Number of tons 34 produced during the war. The most massive and the most combative. Fatal tank run

The Thirty-four remained in service for a long time after the end of the war. Soviet army and the armies of countries friendly to us, as a completely reliable and more or less meeting the requirements of a combat vehicle. Those of them that remained in service were modernized and received the designation T-34-85 model 1960. At the same time, changes were made to the design of the engine, designated B-34-M11. Two air cleaners with ejection dust extraction were installed, a heater was introduced into the engine cooling and lubrication system, and a more powerful electric generator was installed. The driver received a BVN infrared surveillance device with an infrared headlight to drive the car at night. The 9R radio station was replaced with 10-RT-26E. Two BDS smoke bombs were installed at the rear of the tank. The speed increased to 60 km/h. Other characteristics, including combat weight and engine power, remained the same.

In 1969, the T-34s were once again modernized: they received more modern night vision devices and a new R-123 radio station. This ends the history of the development of the T-34 tank in our country, but it did not end there at all.

Let's summarize some results. First of all, a short summary of the number of cars produced:

1940 - 110 (+2 prototypes),
1941 - 2996, 1942 - 12527,
1943 - 15821,
1944 - 14648,
1945 - 12551,
1946 - 2707.

This is Maksarev's data. There are others:

1942 - 12520,
1943 - 15696.

In general, an accurate calculation is very difficult, and perhaps makes no sense. Information about the number of vehicles was provided by factories, military acceptance and other authorities. Be that as it may, arithmetic calculation gives us more than 61 thousand T-34 tanks produced in our country over the course of six and a half years. This puts the T-34 in first place in the world in terms of mass production (the American Sherman tank is second, produced in the amount of 48,071 units). But these are not all thirty-fours ever built. But more on that later.

As we have already said, the T-34 was improved during its production; many changes were made to its design. However, the main things: the body, engine, transmission (except for the gearbox), and suspension have remained virtually unchanged. Other details were changed several times. So, we know that the L-11, F-32, F-34, D-5T, and ZIS-S-53 guns were installed on the tank as the main armament. Some experts count up to 7 different types of towers: welded from rolled sheets, cast or even stamped, 45 mm thick, created at ChKZ. The towers differed not only in the shape and number of hatches on the roof, the number and location of fan “mushrooms”, the presence or absence of pistol embrasures, observation devices in the sides, but, most importantly, in their shape. There are also four types of rollers: with rubber, with internal shock absorption, with solid rims, and with developed fins. There were at least three types of tracks. The additional fuel tanks also differed in shape, quantity and location. There were other differences: antennas, handrails, exhaust pipe covers, driver's hatches, etc. Apparently it’s not worth listing everything. And often at the front, one vehicle, especially after repair, had several different rollers, fortunately their standard sizes were almost the same (outer diameter 634 or 650 mm).

Experts noted the following weaknesses of the armored hull:

1. Weakening of the upper frontal armor plate, the presence of a driver's hatch and a large cutout for a machine gun ball mount.
2. The same top sheet showed a tendency to form cracks, because was made of homogeneous armor of high hardness; this was caused by fire cutting and welding of a sheet of complex configuration with a large volume of welding work.
3. A large number of welded small parts (tow hooks, bullet-reflective strips) led to local weakening of the armor plate and contributed to the biting of armor-piercing shells.

It would be interesting to present the opinion of a highly qualified specialist, namely our outstanding designer of light tanks and self-propelled guns N.A. Astrov (1906 - 1992):

“The general layout of the T-34, which basically repeated the Christie and BT, although now called classic, is by no means optimal, since the coefficient of utilization of the armor volume for such a design is not high. However, the Kharkovites who chose this particular one for the T-34 scheme, they undoubtedly did the right thing, because changing the overall layout in the conditions of an impending war could lead to unexpected, very difficult, and perhaps irreparable troubles.

A general conclusion arises: the “winning” machine does not always have the opportunity to be based on optimal (according to science) decisions.”

It is necessary to say a few words about what were organizational forms the use of our tanks in the Second World War, that is, in which units and formations the T-34s fought.

The tank divisions of the mechanized corps at the beginning of the war were very strong formations. For comparison: the German tank division of 1941 had 147 or 300 tanks (depending on the number of tank battalions in it, two or three). In the battles in June and July 1941, the mechanized corps suffered heavy losses. But the industry was not then able to quickly make up for the losses in tanks. This required changing and simplifying the structure of tank formations. On July 15, the Supreme High Command headquarters ordered the abolition of the mechanized corps, and at the end of August the NKO approved the staff of the new tank brigade, tank regiment which consisted of 93 tanks. But already in September it was necessary to transfer the brigades to a battalion basis. Its two tank battalions totaled 46 tanks. Of these, 16 are thirty-four, 10 are KB, the rest are T-60. Separate tank battalions of 29 tanks each were also formed, consisting of three tank companies, of which only one had seven T-34s. The remaining tanks of this battalion, numbering only 130 people, were T-60s.

We will not consider here other small formations of that difficult period of the war. But already in the winter of 1941-42. our industry has gained strength. The monthly production exceeded 1,500 vehicles, and therefore in March 1942 the formation of four tank corps began. The corps consisted first of two, then of three tank and one motorized rifle brigades and was supposed to have 110 tanks, including 40 thirty-fours. Already in May of the same year, tank armies of non-permanent composition began to be created, but they necessarily had two tank corps. A total of four such armies were formed then, with the 5th Tank Army being formed twice.

In September 1942, the formation of mechanized corps began. As combat experience accumulated and a sufficient amount of equipment became available, the tank armies received a more homogeneous organization. As a rule, they consisted of two tank and one mechanized corps. The tank corps consisted of three tank and one motorized rifle brigade and in 1944 numbered 207 medium tanks (all T-34) and 63 SU. Self-propelled artillery brigades were also introduced into the tank armies. Now all tank brigades were of a homogeneous composition, that is, they consisted only of T-34 tanks. Organization of a tank brigade by state in 1943 (remaining virtually unchanged until the end of the war). By the end of the war, the tank army (there were six of them), numbering more than 50 thousand people, consisted of 900 tanks and control systems. True, not all of them and did not always have a full composition.

T-34s went through the entire war from the first to the last day. They also took part in the defeat of the armed forces of militaristic Japan. They went into battle in the tundra, and in the forests of Karelia and Belarus, along the steppes of Ukraine and in the foothills of the Caucasus, that is, along the entire length of the many thousand-kilometer Soviet-German front. And they fought not only as part of the Red Army. They fought in the ranks of the Polish People's Army. From July 1943 to June 1945, the Polish Armed Forces received 578 tanks, of which 446 were T-34s.

At the final stage of the war, a considerable number of our tanks were also transferred to the armies of Romania, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Bulgaria, which fought shoulder to shoulder with the Red Army.

Note that a number of captured T-34 tanks were also in the service of the Wehrmacht.

Typically, captured T-34s were left in the units that captured them. For example, in the “Panzergrenadier” SS division “Reich” shortly before the Battle of Kursk there were 25 Pz tanks. Kpfw. T34 747(r). It was not possible to establish how many of them went on the attack on the positions of the Soviet troops.

In total, as of May 31, 1943, the Germans had no more than a hundred captured tanks, including 59 T-34s (it should be noted that unit commanders, to put it mildly, were “in no hurry” to report on the captured vehicles they had in service). Of the latter, only 19 units were combat-ready. And as of December 30, their total number was reduced by half. Mostly these were the same "thirty-fours"; of these, 29 were in the 100th Jaeger Division on the Eastern Front.

The Germans also had self-propelled guns SU-122 and SU-85, designated StuG SU122(r) and JgdPz SU85(r), respectively. Finland also had T-34 tanks in World War II. Nine captured T-34-76 and nine T-34-85 tanks were in the Finnish army as of 12/31/44. They took part in battles both with Soviet troops and acted against the Germans after the conclusion of a peace treaty with the Soviet Union.

Device T-34-85

"The T-34-85 medium tank is a tracked combat vehicle with a rotating turret that provides all-round fire from a cannon and a coaxial machine gun" ("Manual on the equipment and operation of the T-34 tank").

The T-34 tank is designed in accordance with the so-called classical layout, that is fighting compartment with a turret in front, a motor-transmission with drive wheels at the rear. This arrangement was first used on the French Renault tank in 1917, but perhaps it was most clearly embodied in the BT and T-34 series tanks. The latter, to a certain extent, inherited from the BT the general layout, chassis and suspension parts.

The main parts of the tank are: hull and turret, weapons, power plant, power train (transmission), chassis, electrical equipment and communications. The tank hull is welded from rolled armor plates. Only the upper stern plate was bolted to the corners of the side and lower stern armor plates and, with the bolts removed, could be folded back on two hinges, thereby providing access to the power plant. The roof over the power plant is also removable. In the upper frontal hull plate, installed at an angle of 60" to the vertical, there is a driver's hatch on the left and a machine gun ball mount on the right. The upper side hull sheets are installed at an angle of 41". The lower side sheets are vertical. Each has 4 holes for the passage of the balancer axes of the track rollers, one hole for the bracket for the balancer axes of the front track roller and 4 cutouts for the trunnion of the balancers of the second to fifth rollers.

The bottom of the body consists of two or four (depending on factory differences) sheets, butt welded with overlays. On the front right in the bottom in front of the machine gunner's seat there is an emergency exit hatch through which the crew can leave the vehicle in an emergency. There are also hatches and hatches cut into the bottom for draining fuel from the onboard tanks, draining oil from the engine and gearbox, etc.

Inside the tank body has 4 compartments. In front is the control compartment, which houses the driver and machine gunner, levers and pedals of control drives, and instrumentation. Behind the control compartment is the fighting compartment with a turret, which houses the remaining crew members - the commander, gunner and loader. A removable steel partition separates the fighting compartment from the power unit compartment (PS), in the middle of which the engine is mounted on a pedestal. On the sides of the engine there are water radiators, two oil tanks and four batteries. There is a hatch cut out in the roof above the control unit with an armored cover for access to the engine, and on its sides there are elongated air inlets covered with armored shutters.

In the stern behind the bulkhead there is a power transmission compartment, which houses the main clutch, gearbox, final clutches with brakes and final drives, as well as an electric starter, two fuel tanks and two air cleaners. In the roof above the power transmission compartment there is a rectangular air vent, closed with a metal mesh, under which there are adjustable armored blinds. The upper stern plate is equipped with a round hatch with an armored cover, hinged, usually bolted to the armor plate flange. The same sheet contains two armored caps covering the exhaust pipes, as well as two brackets for attaching smoke bombs.

The main armament of the tank was initially a 76-mm semi-automatic L-11 cannon of the 1939 model with a vertical wedge breech. In 1941, it was replaced by guns of the same caliber F-32 and F-34 model 1940. Later, the T-34-85 received an 85-mm gun, first the D-5T model, and then the ZIS-S-53. Thanks to the rotation of the turret, the cannon and coaxial machine gun had a circular fire. In the vertical plane, the elevation angle of the cannon and machine gun is 22". With a descent angle of 5", the unhittable (dead) space on the ground for the cannon and coaxial machine gun is 23 m. The height of the gun's line of fire is 202 cm. The frontal machine gun had a horizontal firing angle of 12" to the left and to the right, descent angle 6" (dead space 13 m), elevation angle 16". An experienced crew, when firing from a standstill, is able to fire 7-8 aimed shots from a cannon per minute. Using the TSh-16 telescopic sight it was possible to fire straight aiming at a distance of up to 3800 m, and with the help of a side level and a goniometer circle, indirect aiming (for example, from closed positions) at a distance of 13600 m. The range of a direct shot at a target height of 2 m with an armor-piercing projectile is 900 m. The rotation of the turret is carried out by a turning mechanism with manual and electric drive. It is located to the left of the gun on the wall of the turret. The maximum rotation speed of the turret from the electric motor is 25-30 g/sec. When operated manually, the turret rotates by 0.9" per turn of the flywheel. Vertical aiming is carried out manually using a sector lifting mechanism, which is also located to the left of the gun. The cannon can be fired using a mechanical or electric trigger.

