|
|
Advantages: armor protection, mobility (autonomy, diesel engine, speed, large tracks), powerful gun (more than adequate against any PzKpfw III and IV), easy to build (about 40 hours)
Disadvantages: lack of commander cupola, 2-men turret and tiny turret, "raw" construction (the counterweight of the low cost and manufacturing speed!)
The most significative design of the war
The T-34 was a direct development of the BT light tanks serie, using Christie-type suspensions, thick sloped armor, heavy fire power and superior mobility, thanks to its 500hp diesel engine and 48cm wide tracks. Designed by Mikail Koskin in the Harkov "Komintern" industrial plant the tank was vastly superior to any contemporary tank in its class and was accepted as model for all future medium tanks.
Although the design team was not sure about its tank but finally enjoyed its creature when knowing about the particularities of the German Panzer III, which was the best German AT tank in the early war. Infact, as offshoot of the German-Soviet pact of 1939 some Panzer IIIs were given to the Russians for evaluation. In the Kubinka proving center this took place. Koshkin's team was relieved to prove that the German tank was inferior in armor protection, mobility and fire-power. It was ultimately derised as a pretty toy, overengineered and needless comfortable for the crew(!).
 |
T-34b armor scheme (Photo by Valera Potapov) |
The design parties found several faulties in the design: the Christie suspensions were judged not good as they subtracted to much internal room and planned to be replaced with a torsion bar type, scuh as that on the KV, which proved much more efficient; front armor had to be raised to 60 mm and side armor reduced to 40 mm; turret ring has to be enlarged enough to fit a new three men turret with a commander's cupola. Main gun had to be the new F-32 76,2 mm L41,2 gun. This new tank was named T-34M and did not go over the prototype stage because before mass production could be executed the urgent and desperate need of tanks took the "old" T-34 to be maintained in production.
As for the KV-1 heavy tank Soviet dispersal use of this tank proved to be wrong but the advanced design gave them a technological edge over the Germans permitting the Russians to sustain the invasion: sloped platings which gave optimal ballistical performances, powerful anti-tank gun capable of taking out any German tank, large tracks suitable for the Russian disasterous climax and high all-terrains speed thanks to the Christie-type suspensions and the powerful engine provided a design that joined to the pragmatic (and huge) Russian tank production was going to make the difference in the days ahead on the Eastern Front.
The real drawback in the first series was the mechanical unreliability as both modern KV and T-34 sufferend teething problems with transmission and engine, many carried spare tracks over the hull to provide fast repairs (but also because Soviet logistics was unable to ship them in time). In addition, many of the technical 'details' of the T-34 proved to be ill-manufactured: the air cleaners were too poor and pushed dirt inside the engine, rapidly wearing it down. 4-speed gear-boxes were prone to breaking down and clutches were weak: maximum teorethical speed was rarely archievable under normal conditions. Tanks required a major engine overhaul after less than (max) 100 hours of use. Things became better when a new 5-speed gearbox and new transmission came in 1943.
 |
Destroyed T-34/76 model 1940 |
First tanks (or T-34 model 1940) used short barreled L-11 guns (armed with the 76,2mm L30,5, muzzle speed of around 612 m/s). These was because the more modern F-32 gun (length of 39 calibres) had been delayed by Marschal Kulik's bureau inept adminastration. In addition 76,2 ammunition production was also dealyed as only 12 percent of theunits had their ammo supply. Kharkov T-34 factory started on its own to manufacture an improved model 1941 with, at first, an F-32 gun and shortly after with longer barreled F-34 gun (muzzle speed of about 660 m/s capable of piercing a 65mm thick plates at 30º on a 457 meters range).
On October 5th 1941, in the Kamenewo area, the Russians launched their first counter-attack mass using KV and T34 tanks, stopping the 4th Panzerdivision in its drive to capture Mtsensk. Although this engagement decisively delayed the German advance towards Tula the German offensive against Moscow (operation "Taifun") was in full swing and the Soviets continued to evacuate their more important plants in Volga and Urals areas: 42 factories were moved there and produced thousands T-34s in the months to come.
 |
A "German" T-34/76 model 1941 with the long barreled 76mm gun |
With the standard BR-350A round it was capable to pierce 69mm of armor on the common battle range of 500 metres, sufficient to deal with German Panzer IV Ausf. Gs. When more powerfull armored German tanks appeared, a new BR-350P round, capable to penetrate a 92 mm steel plate on the same range, was used.
Because of the many factories involved in the T-34's production there were many variants in its layout: at Stalingrad the rear turret plate was a simply welded flat plate; interlocking glacis plates were used at Leningrad and several complexes used slightly various thickeness (such as 47mm) in their platings. Some tanks were re-build with additional welded plates. Fuel tanks also evolved during the war and, of course, in every factory. As one of the more big defects of the T-34 layout a new hexagonal turret entered in production: depending on the factory involved it was full cast, full welded or a mix of the two. New turret had more room but still only two crewmen and no commander's cupola (but some factory added this latter on their vehicles).
