Post-war light tanks
small tanks and wedges
www.arrse.co.uk
s3.zetaboards.com
Post-war light tanks
The heyday of light tanks occurred in the interwar period, when in most armies of the world they (along with even more miniature small tanks and wedges) formed the basis of the armament of tank forces. But the deep specialization of light armored vehicles that emerged during the Second World War led to the emergence of new types of military equipment.
By the end of the 20th century, vehicles that can traditionally be classified as “light tanks” were represented by armored reconnaissance vehicles (for example, FV101 Scorpion and M551 Sheridan), tank destroyers (Ikv 91, Steyr SK 105 Kürassier), anti-tank self-propelled guns (Sprut-SD "). However, in some countries “real” light tanks remain in service.
This photo review presents tracked combat vehicles of the second half of the 20th - early 21st centuries, which are either officially classified as light tanks, or have a combination of characteristics that allows them to be classified as this conventional type in our time. Such signs are the presence of at least bulletproof armor, significantly less weight than that of main battle tanks, relatively powerful main weapons (medium-caliber guns designed for direct fire) and the absence of a compartment for transporting infantry.
If the background of photographs interferes with reading reference information For photographs, you can hover your mouse over the text - this will darken the signature background.
PT-76, USSR. In service since 1951. The photo shows a PT-76 of the Egyptian army, captured by the Israelis, in the Yad Le-Shiryon Museum. Floating tank. Weight 14.5 tons, engine 240 hp. Armament: 76.2 mm cannon, 7.62 mm machine gun. Crew 3 people. Over 3,000 built
AMX-13, France. In production since 1952. The photo shows an AMX-13-105 of the Peruvian Armed Forces (with additional 12.7 mm machine guns and an ATGM installation). Weight 14.5 tons. Engine 250 hp Armament: 75 mm, 90 mm or 105 mm (from the early 70s) cannon with automatic loader, 7.62 mm machine gun. Crew 3 people. About 7,700 built
M41 Walker Bulldog, USA. In service since 1953. The photo shows a modification of the M41 DK1 of the Danish army. The weight of the base M41 is 23.5 tons. Engine 500 hp Armament: 76.2 mm cannon, 7.62 mm and 12.7 mm machine guns. Crew 4 people. Over 3,700 built
T92, USA. Two prototypes were assembled in 1955–57. It was not accepted for service. Weight 16.8 tons. Engine 340 hp Armament: 76.2 mm cannon, 12.7 mm and 2x7.62 mm machine guns. Crew 4 people
Type 62, China. In service since 1963. The photograph shows an exhibit from the memorial complex dedicated to the events on the island. Damansky in 1969. Weight 20.5 tons. Engine 430 hp Armament: 85 mm cannon, 12.7 and 7.62 mm machine guns. Crew 4 people. About 1,200 built
Type 63, China. In service since 1963. Floating tank. Weight 18.4 tons. Engine 402 hp Armament: 85 mm cannon, 7.62 mm and 12.7 mm machine guns. Over 1800 built
M551 Sheridan, USA. In service since 1969. Floating tank. Weight 15.2 tons. Engine 300 hp Armament: 152 mm cannon – ATGM launcher, 7.62 mm and 12.7 mm machine guns. Crew 4 people. About 1,700 built
Steyr SK 105 Kurassier, Austria. In service since 1971. The vehicle is based on the Austrian Saurer 4K armored personnel carrier with an improved turret from the AMX-13. Weight 17.7 tons. Engine 320 hp Armament: 105 mm cannon, 7.62 mm machine gun. Crew 3 people. About 600 vehicles built
FV101 Scorpion, UK. In service since 1973. The photograph shows a vehicle from the British contingent in Belize, 1989. Weight 8.1 tons. Engine 190 hp Armament: 76 mm cannon (or 90 mm in the Scorpion 90 version), 7.62 mm machine gun. Crew 3 people. About 1,500 built
www.arrse.co.uk
Type 64, Taiwan. In operation since 1975. “Hybrid” of the M42 Duster self-propelled gun chassis and the M18 Hellcat anti-tank self-propelled gun turret. Weight 25 tons. Engine 500 hp Armament: 76 mm cannon, 7.62 mm and 12.7 mm machine guns. Crew 4 people. More than 50 vehicles built
Infanterikanonvagn 91 (Ikv 91), Sweden. In operation since 1976. Weight 16.3 tons. Engine 330 hp Armament: 90 mm cannon, 2x7.62 mm machine guns. 212 vehicles built
Expeditionary tank, USA. The prototype was built in 1985. It was not adopted for service; The turret is used in the serial wheeled anti-tank self-propelled gun M1128 of the Stryker family. Weight 19 tons (up to 30 tons with mounted armor). Engine 660 hp The main armament is a 105-mm cannon with an automatic loader and a rate of fire of up to 6 rounds/min. Crew 2 people
Stingray, USA. In operation since 1988. It is in service with the Thai army. Weight 22.6 tons. Engine 550 l/s. Armament: 105 mm cannon, 7.62 and 12.7 mm machine guns. Crew 4 people. At least 106 vehicles built
s3.zetaboards.com
Type 63A, China. Produced since 1997, modification of the Type 63 amphibious tank with a 105 mm cannon. Weight 20 tons. Engine 581 hp Crew 4 people. At the end of the 2000s. the PLA had about 300 vehicles
CV90120-T, Sweden. The prototype was built in 1998. A variant of a combat vehicle based on the CV90 universal armored tracked chassis. Weight 28 tons. Engine 615 hp Armament: 120 mm cannon, 7.62 mm machine gun
2S25 "Sprut-SD", Russia. In operation since 2005. Airborne amphibious anti-tank self-propelled gun. Weight 18 tons. Engine 510 hp Armament: 125 mm cannon, 7.62 mm machine gun. Crew 3 people. About 36 vehicles built
The main work of the leading historian of armored vehicles! The most complete and authoritative encyclopedia Soviet tanks- from 1919 to the present day!
From light and medium to amphibious and heavy, from experienced combat vehicles built on the model of the captured Renault FT 17 during the Civil War, to the formidable T-72 and T-80, which are still in service with the Russian army - this encyclopedia provides comprehensive information about ALL types of domestic tanks, without exception, their creation, improvement and combat use in the Great Patriotic War and numerous local conflicts of the past century.
COLLECTOR'S EDITION illustrated with 1000 exclusive diagrams and photographs.
LIGHT TANKS OF THE 1940S
LIGHT TANKS OF THE 1940S
The T-26, the only infantry escort tank in service with the Red Army in the 1930s, by the end of the decade no longer fully satisfied the achieved level of tank building development. The increased power of anti-tank artillery did not leave the T-26 with its 15 mm armor any chance of surviving on the battlefield. The experience of fighting in Spain clearly demonstrated this. T-26s, which easily dealt with weakly armed German and Italian tanks and wedges, became just as easy prey for them anti-tank guns. However, all Soviet (and not only Soviet) tanks that did not have anti-ballistic armor found themselves in a similar situation at that time. In the eternal duel between armor and projectile, the latter won a temporary victory.