The gun's ammunition consists of 55-60 unitary shots, depending on the production series of the vehicles. For 60 shots, there were usually 39 with a high-explosive fragmentation grenade, 15 with armor-piercing tracer and 6 with sub-caliber shells. The ammunition is placed as follows: the main stowage of 16 (in some vehicles - 12) shots is located in the aft niche of the turret and on the racks. On the right side of the turret there are 4 shots in clamps, and 5 on the walls of the fighting compartment, standing up. The remaining shots are stored in six boxes located on the bottom of the fighting compartment. The machine guns had 31 magazines of 63 rounds each. In addition to the main ammunition, tankers often took ammunition in boxes. The tankers' armament was supplemented by pistols, PPSh and 20 F-1 grenades.

There are 3 MK-4 mirror periscopic observation devices installed on the roof of the turret: at the commander (on the non-retractable part of the roof of the commander's cupola), gunner and loader. This device, developed by the Polish captain R. Gundlyach, at the beginning of the war was adopted under the mentioned designation in English army. It allows observation both forward and backward without changing the position of the observer's head, but only by moving the prism. The device is mounted and rotated in a cage protected by an armored cap. It can also swing around a horizontal axis, which allows you to increase the vertical viewing angle. The commander's cupola was cast and had a rotating roof on ball bearings with a hinged hatch. There are 5 horizontal viewing slots cut into the walls of the turret, protected by glass blocks. The tower itself is also cast, hexagonal in plan with inclined side walls. In its front wall there is an embrasure cut out for installing a cannon, covered with swinging armor.

There are seven holes in the turret roof: on the right is a round hatch for landing the loader, two ventilation holes (on some vehicles - one) covered with armored caps, a cutout for the antenna socket, a hatch for the commander's cupola and two hatches for the heads of the gun commander's and loader's periscopes.

A power transmission (PT) is a set of units designed to transmit torque from the engine crankshaft to the drive wheels to change the tank's speed and traction forces over a larger range than the engine allows. The main clutch (MF) smoothly transfers the load to the engine when the tank starts from a standstill, with sudden changes in the number of revolutions of the engine crankshaft and the speed of the tank. It also disconnects the engine from the gearbox when changing gears. GF is a multi-disk (11 driving and driven disks each) engaging dry friction clutch of steel on steel. The GF is turned on or off by the control drive, for which the driver needs to apply a force of up to 25 kg on the levers.

The GF is connected to the gearbox by a gear coupling. It is designed to change the traction force on the drive wheels and change the speed of movement, as well as to move in reverse at a constant number of revolutions and a constant direction of rotation of the engine crankshaft and, finally, to disconnect the engine from the joint venture when starting it and idling. The gearbox is mechanical, three-chord, five-speed, has five forward gears and one reverse gear. Gears are switched by a control drive consisting of a rocker link, longitudinal rods and vertical rollers with levers. In order for the tank to turn, it is necessary to brake the track towards which the turn is being made. To disconnect the driving wheels of the tracks from the main shaft of the gearbox, dry friction side clutches (BF) are used (also steel on steel), having from 17 to 21 driving and from 18 to 22 driven disks, depending on the thickness. BFs are installed at the ends of the gearbox main shaft. Switching off is carried out by a drive from the control compartment, for which the driver needs to apply a force of up to 20 kg to the handle of the corresponding lever. Floating band brakes are installed on the driven drums of the BF. They are also driven by drives from the control compartment, for which there are left and right control levers on the sides of the driver's seat. Foot drives are also connected to the brakes for simultaneous tightening of both brake bands without turning off the brake fan. Before this, however, the GF is turned off or the gearbox is switched to the neutral position. And finally, between the final clutches and the drive wheels there are final drives, consisting of a pair of spur gears. Gearboxes increase the traction force on the drive wheels, allowing you to reduce the speed of rotation of the drive wheel and thereby increase the torque on it. In fact, the final drive is a single-stage reduction gearbox.

The chassis of the tank includes the tracked propulsion system and suspension. It is this propulsion unit that provides the tank with high cross-country ability. It consists of two caterpillar chains, two drive wheels, two idler wheels and 10 road wheels. The caterpillar chain is small-linked. consists of 72 tracks, half of which have guide ridges, the track pitch is 172, and the width is 500 mm. The tracks are connected with fingers through eyelets. One such caterpillar weighs 1070 kg. Double-disc drive wheels (cast or with stamped disks) are installed on the driven shafts of the final drives and are used to rewind the caterpillar. Between the disks on the axles there are 6 rollers, which drag the ridges of the tracks, and, consequently, the entire caterpillar. Cast front idler wheels serve not only to guide the track, but also to tension it. Tension is carried out by moving the guide wheel on the crank. The fact is that with use, the total length of the caterpillar increases. The guide wheel serves to ensure its constant tension. In case of significant wear of the caterpillar, it is allowed to reduce the number of tracks in it by two.

The suspension of the T-34 tank is independent with cylindrical coil springs, and the suspension of the front roller - a double spring - is located vertically inside the bow of the hull and is protected by shields. The suspensions of the remaining rollers are located obliquely inside the tank hull in special shafts. The track rollers are mounted on bearings on axles pressed into the balancers. Double roller with rubber tire. Between the disks of the rollers are the ridges of the tracks. During the production of the T-34, several types of road wheels with external rubber were used. Since the spring of 1942, in order to save scarce rubber, rollers with internal shock absorption were used (however, this did not last long). The rubber shock absorber was placed on bearings on the balancer axles. The savings, however, were “false” - the internal shock absorbers very quickly failed.

The tank's electrical equipment included sources and consumers of electricity. The latter include: an electric starter, an electric turret rotation motor, fans, an electric trigger for a cannon and a coaxial machine gun, electric motors for a heater (installed after the war) and an oil pump, lighting and alarm devices, a sight heater, a radio station, a tank intercom, etc. The sources of electricity are: a DC generator mounted to the right of the engine, and four batteries installed in pairs on both sides of the engine. Total voltage The batteries are 24 V, the generator provides the same voltage. Its power is 1000 W.

The 9RS radio station is designed for two-way radio communication between tanks or other objects. The station is a telephone and telegraph station, its range depends on the time of day and time of year. It is greatest when using a telephone on a four-meter whip antenna during the winter day: 15 km while moving and up to 20 km when parked. At night, especially in summer, the level of interference increases and the communication range drops to 7 and 9 km, respectively. When working with telegraph, the range increases by 1.5-2 times. When using a shortened antenna, it is naturally smaller. The 9RS radio station works for transmission only by telephone, and for reception by telephone and telegraph. The transceiver with power supply is attached with brackets to the left and rear sheets of the turret to the left and behind the commander’s seat. Since 1952 under major renovation instead of the 9RS radio station, a 10RT-26E radio station was installed, which also works as a telegraph for transmission.

The TPU-Z-BIS-F tank intercom (since 1952 replaced by the TPU-47) consisted of three devices - for the gunner, tank commander and driver.

It is intended for communication between them, and for the commander and gunner through a radio station and with external correspondents.

Two manual carbon dioxide fire extinguishers are mounted inside the tank. A set of spare parts, tools and accessories are located both inside and outside. This includes a tarpaulin, a tow rope, a box with gun spare parts, two spare tracks each - with and without a comb, track track fingers, entrenching tools, etc. After the war, two BDSh smoke bombs were installed at the rear of the tank.

A few words about the work of the crew members. The driver sits on a height-adjustable seat. In front of it in the upper frontal plate there is a hatch closed by an armored cover. The lid contains two fixed periscopes. In order to have a larger horizontal viewing angle, the periscope prisms are located at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the tank. The bottom of the prism is covered with protective glass - thanks to it, fragments of a damaged prism will not injure the driver’s eyes. After the war, soft forehead protectors were placed above the protective glass and on the inner surface of the armor above the periscopes, protecting the driver’s head from bruises.

In front of the driver there are the following mechanisms and instruments: left and right control levers, to the right of the right lever is the gearbox rocker, a little to the left, below is the manual fuel supply handle. Further to the left there is a fuel pedal, a brake pedal with a latch. Under the driver's left foot is the GF pedal. On the inside of the frontal armor plate below the hatch there is a panel with control devices. And even lower are two compressed air cylinders for air starting the engine. On the left side wall there is an electrical instrument panel, a starter button, a tachometer (shows engine speed) and a speedometer. Below them is a fire extinguisher, etc.

To the right of the driver is a machine gunner. He fires from a front-mounted machine gun of the DT brand (changed to the DTM after the war). The machine gun is inserted into a ball, which is mounted in a special socket in the upper frontal plate of the hull. The machine gunner uses the PPU-X-T telescopic sight. Firing is carried out in short bursts (2-7 shots) at a distance of 600-800 m only at group live targets. The machine gun is automatic using the energy of exhaust powder gases. To prevent gas contamination inside the tank, the machine gun is installed so that the hole of the gas piston is moved outside under the movable armor shield. The machine gun has no stock. Shooting is carried out by pressing the trigger.

In the turret to the left of the gun there is a height-adjustable gunner's seat. The gunner’s task is quite specific: having received target designation from the commander or choosing a target independently, ensure that the cannon and coaxial machine gun are aimed at the target, and fire a shot using either the trigger mechanism or the electric trigger. He has at his disposal a TSh-16 periscope sight with fourfold magnification and a field of view of 16°. The sight also serves to determine the distance to the target and monitor the battlefield. There are four distance scales in the sight's field of view (for different types cannon shells and for a coaxial machine gun) and a lateral correction scale. The latter is used for aiming at a frontally moving target. To fire from closed positions with indirect fire, the gunner uses a side level, which is mounted on the left shield of the gun fence. He points the cannon and coaxial machine gun at the target using the turret rotation mechanism and the cannon lifting mechanism. The flywheel of the lifting mechanism is located in front of the gunner. On the flywheel handle there is an electric trigger lever for the cannon and coaxial machine gun. The manual trigger is mounted on the gun fence shield in front of the side level.

The commander in his seat is located behind the gunner, to the left of the gun. For the convenience of observation, he is served by the commander's cupola and the observation devices described above. The commander's tasks: observation of the battlefield, target designation to the gunner, work at the radio station and management of the crew's actions.

To the right of the gun is the loader. His responsibilities include: choosing the type of shot as directed by the commander, loading the cannon, reloading the coaxial machine gun, and observing the battlefield. The seat he uses outside of combat is suspended by three straps. Two of them are attached to the turret ring, and the third to the gun cradle. By changing the position of the belts, you can adjust the seat height. In combat, the loader works by standing on the lids of the ammunition boxes on the bottom of the tank. When transferring a cannon from one side to another, he must deftly follow or in front of the breech, while he is hampered by spent cartridges lying on the bottom. The absence of a rotating pole (at least the one that was on our T-28) is a significant drawback of the T-34. Next to the loader's seat, a stopper is mounted in one of the grips of the turret's ball support to secure the turret in the stowed position. If the turret is not fixed, then the shaking and jolting of the vehicle on the march would lead to rapid wear of the support mechanism, and, consequently, to an increase in the play of the turret rotation mechanism.

Production and service of the T-34 in other countries after the end of World War II

After World War II, the People's Liberation Army of Yugoslavia (PLAU) was armed with tanks that were predominantly foreign-made, mostly American. But there were also our T-34s (130 units), transferred to the NOAI back in 1945. Two tank brigades were formed from them in our states.

After the war, the leadership of NOAU decided to try to establish the production of tanks at home. The T-34-85 was chosen as the sample. The emphasis was on increasing the service life of the machine. Many changes were made to the design of the T-34. We installed our own diesel engine and an improved transmission. The gun was probably installed the same as our ZIS-S-53, but with a muzzle brake. The chassis and suspension system remained unchanged. The hull and turret underwent the most significant alterations. Thanks to the bevels in the front part of the body, the area of ​​its frontal surface has been reduced. This was supposed to reduce the likelihood of being hit from the front, but it complicated production and weakened the hull. True, the designers took into account that Yugoslav factories would be better able to weld armor parts than cast them. In the same way, the cylindrical hatch bases welded into the side walls of the tower weakened its strength. The tower itself had a convex roof. A significant aft niche apparently made it possible to increase the ammunition load. The ventilation of the tower has been improved (fan hood on the niche). The commander's cupola was missing and it is unlikely that the 4 periscopic devices in the roof of the tower could compensate for this deficiency.

