Captured anti-tank artillery in the German Armed Forces … Talking about the anti-tank guns used in the armed forces of Nazi Germany, one cannot fail to mention the Soviet-made 76.2 mm divisional guns.
In the Red Army, divisional artillery was assigned the widest range of tasks. To combat openly located manpower, it was envisaged to use unitary loading shots with shrapnel grenades equipped with remote tubes. High-explosive fragmentation 76, 2-mm shells could be successfully used against infantry, unarmored vehicles, as well as for the destruction of light field fortifications and wire barriers. The defeat of armored vehicles and embrasures of pillboxes when firing direct fire was provided with armor-piercing shells. Also, divisional artillery could fire incendiary, smoke and chemical shells.
As of June 22, 1941, active units and warehouses had more than 10,500 divisional guns of 76, 2 mm caliber, including 76-mm divisional guns mod. 1902/30, modernized 76, 2-mm guns with an elongated barrel, produced after 1931, 76, 2-mm guns mod. 1933, 76 mm F-22 cannon mod. 1936 and the 76-mm cannon of the 1939 model, known as the F-22USV. According to the pre-war states, in the rifle, cavalry and motorized divisions in the light artillery regiment, in addition to four 122-mm howitzers, there should have been eight 76, 2-mm guns. The tank division had an artillery regiment: three light divisions of four 76, 2-mm guns and eight 122-mm howitzers. After 1942, the number of 76, 2-mm guns in artillery regiments increased to 20 units.
As you know, any artillery weapon becomes anti-tank when enemy tanks are in its reach. This fully applies to divisional guns, which almost more often than specialized anti-tank guns were involved in the fight against enemy armored vehicles. However, the capabilities of various Soviet divisional guns were not the same.
76-mm divisional gun mod. 1902/30 g
By June 1941, the 76-mm divisional gun of the 1902/30 model was morally and technically obsolete. This artillery system was a modernized version of the 1902 model of the divisional gun. The gun, created in 1930 in the design bureau of the Motovilikhinsky plant, differed from its predecessor by the introduction of a balancing mechanism and significant changes in the carriage.
Until 1931, a modification was produced with a barrel length of 30 calibers, until 1936 - with a barrel length of 40 calibers. The mass of the gun in the firing position was 1350 kg (with a long barrel). Due to the relatively low weight, the calculation of 7 people could roll the "division" over a short distance without attracting horse traction, but the lack of suspension and wooden wheels allowed transportation at a speed of no more than 7 km / h. The high-explosive high-explosive steel long-range grenade UOF-354 weighing 6, 2 kg contained 710 g of explosives and left the barrel 3046 mm long with an initial speed of 680 m / s. The tabular firing range was 13000 m. Vertical aiming angles: from −3 to + 37 °. Horizontal - 5, 7 °. The piston bolt provided a combat rate of fire: 10-12 rds / min.
Despite the fact that the UBR-354A armor-piercing projectile weighing 6, 3 kg had an initial speed of 655 m / s and at a distance of 500 m along the normal could penetrate 70 mm armor, the anti-tank capabilities of the gun did not meet modern requirements. First of all, this was due to the small sector of shelling in the horizontal plane (5, 7 °), allowed by a single-bar carriage, and outdated sighting devices. However, well-prepared and well-coordinated calculations in a number of cases successfully repelled the attacks of enemy armored vehicles, inflicting heavy losses on the enemy.
The use of obsolete divisional guns in anti-tank defense was also limited due to the shortage of 76, 2-mm armor-piercing shells in the initial period of the war. In June 1941, the warehouses had a little over 24,000 armor-piercing rounds. Under the prevailing conditions, German tanks were fired at with fragmentation and shrapnel grenades, with fuses set to strike with a slowdown. At a distance of up to 500 m, a fragmentation projectile could break through armor 25 mm thick, the armor penetration of a shrapnel grenade was 30 mm. In 1941, a significant part of German tanks had a frontal armor thickness of 50 mm, and when firing fragmentation and shrapnel shells, its penetration was not ensured. At the same time, a shrapnel grenade with a heavy warhead equipped with lead bullets sometimes worked as a deformable high-explosive armor-piercing projectile equipped with plastic explosives. When such a projectile meets a solid obstacle, it "spreads" over the surface. After detonation of an explosive charge, a compression wave is formed in the armor and the rear surface of the armor is destroyed with the formation of spalls that can hit the internal equipment of the vehicle or crew members. However, due to the fact that the shrapnel grenade contained only 86 g of black powder, its armor-piercing effect was small.
