell engineers to go creative to boot.
    Some of the proposals try to remain in the realm of sanity though

  31. okay that people 80 years ago didn’t figure out the simple theory of sloping, but to see these designs nowadays makes me sad in the eye….how terrible it is.

  33. I have to say, the uncaring-hipster NPC that you have in some of the pictures for scale is…really pissing me off, and I can’t figure out why >: \

    Anyway, very neat article. I had no idea there were so many KV-4 potential variants.

    • yup. thats the old original thread in the US forum, the EU forum is where i just place it there because i was joining in the design your MBT competition

  38. I really dig that conical turret! I don’t really have any intentions of ever playing through the Russian tank lines but ever since I saw these Kv4 protos on Deviantart.com a while back I have wished for them to be in the game. Just about every model shows the essence of Russian tank ideology :)

    • Errrrr… these things would actually represent the virtual *opposite* thereof, given that the “Soviet school” of tank design was already by this date heading down the road of “maximum payload in minimum tank”…

  39. Curious thing I noted: the A-44, from around the same time period, has a similar low superstructure in front of the turret as many of these. Guessing the idea was to shield the turret ring from frontal fire.

  40. Oh man, the turret on Fedorenko’s proposal looks so hilariously cartoonish. I think even GamesWorkshop would be embarrassed to put that on a tank.

  42. I don’t know if I would want to drive any of those versions. However, let me say those sketchup tanks, and the layout of the diagrams look fantastic. Very nicely done!

  43. There’s probably enough KV-4 variants to make their own tech tree XD.

    But seriously, some of these could actually be placed in the game along with the KV-4 already in it, particularly the ones with hull-mounted 107 mm guns, possible in a future “Heavy Tank Destroyer” line (consisting of TDs that are closer to the German ones already in the game than traditional Soviet TDs, with heavy armor and powerful guns, but low speed and poor camo values).

  44. I would love to buy that 1st model as a t7 premium heavy. It looks like it would be on par with a semi-stock KV-3.

    • Well… looked at the armor again, safe to say that it would be t8, you can’t have 130 mm armor all the way around at t7. THINK OF THE POOR SHERMANS!