However, the expected gain in tactical and technical characteristics did not happen. And in the early 50s, further work was considered inappropriate. A total of 7 copies of the Yugoslav thirty-four were produced. They took part in the May 1950 parade and subsequently served as training ones. One such vehicle is on display at the military museum in Kalemegdan (Belgrade). We were unable to obtain any technical specifications about her.

At the end of the 40s, the Polish, and after it the Czechoslovak government, decided to organize the production of the T-34 tank at home. Technical documentation and technology were received from the Soviet Union. Specialists arrived to provide assistance. The first serial Polish-made tanks left the factory floors in 1951. But these were not one-to-one our T-34s. Their design was improved in accordance with the changing requirements of the time. In 1953 they were modernized again. The designations T-34-85M1 or T-34-85M2 corresponded to the first and second modernization. Their release lasted five years.

Polish-made tanks received a modified turret. Engine designed to operate on various types fuel, had a heater to facilitate starting in winter. Mechanisms have been introduced to make the tank easier to control. The range has been increased to 650 km on additional tanks. New 10RT-26E radio station, TPU-47 tank intercom, TPK-1 or TPK-U25 commander's observation devices, and driver's night vision devices were installed. The turret rotation speed has been increased to 25-30° per second. Ammunition - 55 rounds - was placed differently. The crew, thanks to the new system for aiming and loading the frontal machine gun, was reduced to four people. The tank received equipment to overcome water barriers along the bottom.

Some differences in the shape of the tower, additional tanks, etc. had T-34s made in Czechoslovakia. The ČKD plant in Prague received a license to build this tank in 1949, along with a license to produce the SU-100. The production of tanks began in 1951 and continued for several years.

After the war, T-34 tanks entered service with the DPRK army and the People's Liberation Army of China (PLA). As part of them, they successfully fought on the fronts of the Korean War (1950-53), where they demonstrated their superiority over the American Shermans.

In subsequent years, T-34s, mainly of Polish and Czechoslovak production, entered service with the armies of many states, including countries participating in the Warsaw Pact, as well as Albania, Angola, Congo, Cuba, Democratic Republic of Vietnam, China, North Korea, Mongolia, Egypt, Guinea , Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Mali, Syria, Finland, Yugoslavia. They took part in numerous military conflicts of the 50s - 60s and even the 70s: in the Middle East in 1956, 1967 and 1973, in the Indo-Pakistan conflicts of 1965 and 1971, in Vietnam in 1965- 75 etc.

Allied tanks

As always, truth is learned through comparison. Our thirty-four also needs it. Comparison with contemporary tanks of the enemy and allies allows us to more clearly emphasize the advantages of our tank, and, perhaps, highlight some of its shortcomings.

We have already talked about German tanks. And what did the tank crews of our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition fight on: the British, the Americans, the French?

In the minds of the British military in the mid-30s, the idea of ​​two types of tanks dominated - infantry (slow, but heavily armored) and cruising (fast, but weakly armored). The latter was intended for large mechanized formations operating in the so-called deep operation.

Let's consider only cruising tanks as being more suitable for the tactical purpose of the T-34. In the summer of 1939, the A 15 Crusader tank began to arrive in the British troops. The latest modification of the Crusader III was produced until 1943. Technically unreliable, the Crusaders were also poorly armed. But these were the main tanks of the British tank forces of the first half of the war.

Taking into account the shortcomings of the Crusaders, the British began producing MK cruiser tanks from the end of 1942. VIII "Cromwell". Its armor was solid at that time, but its maneuverability was low. In battles with the German Panthers, the Cromwells were not successful: neither thick armor nor high speed helped. "Cromwell" did not even reach the level of the main combat and technical characteristics of the T-34-85.

At the very end of the war, the British army received the Comet cruiser tanks, which were essentially a development of the Cromwell, with more powerful weapons (77 mm gun - actual caliber 76.2 mm). Cruiser tank, the basis of the British armored forces, was never brought to the level of contemporary Soviet and German medium tanks.

As for the Americans, the pride of their military tank building was the M4 Sherman medium tank. The development of this vehicle began in March 1941. In February 1942, a prototype was built, and two months later mass production of this most massive American tank began.

It took only 13 months from the moment the decision was made to the start of production. The tank was built until the end of the war, supplied in large quantities to the British army, under Lend-Lease to the Soviet Union (4102 units), as well as to all armies of the anti-Hitler coalition. After the war, Shermans were supplied to all of the United States' allies. Even now in some armies they, although significantly modernized, are in service. This fact itself indicates how reliable the Sherman was and that it had a large reserve for modernization.

The tank was produced by different factories in several modifications, differing in the method of manufacturing the hull and turret, engines, chassis, weapons. The tank hull was welded. The nose piece first consisted of three bolted pieces, then one cast piece, and finally a cast and rolled piece. The Shermans basically retained the chassis of the M3 medium tank that preceded it. It was only in March 1944 that the new horizontal volute spring suspension (HVSS) was introduced, which was used on almost all M4 models.

The M4A2 modification was equipped with a diesel engine. The most common modification of the M4AZ in the American army (from June 1942 to May 1945, 11,324 vehicles were produced) was equipped with a special Ford GAA-8 tank carburetor engine. These tanks had a welded hull. The hull of the M4A4 modification tanks was modified to accommodate the Chrysler A75 power unit, consisting of five engines. The M4A6 modification had the same body, but it was equipped with a Caterpillar RD-1829 radial diesel engine. Tanks of the M4A5 modification were produced by Canadian factories under the designation RAM. All M4 tanks had engines located in the rear, and the transmission and drive wheel were located in the front.

Depending on the modification and production time, the Shermans were equipped with 75- and 76.2-mm cannons of various types, as well as 105-mm howitzers (on some vehicles of the M4 and M4AZ modifications). The 75 mm gun was soon recognized as not powerful enough to fight German tanks. In August 1942, an attempt was made to install a 76.2 mm gun in the M4A1 tank. However, the old tower turned out to be unsuitable for her. In 1943, an experimental T23 tank was developed - a prototype of the future M26, armed with a 90-mm cannon. Its turret, but with a 76.2 mm cannon and a coaxial 7.62 mm machine gun, was installed unchanged on the M4. The production of tanks with this turret began in March 1944. The armor-piercing projectile of the new gun had an initial speed of 810 m/s (instead of 620 for the previous 75 mm guns) and penetrated 100 mm armor at a distance of 900 m. On the right side of the turret, a 12.7 mm anti-aircraft machine gun was mounted on a bracket. The third 7.62 mm machine gun was located in a ball mount in the frontal part of the hull. The tower had a floor that rotated along with it. Placing the ammunition rack at the bottom of the fighting compartment required raising the floor, which increased the overall height of the tank. Some tanks used “wet” ammunition stowage: shots for the gun were placed in tubes passing through a tank with ethylene glycol or water. When a shell hit the stowage, the liquid extinguished the ignited ammunition. A gun stabilizer in the vertical plane and a hydroelectric turret rotation mechanism, which had a duplicate drive to the commander and gunner, were also used. The combat weight of Sherman tanks ranged from 30.2 to 35 tons.

The M4 tank, which received the name "General Sherman" in England, was built in 1943-45. turned out to be the main and best tank of the British army. The first Shermans arrived in North Africa in October 1942 (270 units) and on October 24 they received their baptism of fire in the battle of El Alamein. Together with the M3 medium tanks, they made up more than half of all the tanks of the British 8th Army. Later, the British installed their 76.2 mm cannon on the Shermans (which required changing the turret), and in this way received the most powerful tank of the British army during the war. These tanks were called "Sherman Firefly" and began to enter service in February 1944. They were the only Allied tanks that were capable of fighting the German "Tigers" and "Panthers", and even then at close ranges.

The M4 turned out to be a good tank, easy to manufacture. This facilitated its mass production in non-specialized factories that had no experience in mechanical engineering. "Sherman" was distinguished by its operational reliability, structural strength, and maintainability. But it was relatively weakly armed and armored. They tried to eliminate these shortcomings. In particular, on the modification M4A3E2, the thickness of the frontal armor of the hull was increased to 100 mm by shielding. The M4s were more or less equivalent to the German PZ tanks. IV, but could not (except for the Sherman Firefly) conduct an open battle with the Tigers and Panthers. In Korea (1950-53), hopes for the M4A3E8, which was inferior to the T-34-85 in terms of armament and maneuverability, were not realized.

On the basis of the M4 tank, several control systems, sapper and auxiliary vehicles were created, in particular, tank destroyers M10 and M36, a self-propelled 155 mm M40 gun and a 203 mm howitzer M-43. Many tanks were equipped with installations for launching missiles.

This was the second most popular tank in the world after the T-34 (48,071 units were produced). It was inferior to our tank in many characteristics, but superior to it in reliability and ease of operation for the crew.

In other countries - Italy, Japan, France - there were no tanks that were at least to some extent close in tactical and technical data to those described above.

Tank T-34 76 is rightfully considered one of best tanks World War II, which absorbed everything best qualities these fighting vehicles. It was recognized as the best for its time not only by the Soviet military, but even by their opponents who directly encountered this tank in combat conditions.

From the history of the T-34 tank

In 1941, German tank crews could not do anything against the T-34 76 tank with its excellent armor and serious firepower. In addition to optimal characteristics for wartime, the tank was distinguished by a fairly simple design, high manufacturability and adaptability to combat in various conditions. The tank was easily repaired in the field, which undoubtedly became its huge advantage. Before the introduction of Tigers, Panthers and Ferdinands into German service, the Soviet T-34 was a mortal threat to the Germans. The T-34 entered into the toughest battles and often emerged victorious.

Development of T-34 76

The T-34 was designed and assembled at the design bureau of the Kharkov Locomotive Plant. Not only the famous design bureau M.I. was involved in it. Koshkin, the Adolf Dick design bureau also participated in the work. The technical project in this bureau was prepared a whole month late, which is why A. Dick was arrested. As a result, only M. Koshkin became responsible for the project. In the process of work, the designers created two options for tank propulsion: wheeled-tracked and tracked; in the end, preference was given to the second. In March 1940, two samples of the new tank were delivered to the Kremlin’s Ivanovo Square to demonstrate it. military commission and the government. It is worth noting that for this purpose, the new combat vehicles covered as much as 750 kilometers from Kharkov to Moscow under their own power, moving off-road, and thereby demonstrating excellent maneuverability. At the end of March, Soviet industry began producing tanks.

To the beginning of the Great Patriotic War The T-34 tank was the best vehicle in the world, mobile, easy to manufacture, with anti-ballistic armor and a powerful 76 mm gun, capable of penetrating any German tank of the 1941 model. The Germans' 37-mm cannons were practically powerless against the T-34. Since 1941, the Wehrmacht began producing Panzer III, most of which were equipped with a 50 mm cannon, which was already more effective against the armor of the T 34. But penetration was ensured at a distance of no more than six hundred meters, and only if they fired a sub-caliber projectile, but the gun The T-34 could penetrate the armor of early modifications of the Panzer III from two thousand meters. Later, Panzer modifications with 60 and 50 millimeters of armor appeared, but the T-34 penetrated it with armor-piercing shells from a distance of one and a half thousand meters. Even the later and strengthened Panzer III Ausf.M and Ausf.L models with 70 mm armor could be penetrated by the Thirty-Four from a distance of five hundred meters.

It is also worth noting the 45 mm armor of the T-34, which, due to its inclined design, often provoked ricochets when fired from long distances, which made it very difficult to fight this tank. But the T-34 also had disadvantages - poor visibility and a not very reliable transmission. In addition, the fighting compartment was quite cramped and greatly hampered the work of the crew.

Tank structure

First, about the T-34 76 in general terms:

• The combat weight of the tank was more than thirty tons;
• Gun - L 11 and F 34 caliber 76.2 mm;
• Engine power - 500 horsepower;
• Maximum speed - 55 kilometers per hour;
• Crew - four people;
• About 20,000 were produced.