That is why on August 7, 1938, the Defense Committee adopted a resolution “On the Tank Weapon System,” which contained a requirement in less than a year - by July 1939 - to develop new models of tanks that would meet the conditions of a future war in terms of armament, armor and maneuverability. In accordance with these requirements, the development of new tanks began in several design bureaus.
At the Leningrad Experimental Mechanical Engineering Plant No. 185 named after S.M. Kirov by a team of designers led by S.A. Ginzburg was designing a light infantry escort tank "SP". In the summer of 1940, this tank, object 126 (or T-126SP, as it is often called in the literature), was manufactured in metal. In terms of its armor protection, it was equivalent to the T-34 medium tank - its hull was welded from 45 mm thick armor plates, with the exception of the 20 mm bottom and roof. The frontal, upper side and rear hull sheets had inclination angles of 40...57°.
The upper frontal plate had a driver's hatch. An observation device was mounted in its lid. To the left of the hatch, in a ball mount, there was a 7.62-mm DS-39 machine gun, from which the radio operator fired. Opposite his workplace there was also a surveillance device. Two more devices were mounted in the frontal zygomatic sheets.
The welded faceted turret housed a 45-mm gun mod. 1934 and a coaxial 7.62-mm DT machine gun. There was a rectangular hatch in the roof of the turret for landing the crew, and in the rear wall there was a round hatch for dismantling the gun. Holes for firing from personal weapons were cut in the lid of this hatch and in the walls of the tower, closed with pear-shaped plugs. There were four observation devices located along the perimeter of the turret roof, and a commander’s panorama was mounted in the hatch cover.
The tank was equipped with a V-3 engine - a 6-cylinder version (“half”, as they sometimes say) of the V-2 diesel engine. With a power of 250 hp. it allowed the 17-ton combat vehicle to reach speeds of up to 35 km/h. The fuel tank capacity of 340 liters provided a highway range of up to 270 km.
The chassis of the tank consisted of six non-rubber-coated twin small-diameter road wheels on board, three non-rubber-coated support rollers, a rear drive wheel, and a non-rubber-coated guide wheel. The track rollers had internal shock absorption. The caterpillar chain is a small-link lantern with an open hinge. A special feature of the car's chassis was its torsion bar suspension.
A 71-TK-Z radio station with a whip antenna was installed in the tank hull next to the gunner-radio operator. The ammunition of the cannon and machine guns consisted of 150 rounds and 4,250 rounds of ammunition (the same rifle cartridges were used in the DT and DS machine guns).
In 1940, the tank passed factory and military tests well. However, the State Commission proposed reducing the weight of the vehicle to 13 tons by reducing the thickness of the armor from 45 to 37 mm. In addition, cramped working conditions for crew members were noted. They tried to eliminate the last drawback on the second sample of the tank - the DS-39 machine gun was removed, and its embrasure was closed with an armored cover with bolts. In addition, steps have been taken to reduce track wear by replacing non-rubber-coated road wheels with rubber-coated ones.
In the fall of 1940, “object 126” was transferred to the Leningrad Machine-Building Plant No. 174 named after K.E. Voroshilov, where, on its basis, in a short period of time - a month and a half - a group of designers under the general leadership of I.S. Bushneva and L.S. Troyanov developed a new version of the light tank - “object 135” (not to be confused with the T-34-85). S.A. took an active part in the design. Ginzburg and G.V. Gudkov. According to other sources, this vehicle was developed in parallel with “object 126” and was preferred due to its better tactical and technical characteristics. In January 1941, the tank was made in metal and, after successfully passing factory and state tests under the designation T-50, in February 1941 it was adopted by the Red Army.
By design and appearance The T-50 was very similar to the 126th, but at the same time it had significant differences. It was created taking into account experience combat use tanks in Finnish war and the results of tests in the USSR of the German tank Pz.III, carried out in the summer of 1940. The T-50 hull sheets were connected by welding and were located at large angles of inclination. The maximum thickness of the front and side armor of the hull and turret was reduced from 45 to 37 mm. The rear hull plate became 25 mm, and the thickness of the roof and bottom increased to 15 mm. In the upper frontal plate, with a slight offset to the left of the longitudinal axis of the tank (almost in the center), there was a driver's hatch with a viewing device; there was no front-facing machine gun. Two more observation devices were installed in the frontal cheekbones of the hull.
The turret was welded and streamlined, reminiscent of the turret of the T-34 tank, but differed from it in the placement of three crew members. At the rear of the turret roof (not without the influence of the Pz.III) a commander's cupola was installed, the eight viewing slots of which were closed by armored flaps. The turret had a small hatch for signaling. Two rectangular hatches in the roof were intended for landing crew members in the tower. The door in the stern plate served to dismantle the gun. On the sides of the turret there were observation devices for the gunner and loader, covered with round armored covers.
The armament composition was not entirely typical for Soviet tanks. The 45-mm cannon, again not without the influence of the German Pz.III, was paired with two 7.62-mm DT machine guns. The KRSTB radio station was located in the tank turret next to the commander's position.
By reducing the thickness of the armor plates, introducing the principle of differentiated armor, which made it possible to reduce the weight of the vehicle to 13.8 tons, and installing a V-4 engine with a power of 300 hp. (a forced version of the V-3 diesel engine) managed to achieve a significant increase in speed: from 35 km/h for the “126 object” to 52 for the T-50. Two fuel tanks with a total capacity of 350 liters provided a highway range of up to 344 km. The chassis used road wheels with internal shock absorption and an individual torsion bar suspension.
Serial production of the T-50 was to be carried out at plant No. 174, for which purpose, from January 1, 1941, production of the T-26 there was discontinued. However, the restructuring of production for the technologically more complex T-50 proceeded very slowly, and in the first half of 1941 the plant produced only 116 OT-133 flamethrower tanks. Serious difficulties also arose with the development of production of the V-4 diesel engine at Kharkov plant No. 75. But the T-50 tank was supposed to replace the T-26 in the troops, and according to the original plan for the rearmament of the armored forces of the Red Army, it was supposed to be the most massive (the first order for the T-34, as is known, was only 600 vehicles). In 1940–1941, this plan, however, was adjusted as a result of the decision to form mechanized corps. But for them, no less than 14 thousand T-50s were needed. The fact that the T-50 was considered as a full-fledged component of the country’s tank fleet can be judged by the joint resolution of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks and the Council of People’s Commissars of the USSR “On increasing the production of KV, T-34 and T-50 tanks, artillery tractors and tank diesel engines by III and IV quarters of 1941”, adopted after a meeting of the Politburo of the Central Committee on June 25.
At the cost of incredible efforts, in 1941 they managed to produce 50 tanks. In August, plant No. 174 was evacuated - mostly to the city of Chkalov (Orenburg), where it resumed production of tanks in December, and, in addition, to Nizhny Tagil and Barnaul. An attempt to launch production of the T-50 at plant No. 37 in Moscow was unsuccessful. The main limiting factor in the production of the T-50 was the engines. Priority in planned tasks was given to the V-2 diesel engine. In particular, at plant No. 75, which had by that time been evacuated to Chelyabinsk, the removed V-4 engines were dismantled into components for the V-2. Therefore, on October 13, 1941, the State Defense Committee decided to build two factories in Barnaul, one for the production of T-50 tanks and the second for the production of V-4 diesel engines for these tanks. However, on February 6, 1942, in accordance with the decision of the State Defense Committee, production of the T-50 and its engines was stopped altogether. Plant No. 174 in Chkalov, having produced 15 tanks in 1942 (apparently, they were assembled from the stock they brought with them), switched to production of the T-34.