Before the termination of mass production in 1936, the industry supplied more than 4300 76-mm divisional guns mod. 1902/30, of which there were about 2,400 guns in the western military districts. More than 700 of these guns were captured by the advancing German troops in the summer and autumn of 1941.
Although the enemy did not appreciate the capabilities of the outdated "three-inch" guns, they were adopted by the German army under the designation 7, 62 cm FK295 / 1 (r) and 7, 62 cm FK295 / 2 (r) (variants with a barrel length of 30 and 40 calibers respectively). On some guns, wooden wheels were replaced with metal ones with rubber tires. These guns, in the amount of about 100 units, fought on the Eastern Front, several dozen guns were used to arm German armored trains. Limited use 76, 2 mm cannon mod. 1902/30 may be due to the fact that Germany in Poland and France captured a large number of French-made 75-mm divisional guns Canon de 75 mle 97/33, which in their characteristics were close to the Soviet 76, 2-mm guns.
A significant number of 76, 2-mm guns mod. 1902/30 was available in Finland, where they received the designation 76 K / 02-30 and 76 K / 02-40. Some of the guns were captured by Finland during the Winter War and, apparently, the Germans shared their trophies obtained in 1941 with the Finns. A number of captured divisional guns were placed in stationary positions in the fortified areas.
Soviet divisional 76, 2-mm cannon mod. 1902/30 were installed on round concrete bases, and a wheel was attached under the opener, which made it possible to quickly deploy the implement in a horizontal plane. Although by the early 1940s, "three-inch" tanks were hopelessly outdated, if used correctly, they could pose a threat to light and medium Soviet tanks.
76, 2-mm universal gun F-22 mod. 1936 g
Due to the fact that by the beginning of the 1930s the 76, 2-mm gun mod. 1902/30 was considered obsolete, a competition was announced in the USSR to create a new divisional weapon. In 1934, at the request of M. N. Tukhachevsky, the ability to conduct defensive anti-aircraft fire was included in the list of mandatory requirements for divisional artillery. In March 1935, the designer V. G. Grabin presented three 76, 2-mm F-22 guns, designed for the use of anti-aircraft cannon shots mod. 1931 (3-K). In order to reduce recoil when using anti-aircraft projectiles, the divisional gun was equipped with a muzzle brake.
Already during the tests, the military made adjustments to the requirements for the gun. The use of a muzzle brake was considered unacceptable. In addition, it was ordered to abandon the use of anti-aircraft ammunition with a high initial velocity of the gun projectile in favor of "three-inch" cartridges mod. 1902, of which a huge amount was accumulated in warehouses. The transition to a new, more powerful shot, despite all the advantages it provided, was considered unacceptable for economic reasons. At the same time, the F-22, designed for more powerful ballistics, had a large margin of safety and, as a result, the potential for firing with a higher initial projectile velocity compared to standard ammunition.
In May 1936, the 76-mm universal divisional gun mod. 1936 was put into service, and by the end of the year it was planned to deliver at least 500 new artillery systems to the customer. However, due to the fact that the new gun compared to the 76, the 2 mm gun mod. 1902/30 was much more complicated and expensive, plans for the supply of "universal" divisional guns to the army were thwarted. Before production was discontinued in 1939, it was possible to deliver 2932 guns mod. 1936 g.
The weight of the gun in the firing position, depending on the various production batches, was 1650 - 1780 kg. Effective rate of fire: 15 rds / min. Vertical guidance angles: from -5 to + 75 °. Horizontal - 60 °. Compared with the "divisions" arr. 1902/30, armor penetration of the gun mod. 1936 increased significantly. In a barrel with a length of 3895 mm, the UBR-354A armor-piercing projectile accelerated to 690 m / s and at a distance of 500 m, when hit at a right angle, it could penetrate 75 mm armor. The gun had suspension and metal wheels with rubber tires, which made it possible to tow it along the highway at a speed of 30 km / h. But since the mass of the gun in the transport position was 2820 kg, six horses, a tracked tractor or a ZIS-6 truck were required to transport it.
During operation, it turned out that the gun is not very reliable and has excessive weight and dimensions. The design of the gun and the location of the guidance organs were not optimal for using it as an anti-tank gun. The sight and the vertical guidance mechanism were located on opposite sides of the barrel, respectively, the aiming of the gun could not be carried out by the gunner alone. Although the gun mod. 1936 was created as a "universal" one with the ability to conduct defensive anti-aircraft fire, the troops did not have the appropriate control devices and sighting devices. Additional tests showed that when firing at elevation angles greater than 60 °, the shutter automation refused to work with the corresponding consequences for the rate of fire. The gun has a short height reach and low firing accuracy. Hopes that the F-22, due to its greater elevation angle, would be able to possess "howitzer" properties and have a significantly greater firing range did not come true. Even in the case of the introduction of a shot with a variable charge into the ammunition load, the 76, 2-mm high-explosive fragmentation grenade for the howitzer was too weak, and it was not possible to adjust the fire at a distance of more than 8000 m due to the low visibility of shell explosions.