Frame

In 1940, the T-34 hull was made from rolled armor plates. In the front part of the front plate there is a driver's hatch with a hinged lid. Further, in the upper part of the hatch cover, there is a central viewing device for the driver, and on the left and right there are side viewing devices installed at an angle of sixty degrees to the longitudinal axis of the car. On the right is the embrasure of the forward machine gun in a ball joint. The machine gun does not have an armored mask. The rear inclined sheet of the hull is removable and is attached to the side sheets with bolts. It has a rectangular hatch for access to the transmission compartment. On the side of the hatch there are two oval openings with exhaust pipes, protected by armored caps.

Tower

The tank's turret is welded, cone-shaped from rolled armor plates. The roof of the tower had a common hatch for crew members. A viewing device for all-round visibility is mounted on the hatch. In front of the hatch on the left side there was a PT-6 periscope sight, and on the right there was a ventilation hatch.

Cannons

The tank was initially equipped with a 76.2 mm L-11 model gun with a 30.5-caliber barrel. It had a number of shortcomings, so it was soon replaced by the more successful F-32 cannon. After some time, the design bureau developed a modification of this weapon, which was seriously superior to the previous version. The gun was named F-34, the length of its barrel increased to 41 caliber, which significantly increased the penetrating power of the gun. There was a 7.62 mm DT machine gun coaxial with the cannon, and a TOD-6 telescopic sight was used for direct fire of the gun.

Chassis

The tank had five pairs of large diameter road wheels. The guides and support rollers were rubber-coated, and the caterpillar chain was fine-linked from thirty-seven flat and thirty-seven ridge tracks. On the outside, each track had lug spurs. Two spare tracks and two jacks were attached to the rear of the hull. Four pairs of rollers on board had individual spring suspension; the springs were placed at an angle and were welded to the sides in the housing.

The weight of the tank ranges from 26 to 188 tons, depending on the thickness of the armor and the nature of the combat equipment.

A tank is an armored tracked vehicle with cannon armament. There are two groups of tanks:

The weight of the tank ranges from 26 to 188 tons.

• Combat (basic). The main characteristics of such models are impressive firepower, high resistance to damage and excellent movement speed.
• Lungs. Used as a quick reaction weapon, as well as for reconnaissance purposes. As a rule, such vehicles have less power and thickness of protective armor. Light tank models can be transported to their destinations using water, air or rail transport.

Let's compare the mass of several models of combat vehicles.

How much does the T-90 tank weigh?

The model is an improved version of the T-72 tank. It has high combat and technical characteristics that allow it to withstand battles in any climatic conditions.

The weight of the T-90 tank is 46.5 tons.

The weight of the T-90 tank is 46.5 tons. Fighting machine equipped with a 125-mm launcher designed to hit targets of all types, as well as an sighting system and a thermal imager. The tank has a high rate of fire, excellent speed (60 km), and the crew includes three people.

How much does the T-34 tank weigh?

T-34 is a real military legend. Production of the first "thirty-fours" began in 1940, and by the beginning of 1941 the USSR had about 1,225 units of equipment in service. The T-34 model tank changed and improved its technical characteristics several times during the war years. Therefore, the mass in different years of production was also unequal:

• Issue 1940 – 26.3 t
• Issue 1941 – 28 t
• Issue 1942 – 28.5 t
• Issue 1943 – 30.9 t

At the same time, in the total mass of the combat vehicle, the weight of the tracks takes up about 1150 kg. When comparing the weight of the combat turret of a tank from 1940 and 1942, there is a noticeable tendency to increase - from 3200 to 3900 kg. The T-34 crew includes a gunner-radio operator, a driver, a loader and a commander.

The Maus tank was created in 1943 and weighed about 188 tons. This is a real “heavyweight” of German tank building, the length of its gun reached 2.5 m. And the total length of the combat “Mouse” was about 11.5 m! The vehicle's ammunition load included two twin cannons (128 mm and 75 mm). The capacity of the Maus fuel tank is 2650 liters. The number of crew members is five people.

This is interesting!

On these pages you can find out:
How much does a bear weigh
How much does gold weigh
How much does a sumo wrestler weigh?
How much does a cloud weigh?
How much does a piano weigh

Despite the impressive size and weight of the Maus tank, almost all the free space inside was occupied by numerous instruments and parts. So the crew of the combat vehicle had to be located “on a residual basis.”

According to the results of field tests, the Maus achieved good performance: a speed of 20 km/h, overcoming a rise, a vertical obstacle 76 cm high at an angle of 30 degrees, crossing a water trench 2 m wide.

True, all the efforts spent on creating and improving the types of this model were in vain. At the end of 1944, by order of Hitler, work on heavy tanks was stopped, and in the spring of 1945 prototypes type 205 were prepared for the defense of the training ground in the event of capture by the Red Army. After the war, the two surviving Type 205 tanks were transported to Leningrad, and from there to the tank training ground in Kubinka.

How much does the AT-2 tank weigh?

The World of Tanks game is a great opportunity to at least “virtually” control tanks and other military equipment. The AT 2 tank is a fifth-level combat unit of the British development branch (tank destroyer class).

General characteristics of the “combat monster”: weight 44 tons, 57 mm gun, 26 rounds per minute, speed 20 km/h. The crew consists of four people. The tank can be used to push the flanks of enemy units. However, you should take care of your cover from your allies. The accuracy of the AT 2's gun is low, so using the tank for long-range attacks is not recommended.

The weight of the AT-2 tank is 44 tons.

Now you know how much the tank weighs, and as you can see, its weight depends on the modification. In addition, to determine the weight of a tank, you do not need to weigh it, but rather calculate the mass, taking into account the density of the metal and the weight of the combat equipment.

Most experts are of the opinion that the T-34 tank was the best in World War II, it achieved victory, but there are other opinions. A whole staff of developers worked on the creation of this tank even before the start of World War II.

It is believed that the history of the T 34 tank began with the creation of the experimental A-20 tank. Since 1931, wheeled-tracked tanks of the BT type began to appear in service; they were considered high-speed. After experience had been gained in combat operations, the Kharkov Locomotive Plant was tasked with creating a project for a wheeled-tracked tank that would be able to replace the BT in the future. According to historical data, the design began in 1937 by the technical department under the leadership of Koshkin. It was assumed that the new tank would have a 45 mm gun and 30 mm thick armor. The diesel version of the B-2 was offered as an engine. The engine was supposed to reduce the vulnerability of the tank and the fire hazard of the equipment. Three drive wheels were also provided on each side due to the noticeably increased weight of the equipment. The weight of the car became more than 18 tons, the entire structure was complicated.

T-34 tank prototypes

The production of a tank engine began on the basis of aviation oil engines. The engine received the B-2 indexation during wartime, and many progressive ideas were incorporated into its design. Direct fuel injection was provided, there were 4 valves in each cylinder, and a cast aluminum head. The engine passed state tests for one hundred hours. Diesel mass production began in 1939 at a special plant headed by Kochetkov.

During the creation process, the design of the A-20 seemed too complicated, so it was planned to create a purely tracked tank, but it had to have anti-ballistic armor. Due to this idea, the weight of the tank was reduced, which made it possible to increase the armor. However, initially it was planned to create two vehicles of equal weight in order to conduct an equivalent test and determine which tank is better.

In May 1938, the design of a wheeled-tracked tank was nevertheless considered; it had a fairly rational shape, was created from rolled armor plates, and had a conical turret. However, after consideration, it was decided to create exactly such a model, but only on caterpillar tracks. The main thing for the tank was to be able to create excellent anti-ballistic armor. Such tanks were already created in 1936. They had a mass of 22 tons, but the armor was 60 mm. Experienced tank on caterpillar tracks was named A-32.

Both models A-32 and A-20 were fully completed in 1938. Most military commanders were inclined towards the A-20 version; it was believed that a wheeled-tracked tank was more effective in battle. However, Stalin intervened in the consideration of the projects and ordered the proactive construction of two models to begin in order to test them in comparative tests.

More than a hundred employees were involved in the development of both models, since both tanks had to be completed in the shortest possible time. All experimental workshops were combined into one and all employees worked under the best tank developer - Koshkin. Both projects were completed in May. All tanks were submitted for testing in 1939.

Features of the A-32 tank

Tank A - 32 had the following characteristics:

• very high speed
• machine body made of rolled steel sheets,
• rational armor angles,
• 45 mm gun,
• DT machine gun.

In 1939 A-32 was modified again. The armor was strengthened by adding various cargoes to the armor of the tank, which increased the weight of the vehicle to 24 tons. A new L-10 tank gun, developed at the Kirov plant, was installed. In December 1939, the Defense Committee decided to build several test models with reinforced 45 mm armor and a 76 mm tank gun.

It is this model that will become the famous T-34; in the process of creating the design of this machine, special attention was paid to simplifying the design. Specialists from the Stalingrad Tractor Plant and specialists from the Technology Bureau helped a lot with this. It was thanks to them that the T-34 tank model was finally developed for mass production. The production of the first experimental models began in Kharkov in the winter of 1940. On March 5 of the same year, the first two models left the plant and were sent on their first march from Kharkov to Moscow under the strict control of M.I. Koshkina.

Start of production of T-34

On March 17, the tanks were shown to the entire Kremlin leadership, after which the field test cars The tanks were subjected to a full armor test by firing direct-fire armor-piercing and high-explosive shells at the tanks. In the summer, both tanks were sent to a training ground to cross anti-tank barriers. After this, the cars went to their home plant in Kharkov. On March 31, the decision of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party for mass production of the tank was approved. It was planned to build about 200 T-34s by the end of the year.

By the summer their number had increased to five hundred. Production was constantly slowed down due to bad recommendations and data from specialists from the test site, which was added to the GABTU test report. As a result, only three cars were produced by the fall, but after modifications were made based on comments, another 113 cars were produced by the new year.

After the death of Koshkin, the management of KhPZ A.A. Morozov not only managed to correct the serious problems that had arisen with the tank, but also managed to improve the firepower of the tank by installing a much more powerful F-34 gun than the L-11. After this, tank production increased significantly, with 1,100 vehicles built in the first six months of 1941. In the fall of 1941, KhPZ was evacuated to Nizhny Tagil, Sverdlovsk region.

Already in December, the first T-34 tanks were produced at the new location. Due to the military situation, there was a shortage of rubber and non-ferrous metals so as not to stop the production of tanks, the designers reworked all the design details and were able to significantly reduce the number of parts. Soon the development of a new T-43 vehicle began.

Tank 34 was a great achievement in tank building. The design of the tank was very reliable, had very powerful weapons and reliable armoring of the hull and turret of the tank. Most importantly, the car was very dynamic.

Video history of the creation of the T-34

If you have any questions, leave them in the comments below the article. We or our visitors will be happy to answer them

Based on the totality of its tactical and technical data and manufacturability, the T-34 turned out to be the most successful tank of the Second World War. In many ways, it was the thoughtful design of this tank and its mass production that allowed the USSR to tip the scales of armed confrontation with the Third Reich in its favor. During the pre-war and war years, receivers received 35,333 copies of the T-34 from Soviet enterprises, and the “thirty-four” became the most popular tank of the Second World War.

In the history of tank building there is a vehicle that will forever remain an example of success. Based on the totality of its tactical and technical data and manufacturability, the T-34 turned out to be the most successful tank of the Second World War (hereinafter referred to as WWII). In many ways, it was the thoughtful design of this tank and its mass production that allowed the USSR to tip the scales of armed confrontation with the Third Reich in its favor.

At the beginning of glorious deeds

The appearance of the tank was not accidental - it was preceded by a whole decade painstaking work Soviet designers, creative searches, human tragedies, bitter defeats and delightful victories. It all started with the fact that in 1927, a special design group was formed at the Kharkov Locomotive Plant (hereinafter referred to as KhPZ), which was tasked with constructing the first medium Soviet tank T-1-12. Its development resulted in the creation of a more advanced model of the T-24, but it was produced only in a pilot series of 25 vehicles. However, soon, instead of a tank of its own design, KhPZ was obliged to put into production the M1931 tank, purchased in the USA, designed by John Walter Christie. The American car used a unique spark plug suspension, patented by Christie, which later became one of the signature features of the T-34.