There is very little information about the combat fate of T-50 tanks. Nevertheless, it is known that in August 1941, the 1st Tank Division, stationed in the Leningrad Military District and taking part in the battles in the Kingisepp area, had 10 tanks of this type. In the fall of 1941, several T-50s were part of the troops of the 7th Army defending in the Petrozavodsk direction. During these battles, one such vehicle was captured by the Finns and was used until the end of 1954.
As for the Red Army, one T-50 tank, for example, was included in the 5th Guards Tank Brigade back in 1943.
There is no reliable information about how the “fifty” performed in combat. However, there is no doubt that of the three modern Soviet tanks put into service on the eve of World War II, the T-50 turned out to be the most structurally proven and balanced, optimal in terms of the totality of combat and operational qualities. In terms of armament, armor and mobility, it was superior or not inferior to the German medium tank Pz.III, being significantly smaller in size and combat weight. The T-50 turret, which had the same clear diameter as the T-34, housed three crew members, which ensured the division of their functional responsibilities. True, in this case, the disadvantages became a continuation of the advantages. Even with a 45-mm cannon placed in the turret, it was cramped for three tankers. Therefore, the commander's cupola had to be moved to the right side, and the commander had to sit half-turned to the axis of the tank. Perhaps it would have made sense to limit ourselves to a two-man turret with a large number of observation devices, like the “object 126”. For a light tank this was acceptable. All foreign analogues, the main light tanks of World War II - Stuart, Valentine and even the Chaffee created in 1944 - had double turrets.
1 - mask; 2 - DT machine gun; 3 - optical sight TMFP; 4 - ball installation; 5 - DT machine gun magazine; 6 - turret stop handle; 7 - mask lifting mechanism; 8 - sight forehead; 9 - TNSh gun; 10 - sleeve outlet tube; 11 - cartridge belt guide; 12 - rotating mechanism of the tower; 13 - lever to turn off the rotary mechanism; 14 - charging handle.
The T-50’s armament was quite sufficient for 1941 and even 1942: the 45-mm 20K cannon at a distance of 500 m could successfully fight all types of Wehrmacht tanks. It was well known to the tank crews, and in addition, the warehouses had a large number of shells for this weapon.
For 1943, the 20K was already rather weak, but just at that time, OKB No. 172 created, tested and recommended for adoption the 45-mm VT-42 tank gun with a barrel length of 68.6 calibers and an initial armor-piercing projectile speed of 950 m /With. The VT-42 gun differed from the 20K in its very dense layout, which made it possible to assemble it even into a single turret of the T-70 tank. There would be no problems at all with installation in the T-50 turret. The shell of this gun at a distance of 500 m penetrated the frontal armor of any German tank, except Pz.IV Ausf.H and J, "Panther" and "Tiger".
It left a reserve for modernization, including in terms of enhancing armor protection, and the high specific power of the tank - 21.4 hp/t! For comparison: T-34 - 18.65, Stuart - 19.6, Valentine - 10, Pz.III - 15 hp/t. The 300-horsepower diesel engine could confidently drag 45 mm armor.
Summarizing all of the above, one can only regret that mass production of the T-50 was never established.
A story about the T-50 light tank would not be complete without mentioning another example of it. In 1941, as part of the technical requirements for the T-50, the Leningrad Kirov Plant developed and manufactured “object 211”. The lead designer of the tank was A.S. Ermolaev. The welded hull of the combat vehicle had a narrowed nose with a driver's hatch. The welded tower had a streamlined elongated shape. The armament and power plant were identical to the T-50 tank from factory No. 174. The Kirov version was somewhat lighter than the Voroshilov version, but did not have significant advantages over it, and the shape of its hull was less successful. After the start of the war, work on “object 211” at the Kirov plant was stopped, and the only prototype produced took part in the defense of Leningrad.
It would not be superfluous to add that according to the same TTT, the combat vehicle project was also completed by a group of graduates of the VAMM named after. Stalin, who worked under the general leadership of N.A. Astrov. This project was rejected at the stage of the mock-up commission.
As mentioned above, in May 1941, Moscow plant No. 37 received the task of mastering the production of the new generation light tank T-50. The received task shocked the plant management - its modest production capabilities clearly did not correspond to the new facility. Suffice it to say that the T-50 had a complex planetary 8-speed gearbox, and gear cutting production has always been a weak point at this enterprise. At the same time, the workers of Plant No. 37 came to the conclusion that it was possible to create a new light, no longer amphibious, but quite combat-ready tank for direct infantry escort in the given conditions. In this case, it was assumed that the used engine-transmission unit and chassis of the T-40 would be used. The hull should have had a more rational shape, reduced dimensions and enhanced armor.
1 - air cleaner; 2 - main gear; 3 - gearbox; 4 - engine; 5 - final drives; 6 - starting shaft; 7 - drive wheel; 8 - support roller; 9 - support roller; 10 - guide wheel.
Having convinced yourself of the feasibility and advantages of such a solution, chief designer ON THE. Astrov, together with the senior military representative of the plant, Lieutenant Colonel V.P. The Okunevs wrote a letter to I.V. Stalin, in which they substantiated the impossibility of producing the T-50 tank and, on the other hand, the reality of quickly mastering the production of a new tank, and in mass quantities, with the widespread use of automobile units and advanced technologies for their manufacture. The letter was duly dropped in the evening at Mailbox at the Nikolsky Gate of the Kremlin, Stalin read it at night, and in the morning Deputy Chairman of the Council of People's Commissars of the USSR V.A. arrived at the plant. Malyshev, who was assigned to work on the new machine. He examined the model of the tank with interest, approved it, discussed technical and production problems with the designers and advised replacing the DShK machine gun with a much more powerful 20-mm ShVAK automatic cannon, well-used in aviation.
Already on the evening of July 17, 1941, Resolution No. 179 of the State Defense Committee “On the production of T-60 light tanks at Plant No. 37 of Narkomsredmash” was signed, which stated:
"1). Allow the People's Commissariat for Medium Engineering (plant No. 37) to produce the T-60 land tank based on the T-40 amphibious tank in the same dimensions and with the same weapons as the T-40 tank. In connection with the thickening of the armor, allow the tank hull to be made of homogeneous armor that is equally strong in terms of bullet resistance.
2). In this regard, to stop production of T-40 amphibious tanks and Komsomolets tractors at plant No. 37 from August.”
It should be noted that this resolution is not talking about the classic “sixty”, but about the T-60 (030) tank, externally identical to the T-40, with the exception of the rear hull plate and better known under the unofficial designation T-30.