In mid 1942 factories begun to run out of rubber: as a temporarly measure all-steel roadwheels were designed and employed. This resulted in the tanks being very uncompfortable for crews because of vibrations and noisy. As rubber supplies in the beginning of 1943 increased again, first and last roadwheels where replaced with rubber-cushioned ones as a measure to reduce in acceptable way the problem. Bye mid-late 1943 tanks had no more steel-only wheels. A short summary may be this (information provided by Valera Potapov):
 |
T-34/76c on the Leningrad Front, 1943 |
As for the KV heavy tank Soviets carried on a vast plan to reduce the tank price in order to increase the numbers. A 1941 Tcost 269,500 roubles and decreased to 193,000 in 1942. Of couse the high level of craftmanship of the first -34 exemplaries disappeared along with many hull fittings being simplified and others, such as the loader roof periscope, simply omitted.
The German tanks' crews found themselves gravely under-morale because they could be knocked out without being able to do the same. German Pz. Rgt. 4 reported: "Time and time again our tanks have been split right open by frontal hits. The commander's cupola of the PzKpfw III and IV have been completely blown off, proof of that the armor is inadequate and the attachment to the cupolas is faulty. It is also proof of the great accuracy and penetration of the Russian T-34's 76,2 mm gun ... The former pace and offensive spirit (of the Panzer force) will evaporate and be replaced by a feeling of inferiority since the crews know they can be knocked out by enemy tank while they are still a great distance away.". Although in the same report were also reported the main weak points of the tank: "hits against the rear drive-sprocket were succesful, along with chance hits on the turret ring".
 |
T-34/76s and 76,2mm AT guns, 1943 |
It was only on early 1942 that the new KwK 39 50mm L60 cannon appeared on the Pz III: with this the German crews were able to pierce the Soviet tank's front armor on ranges under 500 metres. When new 75mm L43 KwK 40 mounted on the Panzer IV appeared the firepower shifted even more to the German side. Armor increased as well, reaching 70-80 mm and giving the Russian some thought about the way to follow in the next models.
The tank design was improved by using new thicker cast turrets and other improvements but the existence of so many plants make them very difficult to classify: additional armor plates, new gear boxes, additional fuel tanks, new armor design for the gun mantlet and so on.
 |
T-34/76 model 1943 with embarked
infantry re-take the initiative in
|
In late 1942 a new up-armored 32 tons T-34 (called T-43) with 70mm front hull armor and 100mm front and 90mm side turret armor was produced in small quantities: it was aborted because the Russians decided to switch on the "fire power and mobility" rather than "fire power and armor" doctrine. The result of this technical quest was the T-34/85.
The assault guns based on the T-34
After the German Sturmgeschutze's successes the Soviet State Defence Commitee ordered an effort to design a medium assault gun using the T-34 chassis. The assault gun was designated SU-35 and consisted of a modified M-30 Model 1930 122mm howitzer mounted in a fully enclosed casemate on the front of a modified T-34 model 1943 chassis. The simple mantlet permitted an elevation of -3 degrees to +26 degrees and the gun could be traversed of ten degrees to either side. Total ammunition payload was 40 rounds and no Mg was mounted.
First regiments were ready in December 1943 and consisted of four batteries of SU-76 light assault guns (17 vehicles) and two batteries of SU-122s (eight vehicles). The first two were commited in January 1943 on the Leningrad front. Additional two others were employed in March. The Red Army reactions to this units were mixed. The design was plauded but the the performances of the early SU-76 was disappointing. By the appearance of the improved SU-76M the regiments had been reconfigured in more homogenous light and medium assault gun regiments. The medium regiments consisted of four batteries (16 SU-122s) and a T-34 command tank. By Summer 1944 over 1,100 tanks had been built.
 |
A SU-122 SP gun captured (and put in service) by the Wehrmacht |
The appearance of the German Tiger tank speeded up the design of a tank destroyed capable of dealing with its heavy armor. Trials on a captured Tiger proved that the front plate could be penetrated by the 122mm A-18 Army corps gun and the 85mm AA gun. The design bureau under Gen. Petrov was encharged of designing a new tank destroyer armed with a modified D-5S-85 gun. An experimental version mounted the gun upon a SU-122 chassis but this proved to have poor aiming systems for direct fire. A new ball mantlet was designed with a telescopic sight.
The internal sowage permitted the allocation of fourty-nine 85mm rounds.In August 1943 the SU-85 entered in production and was destined in two organizations. The separate SP battalions were equipped with 12 tanks and assigned to Army and Front level commanders while the larger regiments were formed on the same fashion of the SU-122s. The regiments were first deployed with the mechanized army corps to provide them with additional AT fire.
The first time for the employement of the SU-85 was the late Summer 1943 campaign in the Dnepr basin. The TD soon became popular because it was among the few armored vehicles which could deal with Panther tank. For example, the 1021st SP regiments claimed the destrusction of nearly 100 German armored vehcicles while supporting various infantry actions in the Summer 1944. By September 1944 the production halted after 2,050 SP guns had been manufactured. Some of the late exemplaries were based upon the improved chassis used for the more deadly SU-100.
 |
A SU-85 tank destroyer enters in the town of Bacau, near Budapest, on August 31st 1944 |
This page is online thanks to Geocities, the largest Web Community! Get your own free page at Geocities!!! |