John Walter Christie demonstrates his M1931 tank to foreign representatives. The suspension installed on it will soon “migrate” to the design of the T-34
Source - valka.cz

The transition to the production of an imported model of the tank caused a conflict between the KhPZ designers, whose labor efficiency was questioned by military functionaries from the Department of Motorization and Mechanization of the Red Army (hereinafter referred to as UMM). The head of the design bureau (hereinafter - KB) of the T2K plant (into which a special design group grew) I. N. Aleksenko quit with a scandal, and the director of the enterprise I. P. Bondarenko expressed his dissatisfaction with the management, but continued to work.

Instead of Aleksenko, a new head of the design bureau was sent to Kharkov - A. O. Firsov. A hereditary nobleman, he worked as the general designer of the Leningrad Russian Diesel plant since pre-revolutionary times. Here in 1930 he was arrested for “participation in a sabotage group.” However, on September 18, 1931, his remaining term was replaced by work as the chief designer of the T2K KhPZ design bureau. Under the leadership of Firsov, on the basis of the American M1931, Kharkov residents created a tank with a turret of their own design, called BT-2 (“fast tank”) and mastered its mass production. Next came the modernized BT-5 with a more advanced turret and the BT-7, in which the designers made more serious changes to the hull, engine, transmission and chassis. In fact, starting with the appearance of Firsov at KhPZ, the plant began work on units and design solutions that would later organically become part of the T-34 layout.

The team of KB T2K KhPZ named after. The Comintern together with its leader from 1931 to 1936 A. O. Firsov (in the center). Far left in the top row – A. A. Morozov
Source - museum-t-34.ru

Creation of a diesel “heart”

Almost simultaneously with the launch of BT tanks into production, the USSR leadership initiated work on the creation of aircraft and tank diesel engines at a number of Soviet enterprises and research institutes. KhPZ also got involved in the work, where there had been a corresponding department since 1912, and since 1914 - a heating shop for the production of diesel engines. In the 1920s, the plant's designers created the first tractor diesel engine in the USSR for the German tractor "Hanomag" WD-50, produced at KhPZ under license, which received a new name in Kharkov - "Kommunar".

By the beginning of 1932, the customer had determined the main parameters of the future “heart” of Soviet tanks and the materials for its manufacture. It was necessary to design a 12-cylinder diesel engine with a power of 400 hp. With. at 1700 rpm with specific fuel consumption of 180–190 g/l. With. per hour in tank and aviation versions. Its design was supposed to use progressive solutions: direct fuel injection, stamped light-alloy pistons, four valves per cylinder, load-bearing power studs, and a cast aluminum head. The engine was going to be made from domestic materials and components, with the exception of fuel pumps and injectors from Bosch, the production of which was planned to be established on the territory of the USSR later.

In Kharkov, work on the project, originally called BD-2 (“high-speed diesel”), began in October 1932 and was completed by February 1933. One of the creators of this engine, designer K. F. Chelpan, recalled that Firsov made a significant contribution to its development. The engine project was not approved by the UMM and the Scientific Tank Committee of the People's Commissariat of Defense, but senior management closely monitored the progress of work - for example, the head of the UMM, corps commander I. A. Khalepsky, specially came to KhPZ to look at the promising diesel engine, and Stalin called the director to Moscow plant I.P. Bondarenko, so that he would report on the progress of work on the prototype.

Tank diesel engine V-2-34
Source - fotoham.ru

Kharkov residents showed the first BD-2 to the country's leadership at the end of 1934, for which the plant was awarded the Order of Lenin on March 27, 1935. The same order was awarded to I. P. Bondarenko, the chief designer of KhPZ for mechanical engineering, K. F. Chelpan, and the head of the diesel engine design bureau, Ya. E. Vikhman.

In the second half of 1936, the Comintern KhPZ was renamed Plant No. 183. Digital indexing of services was introduced inside the enterprise, and the tank design bureau T2K was assigned the index KB-190.

During this period of time, the chief tank designer of KhPZ Firsov began to think about creating a radically new tank. One of the creators of the T-34, designer V. N. Vasiliev, recalled: " ...the foundations for the creation of the T-34, its primary technical appearance, and main combat characteristics were laid back under Firsov. Already at the end of 1935, well-developed sketches of a fundamentally new tank lay on the chief designer’s desk: anti-ballistic armor with large angles of inclination, a long-barreled 76.2 mm gun, a V-2 diesel engine(index subsequently assigned to BD-2 - author's note) , weight up to 30 tons...”

However, the designer-prisoner was not destined to bring these ideas to life. Following the awards, repression hit the KhPZ. Large military maneuvers in the summer-autumn of 1936 revealed the poor quality of the tanks that entered service with the Red Army - for example, on the first few hundred BT-7s delivered to the troops, gearboxes began to fail. At this time, a civil war began in Spain, and the leadership of the USSR rightly believed that it was a prelude to world war. At such a crucial moment it turned out that in the tank building of the Land of Soviets there are serious problems. To urgently rectify the situation, the bloody repressive machine began to work in full force.

Firsov was the first to suffer. In the summer of 1936, he was removed from the management of the design bureau - designer M.I. Koshkin was transferred to this position from the Leningrad plant No. 185 named after Kirov. He was a relatively young thirty-seven-year-old man, whom throughout the 1910s and 1920s fate threw both into the trenches of the First World War and into the infantry chains of the Civil War. After the end of hostilities, he ended up at the desk of the Communist University named after Ya. M. Sverdlov, where he listened to lectures by Lenin, Stalin and Voroshilov. After distribution, Koshkin found himself in the position of director of the Vyatka confectionery factory, then changed several positions, holding various party positions. In 1929, on the personal order of S. M. Kirov (Koshkin for some time held leadership positions in the Vyatka province, where Kirov was from), he was enrolled as a student at the Leningrad Mechanical Engineering Institute as an initiative worker among the “party thousand people”. The country needed many engineers, and by order, several thousand commanders of the Red Army and party workers began studying at engineering universities.

Second from left – M. I. Koshkin
Source - ruskline.ru

While still studying, Koshkin began working at the Leningrad Experimental Mechanical Engineering Plant No. 185 named after S. M. Kirov (OKMO Bolshevik Plant) as a designer. Here Mikhail Ilyich participated in the development of an experimental medium tank T-29, designed to replace, but never replaced the serial three-turreted T-28. Then, as deputy general designer, Koshkin was involved in the creation of the experimental T-46-5/T-111 tank with anti-ballistic armor, for his work on which he was awarded the Order of the Red Star.

Meanwhile, the “tightening of the screws” at KhPZ was not limited to the dismissal of Firsov. To refine the BD-2 engine in 1937, a special commission was sent to the plant from Moscow. She also had to determine the reasons for the appearance of low-quality products. Based on the results of the commission’s work, a little later a whole group of “diesel drivers” arrived in Kharkov from Moscow. Visiting experts discovered an uneven distribution of the load on the crankshaft bearings in the engine design, which led to increased vibration of the housing and rapid failure of the power plant. In addition, the quality of the metal components was extremely low - inside broken BD-2s, scuffs were found in the cylinders and on parts, as well as metal shavings. As a result, the service life of the engines turned out to be very short, and some units failed after only 10–15 hours of operation.

With the help of Moscow and Leningrad specialists, BD-2 (the index was changed to B-2) was modified, making up to two thousand different changes. At the same time, Chelpan was removed from work on the engine. In mid-1937, the NKVD arrested Firsov for the second time, after which he was shot (according to some sources, six years after his arrest, according to others, in the same year). In December 1937, Chelpan, who was arrested in a fabricated “Greek case,” was behind bars - he was sentenced to “capital punishment” and the sentence was carried out on March 11, 1938 in a Kharkov prison.

K. F. Chelpan
Source - old-mariupol.com.ua

Together with the leaders, the NKVD bodies also arrested ordinary diesel designers: Chelpan’s deputy I. Ya. Trashutin (who managed to avoid death - he was released in February 1939), G. I. Aptekman, M. B. Levitan, Z. B Gurtovoy (these specialists were shot), chief engineer of the KhPZ F. I. Lyashch, chief metallurgist A. M. Metantsev and many others. On May 25, 1938, the director of the KhPZ, I.P. Bondarenko, found himself on a bunk and was soon shot; instead, Yu.E. Maksarev took over the management of the enterprise. Against the backdrop of these arrests, the total demoralization of the plant's engineers, denunciations, and mutual suspicions, the process of developing a new tank was underway.

To strengthen and replenish the design staff of plant No. 183 in June 1937, an adjunct of the Moscow Military Academy of Mechanization and Motorization (VAMM) named after Stalin, military engineer of the 3rd rank A. Ya. Dick, was sent to its design bureau in June 1937. Some of the engineers were subordinated to him, and a dual power reigned in the bureau, which could not end in anything good. During this period, the designers worked on making changes to the design of the BT-7 (model BT-7-2000), on its modernized version BT-7-B-IS and developing a radically new tank BT-9. The latter was supposed to differ from the BT-7 by the presence of six driving wheels, a diesel engine, a conical turret with a 45- or 76-mm cannon and sloping armor. Koshkin and Dick accused each other of incorrect engineering decisions, disruption, and sometimes outright sabotage of work. The number of mutual claims among designers grew, but the work did not move forward.

Sketch of the BT-9 tank
Source - alternatistory.org.ua

In the end, the Moscow leadership was tired of these conflicts, and on September 28, 1937, the directors of plant No. 183 were obliged to divide the KB-190 tank into two. A separate design bureau (hereinafter referred to as OKB), subordinate directly to the chief engineer of the plant, was ordered to be replenished with thirty VAMM graduates from October 5, and another twenty from December 1. No later than September 30, its departments were to be headed by eight of the plant’s most experienced and talented designers. The most famous tank tester at that time, Captain E. A. Kulchitsky, who became famous for his famous jumps on BT series tanks, was brought in as the main military consultant. A. Ya. Dick was appointed head of the OKB, engineer P. N. Goryun was his assistant, and section heads were V. M. Doroshenko (control), M. I. Tarshinov (hull), Gorbenko (engine), A. A. Morozov (transmission), P.P. Vasiliev (chassis).

Koshkin remained the head of KB-190, which was supposed to exclusively develop modernized versions of the BT-7: the artillery BT-7A, armed with a 76-mm cannon, and the diesel BT-7M. Thus, the conflicting designers were “separated into different corners.” To service serial production at the plant there was a separate design bureau KB-35, headed by I. S. Ber.

Forerunners from the BT series

On October 13, 1937, the leaders of the Main Armored Directorate of the Red Army (hereinafter - GABTU), which replaced the UMM, informed Dick, who arrived in Moscow, and the heads of the groups of his bureau tactical and technical requirements new tank BT-20:

• Type - wheel-tracked, with 6-wheel drive Christie type.
• Combat weight - 13-14 tons.
• Armament – ​​1x45 mm, 3 diesel engines, flamethrower for self-defense or 1x76 mm, 3 diesel engines, flamethrower. Every 5th tank must have an anti-aircraft gun.
• Ammunition - 130-150x45 mm or 50x76 mm, 2500 - 3000 rounds.
• Reservations: front – 25, conical turret – 20, side, stern – 16, roof and bottom – 10 mm. The armor is all inclined, with a minimum angle of inclination of the armor plates of the hull and turret of 18°.
• Speed ​​– the same on tracks and wheels: max. 70 km/h, min. 7 km/h.
• Crew – 3 people.
• Power reserve – 300-400 km.
• Engine – BD-2 with a power of 400-600 hp.
• The transmission is similar to the wheeled-tracked tank BT-IS (power take-off for the wheel drive after the side clutches).
• The suspension is individual; it is advisable to use torsion springs as springs.
• Install the Orion shot stabilizer and the horizontal stabilizer of the tower of the engineer Povalov system, install headlights for night shooting with a range of up to 1000 m

A strict, and based on what happened subsequently, a brutal work schedule was established:

• by February 1, 1938 - submit a preliminary design and layout of the BT-20;
• by May 1, 1938 - submit a detailed design of the vehicle according to two approved options with bulletproof and projectile-proof armor;
• by September 1, 1938 - produce prototypes;
• by December 1, 1938 - test prototypes and eliminate defects;
• by May 1, 1939 - launch the selected tank into production.