It was planned to involve five factories of the People's Commissariat of Medium and Heavy Engineering in the production of the T-60: No. 37 (Moscow), GAZ (tank production - plant No. 176), Kolomna Locomotive Building Plant (KPZ) named after. Kuibysheva, No. 264 (Krasnoarmeysky shipyard in the city of Sarepta near Stalingrad, which previously produced river armored boats) and the Kharkov Tractor Plant (KhTZ), which, unfortunately, quickly disappeared due to the urgent evacuation. At the same time, the Moscow automobile plant "KIM", the "Red Proletary" plant and the Mytishchi machine-building plant No. 592 were attracted to produce tank units. The power units were to be supplied by GAZ. Armored hulls with turrets for plant No. 37 - Podolsk and Izhora plants, for GAZ - Vyksa and Murom. ShVAK aircraft cannons came from the Kovrov plant No. 2 and from the Tula arms plant No. 535. From the end of 1942, the Mednogorsk plant No. 314 and the Kuibyshev plant No. 525 also began to supply them, but they made little - only 363 units.
The production of openwork steel tracks for all factories was entrusted to the Stalingrad Tractor Plant named after. Dzerzhinsky (STZ), which had a powerful molding and foundry shop.
For the T-60 tank (already in version 060), designer A.V. Bogachev created a fundamentally new, more durable all-welded hull with a significantly smaller armored volume than the T-40 and a low silhouette - only 1360 mm high, with large angles of inclination of the front and rear sheets, made of rolled homogeneous armor. The smaller dimensions of the hull made it possible to increase the thickness of all frontal sheets to 15–20 mm, and then to 20–35 mm, side sheets - up to 15 mm (later - up to 25 mm), aft - up to 13 mm (then in some places up to 25 mm). The driver was located in the middle in a forward-protruding wheelhouse with a frontal shield and an upper entrance hatch that folded down in a non-combat situation. The driver's viewing device - a quick-change mirror glass block "triplex" with a thickness of 36 mm was located in the frontal shield (initially and on the sides of the wheelhouse) behind a narrow gap covered by an armored flap. An emergency hatch was located in the bottom, 6-10 mm thick. For external access to the engine and transmission units there was a removable front armor cover in an inclined frontal sheet, an upper side over-engine sheet with adjustable air flow and a rear aft one with exit blinds, which simultaneously covered two 320-liter gas tanks located in a compartment isolated by an armored partition. Two round hatches were used to refuel them. The turret sheet, 10 (13) mm thick, was also removable.
New tower only 375 mm high, designed by Yu.P. Yudovich, more technologically advanced than on the T-40, had a cone-shaped octagonal shape. It was welded from flat armor plates 25 mm thick, located at large angles of inclination, which significantly increased its resistance to fire. The thickness of the front zygomatic armor plates and weapon mantlet subsequently reached 35 mm. The roof, 10–13 mm thick, had a large commander's hatch with a round lid. In the side faces of the tower to the right and left of the shooter there were narrow slits equipped with two triplex-type viewing devices. The turret was shifted to the left side by 285 mm from the hull axis. The guidance mechanisms of the rifle installation - horizontal gear and vertical screw (+27...-7°), developed for the T-40, did not require changes. It should be noted that some armored hull factories, previously associated with boiler making, retained the production of round conical turrets for the T-60, similar to the T-40 turret.
On the second prototype of the T-60 (060), instead of the DShK, they installed a rapid-firing 20-mm ShVAK-tank cannon with a barrel length of 82.4 calibers, created in record time at OKB-15 together with OKB-16 based on the wing and turret versions of the aircraft gun SHVAK-20. Refinement of the gun, including based on the results of front-line use, continued in parallel with the development of its production. Therefore, it was officially accepted into service only on December 1, and on January 1, 1942, it received the designation TNSh-1 (Tank Nudelman-Shpitalny) or TNSh-20, as it was called later. For ease of aiming, the gun was placed in the turret with a significant offset from its axis to the right, which forced adjustments to be made to the readings of the TMFP-1 telescopic sight. The table range of a direct shot reached 2500 m, the sighting range was 7000 m, the rate of fire was up to 750 rounds/min, the mass of a second salvo of armor-piercing shells was 1.208 kg. With certain skills it was possible to conduct single shooting. The gun had a belt feed with a capacity of 754 shells (13 boxes). The spent cartridges were ejected from the turret outward through a gas exhaust tube under the barrel armor, and the belt links were ejected along a guide on the bottom of the tank, while they scattered and were practically unable to jam the control systems. The ammunition consisted of fragmentation-tracer and fragmentation-incendiary shells and armor-piercing incendiary shells with a tungsten carbide core and a high initial speed V o =815 m/s, which made it possible to effectively hit light and medium armored targets, as well as machine gun points, anti-tank guns and manpower of the enemy. The subsequent introduction of a sub-caliber armor-piercing incendiary projectile increased armor penetration to 35 mm. As a result, the T-60 could fight at short distances with early German Pz.III and Pz.IV medium tanks when firing at the side, and at distances up to 1000 m - with armored personnel carriers and light self-propelled guns.
To the left of the gun, in the same mount paired with it, there was a DT machine gun with 1008 rounds of ammunition (16 discs, later 15). It was possible to easily remove the machine gun and use it outside the tank with the bipod and shoulder rest attached. In combat practice, this situation often occurred. In principle, in case of urgent need, it was possible to remove the cannon, whose mass (68 kg) differed little from the common Maxim machine gun, but rigidly securing it for firing outside the turret was difficult and therefore was not practiced.
In terms of armament and mobility, the T-60 tank generally corresponded to the German Pz.II, which was widely used at the beginning of the war, and the Luchs reconnaissance tank that appeared later, somewhat superior to them in armor protection, range and maneuverability on soft soils. Its armor was no longer only bulletproof, it provided protection at a distance of up to 500 m from shells from light infantry 75-mm guns, 7.92-mm and 14.5-mm anti-tank rifles, 20-mm tank and anti-aircraft guns, as well as 37-mm mm anti-tank guns, common in 1941–1942 in the Wehrmacht.
Meanwhile, on September 15, 1941, Moscow plant No. 37 produced the first production T-60, but due to the evacuation that soon followed, production was stopped on October 26. In total, 245 T-60 tanks were made in Moscow. Instead of Tashkent, which was initially planned, the plant was evacuated to Sverdlovsk: on the territory of the Metalist factories, the car repair shop named after. Vojvodina and a branch of Uralmash - for a total of three industrial sites, where the equipment arrived from October 28 to November 6. Together with part of the KIM plant evacuated there, a new tank plant No. 37 was formed (chief designer G.S. Surenyan, then N.A. Popov). Assembled on it since December 15, 1941, mainly from parts brought from Moscow, the first 20 T-30 and T-60 tanks passed through the streets of Sverdlovsk on January 1, 1942. During the first quarter of 1942, 512 vehicles were already produced. In total, until September 1942, 1144 T-60s were produced in the Urals, after which Plant No. 37, briefly producing the T-70 tank, stopped independent tank building, switching to the production of components and assemblies for the T-34 tank, as well as ammunition.