Due to the numerous shortcomings of the F-22, the leadership of the Red Army issued a terms of reference for the development of a new "division". However, the decision to withdraw the "universal" guns to the reserve coincided with the receipt of information about the creation in Germany of new heavy tanks with powerful anti-cannon armor. With this in mind, in the spring of 1941, the available guns mod. In 1936, it was decided to send 10 anti-tank artillery brigades to form, each of which had to include up to 48 F-22 guns. At the same time, the People's Commissariat of Ammunition was tasked with developing an enhanced armor-piercing round with the ballistics of a 76-mm anti-aircraft gun. The essence of the proposal was to return to the use of a shot from the 76-mm 3-K anti-aircraft gun and add a muzzle brake to the F-22 design, as well as to facilitate the gun carriage due to the abandonment of a large elevation angle. Due to the outbreak of the war, this proposal was not implemented.
According to reports on June 1-15, 1941, there were 2,300 F-22 guns in the military districts in the western direction. During the fighting in the summer and autumn of 1941, almost all of these 76, 2-mm guns were lost in battles or during retreat. At the same time, the Germans in 1941 got at least a thousand serviceable F-22s.
In September 1941, the captured F-22 was adopted by the Wehrmacht under the designation 7, 62 cm F. K.296 (r). Since it was not possible to capture a significant number of 76, 2-mm armor-piercing shells, German enterprises began producing the PzGr. 39, which had better armor penetration than the Soviet UBR-354A. In November, the PzGr. 40. With new anti-tank rounds, the FK 296 (r) guns were used on the Eastern Front and in North Africa.
In August 1941, the command of the Afrika Korps demanded a mobile artillery unit capable of moving in the desert off-road and having the ability to fight British and American tanks protected by anti-cannon armor. For this, it was supposed to use the chassis of off-road trucks or half-track tractors. As a result, the choice fell on the Sd Kfz 6 half-track artillery tractor and the 76, 2 mm F. K.296 (r) cannon, which, by the standards of 1941, had good armor penetration. To speed up the manufacturing process of the anti-tank self-propelled gun, its design was simplified as much as possible. The gun together with the wheels was installed on a prepared platform in the back of the Sd Kfz 6 tractor. To protect the crew from bullets and shrapnel, an armored cabin was assembled from 5 mm sheets. Front protection was provided by a standard gun shield.
The final assembly of the nine vehicles was completed by Alquette on December 13, 1941. In the Wehrmacht, the SPG received the designation 7, 62 cm F. K.36 (r) auf Panzerjäger Selbstfahrlafette Zugkraftwagen 5t "Diana" or Selbstfahrlafette (Sd. Kfz.6 / 3). In January 1942, self-propelled guns arrived in North Africa. The vehicles were transferred to the 605th Anti-Tank Destroyer Battalion and took part in hostilities under the command of Rommel, starting on January 21, 1942.
Although the PT ACS "Diana" was created, as they say, "on the knee", was an improvisation of wartime and had a number of significant shortcomings, it proved itself well against British armored vehicles. In their reports, the Selbstfahrlafette (Sd. Kfz.6 / 3) commanders noted that armor-piercing shells confidently hit enemy light tanks and armored vehicles at a distance of up to 2000 m. At half the range, the guns pierce the armor of the Matilda Mk. II infantry tanks.
In this regard, the British soon began to avoid using tanks, in areas where 76, 2-mm self-propelled guns were seen, and heavy artillery and aircraft were actively used to destroy them. As a result of bombing and assault strikes and artillery shelling, all tank destroyers Selbstfahrlafette (Sd. Kfz.6 / 3) were lost by the beginning of December 1942 during the battles for Tobruk and El Alamein. The last two vehicles participated in repelling the British offensive that began on October 23, 1942. Although such installations were no longer officially built, there is reason to believe that other self-propelled guns were created using 76, 2 cm F. K.296 (r) guns in front-line tank repair shops using various chassis.
However, even taking into account the successful use of captured F-22s in North Africa and on the Soviet-German front, these guns were not optimal for use in anti-tank defense. German crews complained about inconvenient guidance elements located on different sides of the bolt. The sight also caused a lot of criticism. In addition, the power of the gun was still not enough for confident penetration of the frontal armor of heavy Soviet KV-1 tanks and British heavy infantry tanks Churchill Mk IV.