However, already in the first quarter of 1938 it became clear that the OKB was missing its deadlines. March 27, 1938 acting Chief Engineer of the Defense Committee under the Council People's Commissars Corps commander V.N. Sokolov sent to the Chairman of the USSR Defense Committee V.M. A memorandum to Molotov containing the following lines:

“The government decree obliging Plant No. 183 to create new types of BT and T-35 tanks in 1938, ensuring their transition to production from January 1, 1939, was thwarted by the plant. The preliminary design of the BT drawn up to date is at odds with government data. The weight is 16 tons instead of 13-14 tons, the thickness of the frontal armor is 16-20 mm instead of 25 mm. Armament - instead of 2 diesel engines - 3 diesel engines, installation of a flamethrower is not provided... (18 people are working on the project).”

What happened at plant No. 183? Why did only eighteen designers work on the project instead of the planned fifty graduates of VAMM and the old engineering personnel of the enterprise? For what reason was the sketch submitted for approval to GABTU almost two months later than the due date? The author does not have answers to these questions. What is known is that as a result, the head of the OKB, adjunct VAMM A.Ya., was found guilty. Dick. In April 1938, the day after submitting his dissertation for defense, he was arrested and sentenced to ten years in the camps, which he served “from bell to bell” (after his release from the camp, Dick lived for another seventeen years in exile in Altai).

In parallel with the Design Bureau of Plant No. 183, a group of military men led by 2nd rank military technician N.F. worked on the development of new tanks, which were modified BTs, in the armored vehicle workshops of the Kharkov Military District. Tsyganov. This team created the prototypes BT-2-IS, BT-5-IS, BT-SV and BT-SV-2 that did not go into production. The last vehicle, the high-speed tank "Stalin-Voroshilov" (which had the unofficial nickname "Turtle"), was booked from all four sides armor plates located at rational angles of inclination (for the anti-ballistic version, the armor thickness reached 40-55 mm). When designing the BT-7-B-IS and BT-9, the OKB used the suspension design of Tsyganov and other solutions found by his group. Unfortunately, this talented military inventor repeated the fate of many engineers of that period. In early 1938 he was arrested, after which work on the BT-SV-2 (sometimes mistakenly called one of the T-34 prototypes) ceased. Tsyganov was later rehabilitated and returned to the army; he took part in the fighting and died of his wounds in January 1945.

Prototype BT-SV-2 "Turtle"
Source - topwar.ru

Birth of a legend

Before the arrest of A.Ya. Dick KB-190, headed by Koshkin, was modernizing the BT-7 tank. A new conical turret with inclined walls was designed for it, the three-speed gearbox was improved (before the modernization it was four-speed) and the suspension was strengthened. On September 1, 1937, the new vehicle was put into service. Koshkin was already busy launching the “product” into mass production when it turned out that the design bureau was being disbanded, he was appointed general designer of plant No. 183, and the responsibility for creating new tanks now fell on him.

Instead of the OKB, the plant formed KB-24, which included the best specialists from Dick's bureau, as well as from KB-190 and KB-35. General management and coordination of decisions on new tanks was carried out by A.A. Koshkin’s deputy. Morozov, engineer M.I. took over the building. Tarshinov, the turret and the installation of weapons in it - A.A. Moloshtanov, transmission – Ya.I. Baran, managed by P.P. Vasiliev, chassis - V.G. Matyukhin.

Work on the engine was carried out in a separate design bureau. It was during this period, from April 19 to April 26, 1938, that state tests of three V-2 engines took place at the plant’s stand. The first diesel engine worked for only 72 hours, the second one, after a hundred hours of continuous operation, lost oil, a smoky exhaust appeared, and the cylinder head cracked, and the third one had a crankcase burst. Based on such disappointing test results, the commission did not accept the engine, but, nevertheless, it was ordered to assemble 5 copies in May, 10 in June, and 25 copies in July.

On April 28, 1938, at a meeting of the People's Commissariat of Defense (hereinafter referred to as the NKO), Koshkin presented for consideration sketches of not one, but two tanks: the ordered BT-20 (factory index - A-20) and its exclusively tracked version A-20G. Who was the initiator and author of the latter is not known for certain today. Official historiography attributes its creation to M.I. Koshkin, and considering that he at one time led the development of the T-46-5/T-111 tank, there are good reasons to consider this version plausible. However, in recent decades there have been suggestions that the preliminary design of this tank could have been created by A.Ya. Dick. In a memo dated August 20, 1937, compiled by the district engineer of the GABTU of the Red Army, military engineer of the 2nd rank Saprygin, there are the following words:

«… [Koshkin, designer Morozov, etc. – approx. author] completely refused to introduce the following improvements[suggested by Dick - approx. author]:

1. five-speed gearbox[implemented on the T-34 in 1942 – approx. author] ;

2. installation of 5 pairs of wheels, which provides significant advantages for the tank (there is no need to widen and make the wheels and track heavier);

…

6. set the slope of the armor, at least on the top side[implemented on A-32 – approx. author] ;

7. make a hatch in the bottom[implemented on A-32 – approx. author] …»

Be that as it may, at the end of April 1938, Kharkov residents presented designs for two tanks for consideration by military customers. The head of the GABTU, Hero of Spain, Corps Commander D.G. really liked the tracked version. Pavlova. Back in February, he sent the People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR K.E. A report to Voroshilov, in which, among other things, he pointed out the need to develop a future replacement for BT tanks in two versions: wheeled-tracked and tracked. At that time, the highest tank command had not yet developed a final consensus on the preferred type of propulsion (tracked or wheeled-tracked) for future light and medium tanks. The first ones were cheaper, had higher reserves for increasing weight and cross-country ability. The second ones were distinguished by high speed on flat areas of terrain. Pavlov was more inclined to the first option: “Upon receiving the chassis (including the caterpillar) of a purely tracked tank, operating for at least 3000 km, it will be possible to abandon the wheeled-tracked type of tank.” Thus, it is quite possible that the creation of a tracked project was a joint initiative of functionaries from GABTU and Kharkov designers.

Sketch of the A-20 tank
Source - armor.kiev.ua

On May 4, 1938, an extended meeting of the NGO took place, which was attended by the country’s top leadership: I.V. Stalin, V.M. Molotov, K.E. Voroshilov and other members of the Politburo. They collectively listened to the opinions of tank functionaries (many of whom personally took part in the battles in Spain) about how they saw the future main tank of the Red Army. Komkor Pavlov, although he was inclined towards the tracked version, did not dare to contradict Stalin, who, like the entire Politburo, favored the wheeled-tracked propulsion system. Fortunately, the Kharkov tank builders were rescued by the hero of Spain, military engineer of the 3rd rank A.A. Vetrov, who categorically advocated the need to create a tracked tank. During a break in the meeting, Stalin personally clarified the military engineer’s opinion and decided to order plant No. 183 to develop two prototypes at once.

In October 1938, the company provided the GABTU with drawings and models of the A-20 and A-20G, which the Main Military Council of the Red Army reviewed on December 9-10. At a meeting of the USSR Defense Committee on February 27, 1939, Stalin in the presence of M.I. Koshkin and Deputy People's Commissar of Defense G.I. Kulika discussed the question of which prototype to order for Kharkov residents. Both Stalin and military functionaries were still inclined towards the wheeled-tracked version, and those present who had a different opinion did not risk voicing it. The exception was chief designer plant No. 183. Koshkin insisted that in order to accept final decision it is necessary to compare prototypes with two types of propulsors. In response, Stalin uttered the famous phrase: “There is no need to constrain the plant’s initiative, I trust the plant workers. Let them build both tanks."

Work began in full swing in Kharkov; the tracked tank was assigned the factory index A-32 and included in the production program. They decided to increase the thickness of its armor by 5-10 mm, using the weight of the “lighter” chassis. The A-20 was equipped with a 45-mm cannon, and the A-32 was armed with a 76-mm L-10 gun produced by the Leningrad Kirov Plant (hereinafter referred to as LKZ). At the beginning of 1939, three tank design bureaus (KB-190, KB-35 and KB-24) of plant No. 183 were combined into one unit, which was given a secret name - “department 520”. Organizational changes were made due to an increase in the volume of work and the need to constantly transfer design personnel from one “burning” area to another. The new design bureau was headed by Koshkin, and Morozov became deputy chief designer.

A-20 prototype
Source - aviarmor.net

The A-20 and A-32 prototypes were produced by May 1939, and over the next three months they passed a full cycle of state tests. By this time, the diesel section was finally separated from plant No. 183 into an independent diesel plant No. 75 of the People's Commissariat of the Aviation Industry. In June, the V-2 finally successfully passed state tests, and on September 5 it was recommended for launch into mass production.

Meanwhile, WWII began on September 1, 1939, and there was no point in delaying further production of the new main medium tank. At the end of September K.E. Voroshilov ordered demonstration tests to be held at the Kubinka test site. The tanks were observed by Stalin, Voroshilov, as well as other members of the NGO and government. At the test site, Soviet tank builders demonstrated six vehicles at once: experimental heavy SMK and KV, light modernized T-26 and BT-7M, as well as A-20 and A-32. The A-32 tank showed excellent maneuverability; in addition, unlike the A-20, its weight could be significantly increased. Koshkin informed the country’s leadership that the design bureau is working to increase the thickness tank armor up to 45 mm and considers this a completely justified decision in the event of final modification of the V-2 diesel engine by Plant No. 75.

After the tests, Stalin changed his mind about tanks with tracked propulsion. It was decided to continue testing the chassis of the A-32 tank with ballast and prepare two prototypes with more powerful anti-ballistic armor. At the same time, the A-20 model was not abandoned - the possibility of parallel production of this vehicle together with the A-32 and its use as a cavalry tank was considered.

A-32 prototype undergoing field testing
Source - 3v-soft.clan.su

On December 19, 1939, at a meeting of the Defense Committee based on the results of tests of the A-32, resolution No. 443ss was adopted, which ordered the adoption of the T-32 tracked tank, manufactured by plant No. 183. Previously, Kharkov residents were obliged to make changes to its design: increase the thickness of the main armor plates to 45 mm, improve visibility from the tank, install a 76-mm F-32 cannon instead of the L-10 gun, coaxial with a 7.62-mm DT machine gun, and also provide for the installation course, separate and anti-aircraft machine guns of the same caliber. The new tank was assigned the index T-34.

Fatal tank run

Assembly of the first A-34 No. 1 (A is the factory index) was completed in January 1940, A-34 No. 2 in February. In internal factory correspondence, the cars received the unofficial nickname “twins.” The tanks immediately began to undergo a full cycle of tests at the factory test site, but by March, when it was planned to organize a show of the new vehicles to Stalin, it became clear that the “thirty-fours” would not have time to reach the required mileage of 2000 km. Then Koshkin made the now legendary decision to drive the tanks under his own power along the Kharkov-Belgorod-Oryol-Moscow route and back, so that they would cover the distance provided for by the test program, and show the “Leader of the Peoples” the new vehicles right in the Kremlin. Despite the fact that Mikhail Ilyich had a severe cold the day before, he decided to go to Moscow along with his tanks.

On the night of March 5-6, the “twins” left the walls of the plant. They were accompanied by two tractors, one of which was towing a trailer loaded with spare parts, and the second was a transport trailer for shift crews, repairmen and Koshkin himself. Cars made marches, mainly at night, bypassing cities and busy highways.

The breakdowns began when the tanks had not yet moved far from Kharkov - the first happened in the Belgorod area. This is how Yu.E. wrote about it in his memoirs. Maksarev: “The GABTU representative, sitting at the levers, forced the car to turn in the snow at full speed and disabled the main clutch.” Koshkin decided not to waste time, but to continue moving (a repair team was called from the factory for the broken “thirty-four”). Another unpleasant episode occurred near Orel - the second tank slid into the lake, and the designer helped to pull it out, standing in the icy water.