The workshops of the Kolomna Machine-Building Plant named after. Kuibysheva. In October 1941, some of them, including the workshops that produced T-60 tank hulls for plant No. 37, were evacuated to the city of Kirov to the site of the Kirov Machine-Building Plant NKPS named after. 1st of May. A new plant No. 38 was created here, and already in January 1942 the first T-60 tanks came out of its gates. Since February, the plant began their planned production, while simultaneously supplying other enterprises with cast track tracks, which were previously made only by STZ. During the 1st quarter, 241 cars were produced, until June - 535.
Another enterprise involved in the production of the T-60, plant No. 264, received technical documentation for the tank in a timely manner, but subsequently drove the vehicle independently, without resorting to the help of the parent plant, but also without trying to modernize it. On September 16, 1941, it was joined by workers from the evacuated KhTZ who were familiar with tank building and who, while still in Kharkov, began mastering the production of the T-60. They arrived at plant No. 264 with a backlog of tools, patterns, stamps and tank blanks already prepared, so the first armored hull was welded by September 29th. The transmission and chassis units were to be supplied by the STZ tank production (plant No. 76). Extremely loaded with the production of the T-34 and V-2 diesel engines, moreover, at the end of 1941, it turned out to be their only manufacturer, STZ, and plant No. 264, which supplied it with armored hulls and welded turrets for the “thirty-four”, could not give the same attention to the light T-60 attention. Nevertheless, in December we managed to assemble the first 52 cars. In January 1942, 102 tanks were already delivered, and in the first quarter - 249. In total, by June 1942, 830 T-60s were produced here. A significant part of them participated in Battle of Stalingrad, especially in its initial phase.
The main and largest plant producing the T-60 was GAZ, where N.A. arrived for permanent work on October 16, 1941. Astrov with a small group of Moscow colleagues for design support of production. He was soon appointed deputy chief designer of the tank building plant, and at the beginning of 1942 he received the Stalin Prize for the creation of the T-40 and T-60.
In a short time, the plant completed the production of non-standard technological equipment and began production on October 26 mass production T-60 tanks. Armored hulls for them began to be supplied in increasing quantities by the Vyksa Crushing and Grinding Equipment Plant (DRO) No. 177, and later by the Murom Locomotive Repair Plant named after. Dzerzhinsky No. 176 with its powerful boiler production, technologically similar to a tank hull, and, finally, the oldest armored plant in Kulebaki No. 178. Then they were joined by part of the Podolsk plant No. 180 evacuated to Saratov to the territory of the local locomotive repair plant. And yet armored hulls there was a chronic shortage, which hindered the expansion of mass production of the T-60. Therefore, soon their welding was additionally organized at GAZ.
In September, only three T-60 tanks were manufactured in Gorky! But already in October - 215, in November - 471! By the end of 1941, 1,323 vehicles were produced here.
In 1942, despite the creation and adoption of the more combat-ready light tank T-70, parallel production of the T-60 continued at GAZ - until April (in total for 1942 - 1639 vehicles), at Sverdlovsk plant No. 37 - until August , at plant No. 38 - until July. In 1942, all factories produced 4,164 tanks. Plant No. 37 delivered the last 55 vehicles at the beginning of 1943 (until February). In total, since 1941, 5839 T-60s have been produced, the army has accepted 5796 vehicles.
The first mass use of the T-60 dates back to the Battle of Moscow. They were available in almost all tank brigades and individual tank battalions defending the capital. On November 7, 1941, 48 T-60 tanks from the 33rd Tank Brigade took part in the parade on Red Square. These were Moscow-made tanks; Gorky's T-60s first entered battle near Moscow only on December 13th.
T-60s began arriving on the Leningrad Front in the spring of 1942, when 60 vehicles with crews were allocated to form the 61st Tank Brigade. The story of their delivery to the besieged city is not without interest. They decided to transport the tanks on barges with coal. It was good from a camouflage point of view. The barges delivered fuel to Leningrad, became familiar to the enemy, and not every time they were actively hunted. In addition, coal as ballast provided river vessels with the necessary stability.
Combat vehicles were loaded from the pier above the Volkhov hydroelectric power station. Log decks were laid on top of the coal, tanks were placed on them, and the barges set sail from the shore. Enemy aircraft were never able to detect the movement of our military unit.
The baptism of fire of the 61st Tank Brigade occurred on January 12, 1943 - the first day of the operation to break the siege of Leningrad. Moreover, the brigade, like the 86th and 118th tank battalions, which were also armed with light tanks, operated in the first echelon of the 67th Army and crossed the Neva across the ice. Units equipped with medium and heavy tanks were brought into battle only on the second day of the offensive, after a bridgehead 2–3 km deep had been captured and sappers had strengthened the ice.
The T-60 crew, which included the company commander of the 61st Tank Brigade, Lieutenant D.I., showed particular courage, heroism and resourcefulness during the offensive. Osatyuk, and the driver-mechanic was Sergeant Major I.M. Makarenkov. This is how this episode is described in the collection “Tankmen in the Battle of Leningrad”: “Having rushed forward at dawn on January 18 near Workers’ Village No. 5, they noticed three tanks. The Volkhovites wanted to jump out of the car and run towards them, but... they saw that it was Hitler’s tanks going on a counterattack. What to do? It is pointless to start a duel with the enemy on your little one, which has a 20-mm cannon... The decision was made instantly! The tank commander gave a command to the driver: “Retreat to that grove, on the edge of which our guns took up firing positions!”
The tank, maneuvering, making unexpected and sharp turns, eluded the fire of Nazi tanks. And Osatyuk fired at them, trying to blind and stun the enemy. The duel lasted several minutes. There were moments when it seemed that the armored monsters were about to overtake, fall upon and crush. When there were about 200 meters left to the grove, Osatyuk’s car turned sharply to the left. The lead Nazi tank also turned around, but came under fire from our guns and burst into flames. Then the second tank was hit, and the third left the battlefield.
“Now, Vanyusha, go ahead!” the commander ordered the driver. Having caught up with their company, they saw an interesting picture - the tankers drove the enemy infantry into a huge pit. The Nazis stubbornly resisted and threw grenades at our tanks. It was clear that there was no time to delay: the Nazis would have time to dig in. Osatyuk orders Makarenkov to make a trail to the cliff and lay a track. Then the tank, picking up speed, rushed towards the pit, flew through the air and crashed into the Nazis.
"Well done! - the lieutenant shouted. “Now act!” The car rushed at high speed along the bottom of the pit, destroying the Nazis with fire and tracks. After making several circles, the tank slowed down, reached the middle of the pit and stopped. It was all over. Your people have arrived...”
This combat episode perfectly illustrates the old tank “truth” - the indestructibility of a tank is proportional to the square of its speed. However, measures were taken to strengthen the armor protection of the tank. At the suggestion of the Izhora armored research institute-48, which was transferred from the People's Commissariat of the shipbuilding industry to tank building at the beginning of the war, several options for installing additional armored screens up to 10 mm thick on the front part of the hull and on the turret of the T-60 tank were developed and implemented on many vehicles.
As for the 61st Tank Brigade, its tanks were the first to link up with the troops of the Volkhov Front. For excellent fighting it was transformed into the 30th Guards. Lieutenant D.I. Osatyuk and driver-mechanic foreman I.M. Makarenkov was awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.