Since the F-22 gun was originally designed for a much more powerful ammunition and had a large margin of safety, by the end of 1941 a project was developed to modernize the F-22 into an anti-tank gun 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r). The captured guns mod. In 1936, the chamber was bored, which made it possible to use a sleeve with a large internal volume. The Soviet sleeve had a length of 385.3 mm and a flange diameter of 90 mm. The new German sleeve was 715 mm long with a flange diameter of 100 mm. Thanks to this, the powder charge was increased by 2, 4 times. Due to the increased recoil, a muzzle brake was installed. In fact, German engineers returned to the fact that V. G. Grabin proposed in 1935.
The transfer of the handles of the gun guidance drives to one side with the sight made it possible to improve the working conditions of the gunner. The maximum elevation angle has been reduced from 75 ° to 18 °. In order to reduce mass and visibility in position, the gun received a new armor shield of reduced height.
Thanks to the increase in muzzle energy, it was possible to significantly increase the armor penetration. German armor-piercing tracer projectile with a ballistic tip 7, 62 cm Pzgr. 39 with a mass of 7, 6 kg had an initial speed of 740 m / s, and at a distance of 500 m along the normal it could penetrate 108 mm of armor. In smaller numbers, shots were fired with an APCR shell 7, 62 cm Pzgr. 40. At an initial speed of 990 m / s, a projectile weighing 3, 9 kg, at a distance of 500 m at a right angle, pierced 140 mm of armor. The ammunition load could also include cumulative shells 7, 62 cm Gr. 38 Hl / B and 7.62 cm Gr. 38 Hl / С with a mass of 4, 62 and 5, 05 kg, which, regardless of the range, normally provided penetration of 90 mm of armor. For the sake of completeness, it is pertinent to compare the 7.62 cm Pak 36 (r) with the 75mm 7.5 cm Pak anti-tank gun. 40, which, in terms of cost, a complex of service, operational and combat characteristics, can be considered the best of those mass-produced in Germany during the war years. At a distance of 500 m, a 75-mm armor-piercing projectile could penetrate 118 mm armor along the normal. Under the same conditions, the armor penetration of a sub-caliber projectile was 146 mm. Thus, it can be stated that the guns had practically equal armor penetration characteristics, and confidently ensured the defeat of medium tanks at real firing distances. But at the same time 7, 5 cm Pak. 40 was lighter than 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) by about 100 kg. It should be admitted that the creation of the 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) was certainly justified, since the cost of the conversion was much cheaper than the cost of the new gun.
Prior to mass production, the 7,5 cm Pak. 40 anti-tank gun 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) converted from the Soviet F-22 "division" was the most powerful German anti-tank artillery system. Taking into account the high armor penetration and the fact that the total production of 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) guns exceeded 500 units, they were in 1942-1943. had a significant impact on the course of hostilities. The converted 76, 2-mm anti-tank guns were successfully used by the Germans in North Africa and on the Eastern Front. The frontal armor of Soviet medium tanks T-34 and American M3 Lee could be penetrated at a distance of up to 2000 m. At shorter ranges of fire to the German 76, 2-mm armor-piercing shells 7, 62 cm Pzgr. 39, the Soviet heavy tanks KV-1 and the well-protected British Matilda II and Churchill Mk IV were vulnerable. A well-known incident that occurred on July 22, 1942, when the crew of Grenadier G. Halm from the 104th Grenadier Regiment in the battle of El Alamein destroyed nine British tanks with Pak 36 (r) fire within a few minutes. In the middle and in the second half of 1942, these guns inflicted very significant losses on Soviet tank units operating in the Kharkov and Stalingrad directions. Our tankers called the 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) anti-tank gun the "viper".
After the defeat of the German troops at Stalingrad, the role of the 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) in the anti-tank defense decreased. Our fighters managed to capture about 30 guns, and they entered service with several anti-tank divisions.
After testing the 76-mm Pak 36 (r) gun in the USSR, the issue of launching this gun into production was considered. But V. G. Grabin refused, under the pretext that the release of more powerful systems was planned. In fairness, it should be said that in addition to the 57-mm ZiS-2, our designers during the war years did not manage to launch another truly effective anti-tank gun into the series. Finishing of the 85-mm D-44 cannon, created under the leadership of the chief designer F. F. Petrova, dragged on, and she entered service in the post-war period. Field 100-mm cannon BS-3, created by V. G. Grabin, at first did not have a sight at all for direct fire and armor-piercing shells in ammunition. In addition, this powerful weapon was distinguished by its large mass and dimensions, and its transportation was possible only by mechanical traction. In the final period of the war, BS-3 guns were supplied to the corps and artillery of the RGK.