On March 12, in Serpukhov, the column was met by Deputy People's Commissar of Medium Engineering A.A. Goreglyad. He transported the tank and tractors to Cherkizovo near Moscow, where at that time another tank-building enterprise was located - plant No. 37, which produced T-40 light tanks. Here the crew of the lagging A-34 caught up with the main group. Repairmen were preparing cars for the government show, and Koshkin, who was very ill, met leaders who came to Cherkizovo from various military and civilian administrative departments.

M.I. Koshkin with factory test mechanics, 1938
Source - mankurty.com

Despite all the difficulties, in the early morning of March 17, both tanks arrived at Ivanovo Square in the Kremlin. Security searched all participants in the rally before allowing them into the main government complex of the country, and one NKVD officer sat in each tank in place of the gunner-radio operator. During his report to Stalin, Koshkin kept sneezing and coughing, which displeased the head of the USSR. Stalin inquired about the health of the designer and demanded from his superiors that they take care of his recovery.

After the report and inspection of the tanks, the driver mechanics simultaneously moved their vehicles off the ground. They, effectively striking sparks from the pavement, rushed: one to Spassky, the other to the Trinity Gate. Here, the multi-ton colossus quickly turned around and rushed back towards each other. Having made several circles with turns in different directions, the tanks froze on command in the same place.

Stalin liked the cars, despite the fact that Marshal G.I. Kulik and General D.G. Pavlov pointed out to him a lot of shortcomings that the tank actually had. Pavlov directly told Stalin: “We will pay dearly for producing insufficiently combat-ready vehicles.” However, the just ended war with Finland showed that the light tanks in service with the Red Army did not meet the requirements modern combat. Stalin ordered that the T-34 complete the test cycle and begin mass production of the vehicle, while simultaneously improving its design. He ordered Plant No. 183 to provide all necessary assistance.

After the show, the tanks were driven to a training ground in Kubinka, where they were subjected to sea trials, shelling tests, the hull's tightness was checked (one of the vehicles was thrown with Molotov cocktails), etc. As a result, a list of comments to the T-34 appeared, consisting of eighty-six points . In April, tanks and tractors went to their home plant along the Moscow-Minsk-Kyiv-Kharkov route. Despite an untreated cold, Koshkin again went with the tanks and returned home with a severe form of pneumonia. Perhaps he could have been cured, but he constantly ran away from the hospital to the plant, where work on launching the T-34 into series was in full swing. Doctors were forced to remove one of his lungs, but this did not save the designer. On September 26, 1940, he died in the Lipki sanatorium near Kharkov at the forty-second year of his life. Instead, his deputy A.A. became the general designer of plant No. 183. Morozov.

A.A. Morozov
Source - morozov.com.ua

The publication

The designers refined the tank, eliminating the identified deficiencies one by one. At the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant (hereinafter referred to as ChTZ), they mastered the production of fuel equipment for the V-2 (previously it had to be purchased from the German company Bosch, and high-pressure fuel pipes from Italy and Sweden). Now a special workshop for fuel equipment has been built in Kharkov. The engine life of diesel engines gradually increased, but the main problem - increasing the reliability of the main clutch and gearbox of tanks - was not solved before the war. This was largely due to the insufficient gear-cutting machine park and the shortage of a significant part of the wear-resistant materials used in the production of friction clutches.

An interesting situation arose with the F-34 cannon, designed specifically for the T-34 in the design bureau of Gorky plant No. 92, which was led by the legendary designer V.G. Grabin. Initially, the Gorky people created the F-32 tank gun (the KV-1 tank was armed with it), designed to replace the 76-mm L-11 development of the artillery design bureau LKZ I.A. Makhanova. When designing it, Grabin used the muzzle of the regimental 76-mm F-22 cannon of his own design, and his designers developed a completely new bolt. The F-32 won the competition against the L-11, which turned into a tragedy for Makhanov. In June 1939, he and almost the entire leadership of the LKZ Design Bureau were arrested and shot.

In 1938, when work on the F-32 was still ongoing, the GABTU issued tactical and technical requirements to the Gorky residents for a new anti-tank tank gun with the ballistics of a 40-caliber gun (that is, not as mounted as the L-11 and F-32) . Grabin Design Bureau prepared a new “product” with the index F-34 by November 1940, but Marshal Kulik refused to conduct military tests and accept the artillery system for service. Ignoring Kulik's opinion, Plant No. 92 and military receivers began mass production of this gun and sending it to tank factories in Kharkov and Stalingrad, believing that the F-34 was more suited to the needs of the army than the F-32 or L-11. As a result of all these events, a paradoxical situation arose in the summer of 1941 - the gun fought on T-34 tanks, received flattering reviews from Soviet tank crews, but was not accepted for service. When Stalin became aware of this, he demanded that the prescribed military tests be carried out and that the gun be retroactively accepted for service.

Production of T-34-76 tanks. In the foreground are 76.2 mm F-34 cannons of the 1940 model. Workshop of the Chelyabinsk Kirov plant, 1943
Source - waralbum.ru

In addition to the 76-mm cannon, by July 1941, for the T-34, Grabin's design bureau had developed a 57-mm ZiS-4 tank gun, the ballistics of which corresponded to the legendary anti-tank gun ZiS-2. However, a tiny number of these guns were installed on the tanks - only about thirty pieces. The reason for this was the excessive armor-piercing power of this artillery system - there were cases when T-34-57 armor-piercing shells pierced through enemy tanks without causing them much damage. Projectiles fired with a lower initial velocity from the 76-mm F-34, in the event of penetrating the target’s armor, were more likely to disable it. In addition, high-explosive 57-mm shells had insufficient destructive power, which reduced their effectiveness when fighting enemy infantry. The final end to the ZiS-4 in 1941 was its high cost compared to the F-34.

Tests of the German tank Pz.Kpfw.III, received by the USSR in the summer of 1940 as part of Soviet-German cooperation, showed that while it has superior armor and weapon power, the T-34 is inferior to its main German counterparts in terms of chassis and transmission reliability, and also the motor potential of the engine. In addition, the Soviet tank had a worse solution to the issue of surveillance devices and the spaciousness of the turret. In the cramped two-man turret of the T-34, the tank commander constantly had to be distracted from command while loading the gun, and in the event of rapid developments, he might not have time to make the decisions necessary for the survival of the crew. The T-34 met the day of June 22, 1941 with these unresolved problems.

When clouds gathered over the Motherland

In the very first battles, the shortcomings of the new tanks were fully revealed. Decisions hastily made by the command of the General Staff of the Red Army and the fronts led to the mechanized corps (hereinafter referred to as MK) hundreds of kilometers of marches, on which more than half of the tanks had to be abandoned due to breakdowns and lack of fuel. Another part of the tanks was abandoned or destroyed by their crews, left without shells and fuel, when leaving the encirclement. A significant portion of MK vehicles were lost in hasty and poorly prepared attacks on well-fortified enemy positions. The German crews had a hard time when their tanks came into close contact with the better armored and armed Soviet T-34s. But the Wehrmacht tankers tried to avoid such situations, preferring to act from ambushes or even give the crews the opportunity to deal with the enemy anti-tank guns, anti-aircraft guns or infantry.

As a result, most of the pre-war "thirty-fours", along with the rest of the armored forces, were lost in the summer of 1941. By autumn the situation had become catastrophic. On September 14, 1941, in Ukraine, most of the troops of the Southwestern Front were surrounded in the territory of the Kyiv, Poltava, Chernigov and Sumy regions, and the enemy approached Kharkov.

Stuck and abandoned Soviet KV and T-34 tanks
Source - topwar.ru

On September 17, 1941, the State Defense Committee (GKO) decided to evacuate factories No. 183 and No. 75 to the Urals (the first to Nizhny Tagil at the Uralvagonzavod sites, the second to Chelyabinsk, where the legendary “ Tankograd"). Until October 25, ChTZ, renamed the Chelyabinsk Kirov Plant (hereinafter referred to as ChKZ), was obliged to begin production of the first V-2 engines. In September, the development of production of these power plants began at the Stalingrad Tractor Plant (“thirty-four” it began producing in the summer of 1940). Later, in the summer of 1942, construction of a motor plant in Barnaul began.

In addition to plants No. 183 in Nizhny Tagil and STZ in Stalingrad, ChKZ, Leningrad plant No. 174, Sverdlovsk Uralmash, and Gorky plant No. 112 Krasnoe Sormovo were obliged to master the production of T-34 in 1942. But the main manufacturer of the T-34 was still plant No. 183, which missed all deadlines for launching mass production of tanks at the new location. The company failed to evacuate many of the machine tools, wagons with equipment for the production of turrets were lost at the railway station, there were no tank diesel engines, and when everything that had been evacuated from Kharkov was installed on the “thirty-fours” already assembled in Nizhny Tagil, production stopped.

Lead clouds hung over the director of the plant, Maksarev, Stalin was going to put him on trial - in those tough times this meant certain death. To rectify the situation, the head of the USSR sent to Nizhny Tagil the Deputy People's Commissar of Tank Construction and concurrently the Director of ChKZ I.M. Zaltsman, who solved similar problems in Chelyabinsk quickly and effectively. In order for Zaltsman to have time to resolve all issues both in Nizhny Tagil and at ChKZ, he was allocated a personal Li-2 transport aircraft.

In his new place, Zaltsman began to act using his usual methods. At the nearest large junction station in Sverdlovsk, filled with carriages with equipment from evacuated enterprises, Isaac Moiseevich, sometimes using his authority, and sometimes threatening him with a pistol, confiscated and sent the necessary machines to plant No. 183. In addition, several cars with M-17 aviation carburetor engines, which fit perfectly into the T-34 engine and transmission compartment and were suitable in power, went to the wrong destination. The plant started working, and Zaltsman defended Maksarev before Stalin, proving that in the current situation he was not to blame. Maksarev worked as Zaltsman's deputy in Nizhny Tagil until he took the plant back in 1943.

THEM. Zaltsman
Source - uralpolit.ru

After an outright “robbery” on the roads carried out by the Deputy People's Commissar of Tank, which led to disruptions in aircraft production, Stalin received several angry complaints from the People's Commissar of the USSR Aviation Industry A.I. Shakhurin, but the “leader” of the tank builders did not punish and let the conflict go “on the brakes.”

The tank grows up, the tank changes

Morozov Design Bureau was also evacuated from Kharkov to Nizhny Tagil. It worked in two directions at once, the first of which was the modification of the T-34 design in order to increase its reliability and manufacturability, as well as reduce labor intensity. The design bureau of plant No. 75, taken to Chelyabinsk and headed by I.Ya., who returned from the camps, was guided by the same goals. Trashutin. Thanks to these efforts, during the war, the labor intensity of manufacturing one tank was reduced by 2.4 times (including the armored hull by 5 times, the diesel engine by 2.5 times), and the cost by almost half (from 270,000 to 142,000 rubles) .

A significant reduction in the labor intensity of hull manufacturing was influenced by the introduction at Soviet tank factories of innovative technology for automatic submerged arc welding of armor plates, developed at the Kiev Electric Welding Institute E.O. Paton. It turned out to be extremely useful because it did not require high qualifications and experience from welders. While highly qualified German welders spent a lot of precious time assembling the hulls of “threes”, “fours”, “tigers” and “panthers”, in the USSR similar work was carried out by recent schoolchildren and schoolgirls. In addition, after testing the welding seams by fire, it turned out that their strength was higher than that of the armor sheets connected by them.

Welding the sides of the T-34 tank hull with an automatic welding installation at plant No. 183 in Nizhny Tagil
Source - waralbum.ru

Another, no less important area of ​​work of the Morozov Design Bureau was improving the combat qualities of the tank, the requirements for which from the military were increasing every month.