T-60s also fought on the Southern Front, especially actively in the spring of 1942 in the Crimea, and participated in the Kharkov operation and in the defense of Stalingrad. The Germans called the T-60 “indestructible locusts” and were forced to reckon with them.
T-60s made up a significant part of the combat vehicles of the 1st Tank Corps (commander - Major General M.E. Katukov), together with other formations of the Bryansk Front, repelled German offensive in the Voronezh direction in the summer of 1942. During the fighting, Katukov's corps, which formed a single battle group with the 16th Tank Corps, found itself in a difficult situation. This is how M.E. himself describes this situation and the actions of the T-60 tanks. Katukov:
“The Nazis, conducting continuous attacks, sought to find the most vulnerable spots in the battle formations of the groups. Finally they managed to do it. In a sector where we had few fire weapons, the fascist infantry broke through the front line and penetrated our defenses. The situation has become threatening. Having made a breach, the Nazis continued to deepen the breakthrough in order to separate the group’s troops and reach their rear.
It should also be taken into account that at that moment the enemy was pressing along the entire front line, which means that all the available forces of our group - tanks and infantry - were fully involved. In my reserve there were two light T-60 tanks. But these “tiny” combat vehicles could only be called tanks conditionally. They were armed with 20-mm ShVAK cannons.
The reader probably has an idea of what a twelve-gauge hunting shotgun is. So the guns in service with the T-60 have the same caliber. The T-60s were not suitable for fighting against German tanks. But the “babies” acted excellently against enemy manpower and more than once inflicted enormous damage on the fascist infantry with their automatic fire. This happened both near Mtsensk and near Moscow.
And now, in the fateful hour of the German breakthrough, the “baby” tanks came to the rescue. When the fascist infantry penetrated our defenses for half a kilometer, if not more, I threw my last reserve into battle.
Fortunately, at that time the rye rose almost as tall as a man, and this helped the “little ones,” hiding in the rye, to go to the rear of the Nazis who had infiltrated our battle formations. T-60s attacked the German infantry with heavy fire from a short distance. Several minutes passed, and the chains of the advancing fascists were thrown back.”
By the start of the counter-offensive of the Stalingrad, Don and Southwestern fronts on November 19, 1942, quite a few combat vehicles of this type remained in the tank brigades. Insufficiently armored and poorly armed, the T-60 had very low stability on the battlefield, becoming easy prey for enemy medium and heavy tanks. To be fair, it must be admitted that the tankers were not particularly fond of these lightly armored and lightly armed vehicles with fire-hazardous gasoline engines, calling them BM-2 - “mass grave for two.”
The last major operation in which T-60s were used was the lifting of the siege of Leningrad in January 1944. Thus, among the 88 tanks of the 1st Tank Brigade of the Leningrad Front there were 21 T-60 tanks, in the 220th Tank Brigade there were 18, and in the 124th Tank Regiment of the Volkhov Front, at the start of the operation on January 16, 1944, only 10 combat vehicles: two T-34s, two T-70s, five T-60s and even one T-40!
Subsequently, the use of the T-60 continued as vehicles for escorting troops on the march, security and communications, for reconnaissance in force, combating landings, as artillery tractors for towing ZIS-2 anti-tank guns and divisional ZIS-Z, as command and training tanks. In this form, the T-60s were used in the active army until the end Patriotic War, and as art tractors - also in the war with Japan.
On the basis of the T-60 tank, the BM-8-24 rocket launcher was produced (1941), and prototypes of a tank with a 37-mm ZIS-19 gun, a 37-mm anti-aircraft self-propelled gun (1942), and a 37-mm anti-aircraft self-propelled gun were developed and manufactured. 76.2 mm self-propelled artillery mount, T-60-3 anti-aircraft tank with two twin 12.7 mm DShK machine guns (1942) and OSU-76 self-propelled artillery mount (1944).
At the end of October 1941, the team at the Gorky Automobile Plant design bureau began developing a new light tank, the T-70, armed with a 45-mm cannon. The main goal of this work is to increase the firepower of a light tank. Its design had to make maximum use of the components and assemblies of the T-60 tank with the least amount of alterations so that the new vehicle could be put into mass production as soon as possible. The design of the tank was carried out using a technique common in the automotive industry, which was unusual for tank designers. General views of the tank were drawn life-size on special aluminum plates measuring 7x3 m, painted with special white enamel and lined into squares measuring 200x200 mm. In order to reduce the area of the drawing and increase its accuracy, a plan and full and partial transverse sections were superimposed on the main projection - a longitudinal section. The drawings were carried out with the greatest possible completeness, including all elements, components and parts of the internal and external equipment of the machine. These drawings served as the basis for control during the assembly of the prototype and even the entire first series of machines. The main advantage of such drawings was their high accuracy.
The tank was equipped with a power plant, which included twin carburetor engines. At the first stage of production of the machine, with the exception of increasing the number of road wheels from four to five per side and strengthening the torsion shafts, tracks, road wheels, individual elements suspension and transmission units remained the same as on the T-60 tank. During mass production, their design was strengthened.
After the production of a prototype of the T-70 tank in December 1941, its sea trials and test firing with the main weapon were carried out. The vehicle had a higher specific power compared to the T-60 tank (15.2 versus 11 hp/t), more powerful weapon(45 mm gun instead of 20 mm) and enhanced armor protection (45 mm armor instead of 20–35 mm).
In January 1942, the T-70 tank was adopted by the Red Army. The date for the start of serial production of the vehicle was determined - March 1942. In April 1942, according to the drawings of the Gorky Automobile Plant, serial production of T-70 tanks was organized at plant No. 38 in Kirov.
The general layout of the vehicle was fundamentally the same as that of the T-60 tank. The driver was located in the bow of the hull on the left side. The tank commander was located in the rotating turret, offset to the left side from the longitudinal axis of the hull. In the middle part of the hull along the starboard side, two engines paired in series were installed on a common frame, forming a single power unit. This design solution was implemented for the first time in domestic tank building. The transmission and drive wheels were located in the front.
The turret was equipped with a 45-mm tank gun mod. 1938 and a coaxial 7.62-mm DT machine gun, which was located to the left of the gun. For the convenience of the tank commander, the gun was shifted to the right of the longitudinal axis of the turret. The length of the gun barrel was 46 calibers, the height of the firing line was 1540 mm. The machine gun was mounted in a ball mount and, if necessary, could be removed and used outside the tank. The vertical aiming angles of the twin installation ranged from -6 to +20°. When firing, the following sights were used: telescopic TMFP (a TOP sight was installed on some tanks) and a mechanical one as a backup. The direct fire range was 3600 m, maximum - 4800 m. Rate of fire - 12 rounds/min. The gear rotation mechanism of the turret was installed to the left of the commander, and the screw lifting mechanism of the twin installation was installed to the right. The trigger mechanism of the gun was connected by a cable to the right foot pedal, and the machine gun - to the left. The tank's ammunition included 90 rounds of armor-piercing and fragmentation shells for the cannon (of which 20 rounds were in the magazine) and 945 rounds of ammunition for the DT machine gun (15 discs). On the first production vehicles, the gun's ammunition load consisted of 70 rounds. The initial speed of an armor-piercing projectile weighing 1.42 kg was 760 m/s, and a fragmentation projectile weighing 2.13 kg was 335 m/s. After firing an armor-piercing projectile, the spent cartridge case was ejected automatically. When firing a fragmentation projectile, due to the shorter recoil length of the gun, opening the bolt and removing the cartridge case was done manually. Created in the spring of 1942, a new armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile for a 45-mm cannon penetrated an armor plate 50 mm thick at a range of 500 m.
The welded faceted turret, made from 35 mm thick armor plates, was mounted on a ball bearing in the middle part of the hull and had the shape of a truncated pyramid. The welded joints of the turret were reinforced with armored angles. The frontal part of the turret had a cast swinging mantlet with embrasures for mounting a cannon, machine gun and sight. An entrance hatch for the tank commander was made in the roof of the turret. A periscope viewing mirror device was installed in the armored hatch cover, providing the commander with all-round visibility.
The power unit of the GAZ-203 (70-6000) consisted of two four-stroke 6-cylinder carburetor engines GAZ-202 (GAZ 70-6004 - front and GAZ 70-6005 - rear) with a total power of 140 hp. The engine crankshafts were connected by a coupling with elastic bushings. The flywheel housing of the front engine was connected by a rod to the starboard side to prevent lateral vibrations of the power unit.
The battery ignition system, lubrication system and fuel (except tanks) system for each engine were independent. Two fuel tanks with a total capacity of 440 liters were located on the left side of the aft compartment of the hull in a compartment isolated by armored partitions.
The mechanical transmission consisted of a double-disc dry friction main clutch (steel over ferodo); a four-speed automobile-type gearbox, providing four forward gears and one reverse gear; main gear with bevel gear; two side clutches with band brakes and two simple single-row final drives. The main clutch and gearbox were assembled from parts borrowed from the ZIS-5 truck.
The tracked propulsion unit included: two drive wheels with removable gear rims of lantern engagement with the tracks, ten single-slope support wheels with external shock absorption and six all-metal support rollers, two guide wheels with crank mechanisms for tensioning the tracks and two small-link caterpillars with OMSh. The design of the idler wheel and support roller was unified. The width of the cast track track was 260 mm.
Command tanks were equipped with a 9R or 12RT radio station located in the turret, and an internal intercom TPU-2F. Linear tanks were equipped with a light-signal device for internal communication between the commander and the driver and an internal intercom TPU-2.
During production, the tank's weight increased from 9.2 to 9.8 tons, and its highway range decreased from 360 to 320 km.
Since September 1942, Plant No. 38 and GAZ switched to producing T-70M tanks with an improved chassis. The gun's ammunition load was reduced to 70 rounds. As a result of the work on modernizing the chassis, the width and pitch of the tracks, the width of the road wheels, as well as the diameter of the suspension torsion bars and the gear rims of the drive wheels were increased. By increasing the track pitch, their number in one track was reduced from 91 to 80 pieces. In addition, the support rollers, stopping brakes and final drives were strengthened. The tank's weight increased to 10 tons, and its highway range decreased to 250 km.
A total of 8,226 tanks of the T-70 and T-70M modifications were produced.
On the basis of the T-70 and T-70M tanks, their components and assemblies, self-propelled artillery mounts SU-76, SU-76M and anti-aircraft guns were produced self-propelled gun ZSU-37. In addition, prototypes of the T-90 light tank and SU-76D, SU-57B, SU-85B, SU-15 and SU-16 self-propelled artillery mounts were developed.
Since the combat properties of the T-70M tank at the end of 1942 ceased to meet the requirements for a tank for direct infantry support due to insufficient armor protection, the design bureau of the Gorky Automobile Plant under the leadership of N.A. Astrov developed a new light tank T-80 with enhanced armor protection and a crew of three people. A prototype of the vehicle passed field tests in December 1942.
At the suggestion of the commander of the Kalinin Front, Lieutenant General I. S. Konev, changes were introduced into the design of the tank that made it possible to fire a cannon at the upper floors of buildings when fighting in urban conditions. The vertical aiming angles of the twin installation ranged from -8 to +65°. Due to the increased combat weight, the tank needed a more powerful engine, the development of which was delayed. Therefore, due to the lack of organization of production of forced engines, as well as the insufficient power of its weapons and armor protection, after the production of 75 T-80 tanks at the end of 1943, their production was discontinued, and instead of them the Gorky Automobile Plant and Plant No. 40 in Mytishchi from the second In the first half of 1943, the production of light self-propelled artillery units SU-76M, created on the basis of components and assemblies of the T-70 tank, began.
The T-70 and its improved version T-70M were in service with tank brigades and regiments of the so-called mixed organization, together with the T-34, and were later used in self-propelled artillery divisions, regiments and SU-76 brigades as command vehicles. They often equipped tank units in motorcycle units. T-70s took part in hostilities until the end of the Great Patriotic War. In terms of armor protection, armament and maneuverability, this tank was superior to the Wehrmacht light tanks of both German and Czechoslovak production. Its main drawback was the overload of the commander, who also served as a gunner and loader.
Of course, this light machine had very disabilities to combat enemy tanks, especially heavy “tigers” and “panthers”. Nevertheless, in the hands of skilled tankers, the T-70 was a formidable weapon. For example, on July 6, 1943, in the battles for the village of Pokrovka in the Oboyan direction, the crew of a T-70 tank from the 49th Guards Tank Brigade, commanded by Lieutenant B.V. Pavlovich, managed to knock out three medium German tanks and one Panther!
A completely exceptional case was recorded on August 21, 1943 in the 178th Tank Brigade. When repelling an enemy counterattack, the commander of the T-70 tank, Lieutenant A.L. Dmitrienko noticed a retreating German heavy tank (possibly a medium one, which is not so important). Having caught up with the enemy, the lieutenant ordered his driver to move next to him (apparently in the “dead zone”). It was possible to shoot point-blank, but noticing that the hatch in the turret of a German tank was open (German tank crews almost always went into battle with open turret hatches. - Note auto.), Dmitrienko got out of the T-70, jumped onto the armor of the enemy vehicle and threw a grenade into the hatch. The crew of the German tank was destroyed, and the tank itself was towed to our location and soon, after minor repairs, it was used in battle.
T-80 tanks were supplied to the same units that were armed with the T-70, and were used mainly in 1944–1945. In 1945, the 5th Guards Tank Brigade, for example, which fought in Hungary, had one T-80 tank.
The term “tank” in Ozhegov’s dictionary is explained as “an armored self-propelled combat vehicle with powerful weapons on a tracked track.” But such a definition is not a dogma; there is no unified tank standard in the world. Each manufacturing country creates and has created tanks taking into account its own needs, the characteristics of the proposed war, the manner of upcoming battles and its own production capabilities. The USSR was no exception in this regard.
History of the development of tanks of the USSR and Russia by model
History of invention
The primacy of the use of tanks belongs to the British; their use forced military leaders of all countries to reconsider the concept of warfare. The use by the French of their Renault FT17 light tank determined the classic use of tanks for solving tactical problems, and the tank itself became the embodiment of the canons of tank building.