In February 1942, designers were required to create a new five-speed gearbox. They completed this task by the summer, designing a more reliable gearbox with moving couplings and constant mesh gears instead of the moving gears used on the previous four-speed gearbox. At the same time, the overall and connecting dimensions of the gearbox did not change, which means that no changes were required to the tank hull, and the replacement of the gearbox did not affect the speed of tank production.

The tank's turret has also undergone evolution. The first series of towers were produced both cast and welded - casting was less durable, but more technologically advanced. On the first cast turrets, the armor of the on-board surveillance devices was carried out integrally with the turret, but this innovation was soon abandoned, unifying these elements with the welded turret. Then the all-round viewing device was removed from the hatch cover (the hole in the hatch in this case was welded with a round plug). In the rear part of the turret there was a special hatch through which the dismantled gun barrel with the knurling and recoil brake was removed and installed. The cradle was removed through the turret hatch, which was made large for these purposes, eliminating separate hatches for the commander and gunner, as was the case on the BT-7 tanks.

German soldiers next to a T-34 tank. Car produced in March-April 1941
Source - waralbum.ru

In the spring of 1941, the drawings of the new turret were approved, the shoulder straps of which increased from 1400 to 1420 mm. In the last months of operation of plant No. 183 in Kharkov, only one observation device was installed on the towers, and a cutout for the all-round viewing device was not made. These changes came into full effect at STZ, which for a short time, while the Kharkov facilities were evacuated to the Urals, became the main manufacturer of the Thirty-four in the country.

Until the fall of 1941, the configuration of the towers did not change. In September 1941, STZ began developing a new method for cutting armor plates (which excluded bending of the aft part of the turret side plates), which was mastered by the end of the year. It was approved on September 17, 1941, and in December STZ began producing tanks in a new design.

The next stage of development, begun in Stalingrad, was the use finger joint in the tower design. By April 1942, a new version of the front part of the turret was developed - so-called gussets appeared, which eliminated the ricochet of shells into the shoulder strap area.

At the Sormovsky plant, powerful casting production made it possible to quickly set up the production of towers of their own shape, which had more rational contours of the front part (they were more pointed). On March 1, 1942, the Gorky residents abandoned the stern hatch in the turret, which reduced its cost. Instead, the head of the weapons sector of the Sormovo plant A.S. Okunev developed a technology for replacing a tank's gun (including in the field) through a shoulder strap. This method is still used by tank crews of all countries former USSR.

However, more and more complaints appeared about the T-34 turret every month. It was not very technologically advanced and cramped. In addition, after the tank took part in battles, it turned out that the turret hatch was extremely inconvenient for emergency evacuation of crews, and the designers were asked to change it. As a result, at factory No. 183, in late winter and early spring 1942, the design of a new, hexagonal tower, better known as a “nut,” began. Instead of one large hatch, two separate, smaller ones were built on it, as well as a commander’s cupola. By 1943, all T-34 manufacturers gradually began installing just such turrets on tanks.

Assembly of the T-34 at a tank plant (possibly ChKZ or plant No. 174 in Omsk). The vehicle has a "nut" turret with a commander's cupola
Source - waralbum.ru

From bitter defeats to bitter victories

Along with the improvement of the design of the T-34, their use on the fronts also became more thoughtful and conscious. Until the end of 1942, tanks were sent to units with minimal delay. During the days of the defense of Stalingrad, the “thirty-fours” went into battle directly from the workshops, since the front line was only a few kilometers away, and in the last days of the defense of the STZ - hundreds of meters. As the factories mastered automatic welding, technological optimization of the tank design and perfected all processes, the monthly production of T-34 tanks grew steadily. By the end of 1942, this figure exceeded 1000 vehicles, and by the end of 1943 - 1400. This allowed the command of the Red Army to form a whole series of tank corps (hereinafter - TK) by November 1942, thanks to which from November 1942 to February 1943 the Red Army carried out several successful offensive operations.

On November 19, 1942, Soviet troops launched Operation Uranus, having a more than two-fold advantage in tanks - 1,463 vehicles (of which the majority were T-34s) against 675 German ones. Already on November 23, the troops of the 4th Tank Corps of the Southwestern Front and the 4th MK of the Stalingrad Front met in the area of ​​the Sovetsky farm, encircling the Stalingrad enemy group between the Volga and Don rivers. A series of more blows followed. During Operation Little Saturn, four tank tanks thwarted the Wehrmacht's attempt to relieve Stalingrad, stopped the supply of the 6th German Army by air, and also cleared the territories in the middle reaches of the Don from enemy troops. "Thirty-fours" of the 24th TC of Major General V.M. Badanov stormed the German airfield in the village of Tatsinskaya and destroyed most of the planes flying from here to Stalingrad. The forces of the 6th and 11th tank divisions of the Wehrmacht arrived in time and were able to encircle and force Badanov’s forces to retreat. As a result, he lost most of the tanks of the 24th Tank (she ran out of shells for the tank guns), but he completed his task of disrupting the German supply to the 6th Army.

Preparing a train with T-34 for sending to the front. The crews waited for their tanks right at the factories, simultaneously mastering their design
Source - waralbum.ru

Tankers of the 17th and 18th Tank Corps in their "thirty-fours" literally mixed up the retreating columns of the 8th Italian Army, and the 4th Tank Corps helped the 38th, 40th and 60th armies push the enemy back from Voronezh and soon liberate Kursk. If in the first months of the war Stalin's military commanders had tank (mechanized) corps at their disposal, now they operated tank armies, and the credit for this belongs exclusively to Soviet tank builders, who produced twice as many tanks monthly as their German counterparts. Of course, the quality of Soviet tanks was poor, and the number of engine hours they covered without breakdowns was relatively small. But work to improve the reliability of the Thirty-Fours did not stop throughout the war. From March 1943 to April 1947, warranty tests of serial T-34s were constantly carried out at the Kubinka training ground. They showed that during this period the service life of the vehicles increased from 300-400 to 1200-1500 km. In addition, the Thirty-Fours were superior to German tanks in cross-country ability, armor protection and maintainability.

The situation changed dramatically by the summer of 1943, when Wehrmacht units armed with new German medium (according to the Soviet classification - heavy) Pz.Kpfw.V "Panther" tanks and heavy Pz.Kpfw.VI "Tiger" tanks appeared on the Eastern Front. The 76-mm F-34 cannon could penetrate frontal armor“tigers” and “panthers” only at distances less than 400 meters, while German tank guns “pierced” the forehead of the T-34 from one and a half kilometers. Such a significant advantage of the new German tanks manifested itself during large-scale tank battles on Kursk Bulge in July-August 1943. Soviet troops won, but suffered huge losses in armored vehicles, the bulk of which were the same “thirty-fours”. The situation urgently needed to be corrected.

"Thirty-fours" from the tank column "For Soviet Ukraine" knocked out near Belgorod. Photo by Franz Grasser
Source - belgorod.doguran.ru

The designers remembered the 57-mm Grabin tank gun. In May 1943, the T-34-57 - “fighter tanks”, armed with modernized 57-mm ZIS-4M guns, which differed from the ZIS-4 in a number of simplifications, were again adopted by the Red Army. However, such a decision was only a half-measure.

In the arena – T-34-85

Beginning in the summer of 1942, the Morozov Design Bureau carried out work to create a radically new T-43 tank based on the T-34. Christie's pendant, taking away significant amount reserved space was replaced with a torsion bar, and the thickness of the frontal armor, designed to withstand hits from new German guns, reached 75 mm. For the T-43, a new convenient three-man turret was developed, into which an 85-mm D-5-T85 cannon was installed, created in the design bureau of the Sverdlovsk Artillery Plant No. 9 under the leadership of F.F. Petrov and already successfully used on the KV-85, IS-1 and SU-85 tanks.

For a number of reasons, the launch of a new car into series was considered irrational. However, in order to equip the T-34 with weapons adequate to counter the “tigers” and “panthers”, they decided to create a new turret for the T-34 based on the turret developed for the T-43. Its frontal armor has doubled - from 45 to 90 mm. The weight of the tank also increased and reached 32.2 tons. Finally, a commander's cupola and hatches were constructed on the tower, convenient for evacuating the crew. This is how the new T-34-85 tank designed by Morozov Design Bureau appeared, appearance which is well known to almost all residents of the countries of the former USSR from films, photographs and monuments.

T-34-76 (left) and T-43 (right)
Source - morozov.com.ua

The tank's hull and chassis did not undergo significant changes, except that the diameter of the turret ring increased from 1420 to 1600 mm. The thickness of the hull armor still reached 45 mm, and Christie suspension was used. The rear layout of the transmission and the V-2-34 diesel engine modernized during the war (rated power of 450 hp at 1750 rpm) predetermined the rear-wheel drive of the car. The economical power plant gave the tank a fuel reserve of 370-420 km. The chassis of the vehicle consisted of five road wheels, large diameter which made it possible to do without support rollers. The width of the T-34 track initially reached 550 mm, but plant No. 183, even before its evacuation from Kharkov, equipped some of the tanks with tracks 500 and even 450 mm wide. In the spring and summer of 1942, instead of a smooth 550-mm track, the service of the chief designer of the People's Commissariat of Tank Industry under the leadership of S.A. Ginzburg developed a new 500-mm corrugated cast track, which turned out to be lighter and stronger than the previous one. Until the end of the war, the tracks of the Soviet “thirty-four” were assembled from such tracks.

The 85-mm D-5-T85 cannon was soon replaced by a more compact gun of the same caliber, the ZiS-S-53, developed at the Central Artillery Design Bureau (TsAKB), into which the Grabin Design Bureau was transformed. In addition, it turned out that the cost of the new artillery system is significantly lower than the previous 76-mm F-34 gun and, even more so, than the D-5-T85 gun.

Since January 1944, the Sormovo plant No. 112 began producing the new tank in small batches. In March of the same year, plant No. 183 in Nizhny Tagil began assembling the T-34-85. By the summer, all enterprises involved in the production of "thirty-fours" replaced the T-34-76 with a new model. In the spring of 1944, the T-34-85 began to enter service with the troops and went through the final stage of the war against the Third Reich almost unchanged, and then participated in the battles against Japan.

The most popular tank and its creator

In total, during the pre-war and war years, receivers received 35,333 T-34 tanks from Soviet enterprises. Since 1944, factories in the USSR, and in post-war years enterprises in Poland and Czechoslovakia also produced more than 35,000 T-34-85 vehicles. As a result, the Thirty-Four became the most popular tank of WWII.

M.I. Koshkin, officially recognized as the creator of the T-34, did not see the triumph of his brainchild. In 1942, he and A.A. Morozov and N.A. Kucherenko was posthumously awarded the Stalin Prize of the 1st degree, and on October 4, 1990, by decree of the President of the USSR M.S. Gorbachev - was awarded the title of Hero of Socialist Labor. However, some researchers Soviet tank building, including B.M. Baryatinsky, whose works were used in writing this article, question his authorship. The famous engineer’s closest colleagues also had their own opinion on this issue. This is what L.N. recalled. Kartsev, who in 1953 replaced A.A. Morozov as general designer of plant No. 183: “It seems to me that Morozov was tormented by one circumstance all his life: he did not want to share the glory of creating the T-34 tank with the former chief designer M.I. Koshkin. And here's what I can give to confirm this. After...letter[with Kartsev’s request to perpetuate the memory of Koshkin – approx. author] a correspondent arrived in Nizhny Tagil Komsomolskaya Pravda"... and interviewed all former Kharkov residents. ...After Nizhny Tagil, the correspondent went to Kharkov. When he came to Morozov, he told him: “Neither I nor any of my employees can tell anything about Koshkin.”

Who did not dispute Koshkin’s authorship was Adolf Hitler, who posthumously included him in the list of his personal enemies. In 1941, the First City Cemetery of Kharkov, where the designer was buried, was deliberately bombed, as a result of which Mikhail Ilyich’s grave disappeared (the tombstone was not subsequently restored). But throughout the entire territory of the former USSR, the T-34 stands on pedestals - the most widespread tank-monument, reminiscent of its creators, in the forefront of which M.I. rightfully occupies a place. Koshkin.

One of the many monuments “with the participation” of the T-34
Source - aramgurum.ru