Although the laurels of first use did not go to the Russians, the invention of the tank itself, in its classical sense, belongs to our compatriots. In 1915 V.D. Mendeleev (the son of a famous scientist) sent a project for an armored self-propelled vehicle on two tracks with artillery weapons to the technical department of the Russian Army. But for unknown reasons further design work things didn't work out.
The very idea of putting steam engine The concept of a caterpillar propulsion system was not new; the first to implement it was in 1878 by Russian designer Fedor Blinov. The invention was called: “A car with endless flights for transporting goods.” In this “car”, a track turning device was used for the first time. The invention of a caterpillar propulsion device, by the way, also belongs to the Russian staff captain D. Zagryazhsky. For which a corresponding patent was issued in 1937.
The world's first tracked combat vehicle is also Russian. In May 1915, tests of the armored vehicle D.I. took place near Riga. Porokhovshchikov called “All-terrain vehicle”. It had an armored body, one wide track and a machine gun in a rotating turret. The tests were considered very successful, but due to the approaching Germans, further tests had to be postponed, and after some time they were completely forgotten.
In the same year, 1915, tests were carried out on a machine designed by the head of the experimental laboratory of the military department, Captain Lebedenko. The 40-ton unit was increased to gigantic size an artillery carriage driven by two Maybach engines from a downed airship. The front wheels had a diameter of 9 meters. According to the creators, a vehicle of this design should easily overcome ditches and trenches, but during testing it got stuck immediately after it started moving. Where it stood for many years until it was cut up for scrap metal.
Russia ended the First World War without its tanks. During the Civil War, tanks from other countries were used. During the battles, some of the tanks passed into the hands of the Red Army, on which the workers’ and peasants’ fighters entered the battle. In 1918, in a battle with French-Greek troops near the village of Berezovskaya, several Reno-FT tanks were captured. They were sent to Moscow to participate in the parade. Lenin’s fiery speech about the need to build our own tanks laid the foundation for Soviet tank building. We decided to release, or rather completely copy, 15 Reno-FT tanks called Tank M (small). On August 31, 1920, the first copy left the workshops of the Krasnoye Sormovo plant in Nizhny Tagil. This day is considered to be the birthday of Soviet tank building.
The young state understood that tanks were very important for waging war, especially since the enemies approaching the borders were already armed with this type of military equipment. The M tank was not put into production due to its particularly expensive production price, so another option was needed. According to the idea that existed in the Red Army at that time, the tank was supposed to support the infantry during an attack, that is, the speed of the tank should not be much higher than the infantry, the weight should allow it to break through the defense line, and the weapons should successfully suppress firing points. Choosing between our own developments and proposals to copy ready-made samples, we chose the option that allowed us to organize the production of tanks in the shortest possible time - copying.
In 1925, the tank was launched into mass production, its prototype was the Fiat-3000. Although not entirely successful, the MS-1 became the tank that laid the foundation for Soviet tank building. At his production site, production itself and the coherence of the work of different departments and factories were developed.
Until the early 30s, several of their own models T-19, T-20, T-24 were developed, but due to the lack of special advantages over the T-18, and due to their high cost of production, they did not go into series.
Tanks of the 30-40s - a disease of imitation
Participation in the conflict on the Chinese Federal Railway showed the inadequacy of the first generation tanks for the dynamic development of the battle; the tanks practically did not show themselves in any way; the main work was done by the cavalry. A faster and more reliable car was needed.
To select the next production model, we went the beaten path and purchased samples abroad. The English Vickers Mk - 6 tons was mass-produced in our country as the T-26, and the Carden-Loyd Mk VI wedge was produced as the T-27.
The T-27, which at first was so tempting to produce due to its low cost, was not produced for long. In 1933, wedge heels were adopted for the army
amphibious tank T-37A, with weapons in a rotating turret, and in 1936 - T-38. In 1940, they created a similar amphibious T-40; the USSR did not produce more amphibious tanks until the 50s.
Another sample was purchased in the USA. Based on the model of J.W. Christie, a whole series of high-speed tanks (BT) was built; their main difference was the combination of two propellers, wheeled and tracked. To move when marching, BTs used wheels; when fighting, they used caterpillars. Such a forced measure was necessary due to the poor operational capabilities of the tracks, only 1000 km.
BT tanks, developing quite high speeds on the roads, fully suited the changed military concept of the Red Army: breaking through the defense and quickly deploying a deep attack through the resulting gap. The three-turreted T-28 was developed directly for the breakthrough, the prototype of which was the English Vickers 16-ton. Another breakthrough tank was supposed to be the T-35, similar to the English five-turret heavy tank “Independent”.
During the pre-war decade, many interesting tank designs were created that did not go into production. For example, based on the T-26
self-propelled semi-closed AT-1 type (artillery tank). During the Second World War, they will again remember these cars without a cabin roof.
Tanks of the Second World War
Participation in the Spanish Civil War and in the battles at Khalkhin Gol showed how high the explosion hazard of a gasoline engine is and the inadequacy of bulletproof armor against the then nascent anti-tank artillery. The implementation of solutions to these problems allowed our designers, who had suffered from the disease of imitation, to create truly good tanks and KVs on the eve of the Second World War.
In the first days of the war, a catastrophically large number of tanks were lost; it took time to establish production of the uncompetitive T-34 and KV at the only evacuated factories, and the front desperately needed tanks. The government decided to fill this niche with cheap and quick-to-produce light tanks T-60 and T-70. Naturally, the vulnerability of such tanks is very high, but they gave time to expand the production of Victory tanks. The Germans called them “indestructible locusts.”
In battle under the railway. Art. Prokhorovka was the first time that tanks acted as “cementers” of the defense; before that they were used exclusively as attack weapons. In principle, until today, there have been no more new ideas for the use of tanks.
Speaking about WWII tanks, one cannot fail to mention tank destroyers (SU-76, SU-122, etc.) or “self-propelled guns” as they were called by the troops. Rotating relatively not big tower did not allow the use of some on tanks powerful guns and most importantly howitzers, for this they were installed on the bases of existing tanks without the use of turrets. In fact, Soviet tank destroyers during the war, except for weapons, were no different from their prototypes, unlike the same German ones.
Modern tanks
After the war, light, medium and heavy tanks continued to be produced, but by the end of the 50s, all major tank manufacturers concentrated on the production of the main tank. Thanks to new technologies in the production of armor, more powerful engines and weapons, the need to divide tanks into types disappeared by itself. The niche of light tanks was occupied by armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, so the PT-76 eventually became an armored personnel carrier.
The first post-war mass-produced tank of a new type was armed with a 100 mm gun, and its modification for use in radioactive zones. This model became the most popular among modern tanks; more than 30,000 of these vehicles were in service in over 30 countries.
After tanks with a 105 mm gun appeared among potential enemies, it was decided to upgrade the T-55 to a 115 mm gun. The world's first tank with a 155mm smoothbore gun was named.
The ancestor of the classic main tanks was. It fully combined the capabilities of heavy (125mm gun) and medium tanks (high mobility).
Soviet light tanks are well armed and quite mobile. However, the weakness of visibility and reservation makes itself felt, and there may be problems with maneuverability.