Although, due to combat losses and breakdowns, the number of converted 76, 2-mm anti-tank guns was constantly decreasing, as of March 1945, the Wehrmacht had 165 Pak 36 (r) guns.
To transport these guns, captured Soviet tanks with dismantled turrets were often used, or French Renault UE and Universal Carrier tracked tractors of French and British production.
In addition to being used in a towed version, the 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r) guns were armed with anti-tank self-propelled guns Marder II (Sd. Kfz.132) and Marder III (Sd. Kfz.139). Tank destroyer Marder II was an installation with an open rear wheelhouse, on the chassis of a light tank PzKpfw II Ausf. D. In parallel with the construction of the 76, 2-mm self-propelled gun, work was carried out to install the 75-mm 7, 5 cm Pak gun. 40 on the Pz. Kpfw. II Ausf. F. chassis. Moreover, both types of machines were designated as "Marder II". In total, more than 600 self-propelled units "Marder II" were built, of which 202 units with guns 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r).
When creating the tank destroyer Marder III, the chassis of the Czech-made Pz Kpfw 38 (t) light tank was used. In terms of their fire characteristics, both vehicles were equivalent.
"Marders" were actively used on the Eastern Front. Contrary to the claims that the Germans used their anti-tank self-propelled guns only from prepared positions or behind the attacking line, often tank-based self-propelled guns were used to directly accompany the infantry, which led to large losses. Nevertheless, in general, the self-propelled gun justified itself. The most advantageous distance for hitting tanks was considered to be a distance of up to 1000 meters. One damaged T-34 or KV-1 tank had 1-2 hits. The high intensity of hostilities led to the fact that on the Eastern Front tank destroyers with 76, 2-mm cannons disappeared in 1944.
76-mm divisional gun mod. 1939 (F-22USV)
After the command of the Red Army cooled to the "universal" F-22 cannon in the spring of 1937, a competition was announced to create a new 76, 2-mm divisional gun. V. G. Grabin urgently set about designing a new "division", which for some reason he assigned the F-22USV index, bearing in mind that the new gun is only a modernization of the F-22. In fact, constructively, it was a completely new tool. In the summer of 1939, the military tests of the gun passed, in the same year it was put into service under the name of the 76-mm cannon of the 1939 model of the year, and the designation F-22USV was also used in wartime documents.
Compared to the F-22, the weight and dimensions of the new divisional gun have been reduced. The mass in the firing position was 1485 kg. The gun had a modern design at the time of creation with sliding beds, suspension and metal wheels with rubber tires, which allowed transportation on the highway at a speed of 35 km / h. For towing, a horse-drawn team or ZIS-5 trucks were most often used.
The combat rate of fire of the gun was 12-15 rds / min. A well-trained crew could fire 20 rounds per minute at the enemy without correcting the aiming. The armor penetration was lower than that of the F-22, but by the standards of 1941 it was considered quite good. With a barrel length of 3200 mm, the initial velocity of the UBR-354A armor-piercing projectile was 662 m / s, and at a distance of 500 m along the normal, it pierced 70 mm of armor. Thus, in terms of its ability to penetrate the armor of enemy tanks, the F-22USV gun was at the level of the 76, 2-mm divisional gun mod. 1902/30 g with a barrel length of 40 calibers.
At the beginning of 1941, due to the presence in the troops of a sufficient number of 76, 2-mm guns and the planned transition of divisional artillery to the 107-mm caliber, the production of guns mod. 1939 was discontinued. With the beginning of the war, according to the mobilization plan, the production of the F-22USV was re-launched. By the end of 1942, more than 9800 guns were delivered.
During the hostilities, the enemy captured several hundred F-22USVs. The guns were originally used in their original form under the designation 7, 62 cm F. K.297 (r).
However, given the fact that the Germans constantly lacked specialized anti-tank guns, a significant part of the captured F-22USV was converted to modification 7, 62 cm F. K. 39. There are few details about this gun; a number of sources say that approximately 300 76-mm guns mod. 1939 were converted for ammunition from 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r), after which a muzzle brake was installed on the barrel. However, given that the durability of the USV artillery gun was lower than that of the F-22, this seems questionable. The ballistic characteristics of the gun are also unknown; according to unconfirmed reports, an armor-piercing projectile at a distance of 500 m could penetrate the 75-mm frontal armor plate of the KV-1 tank.
Guns 7, 62 cm FK 39 were used by the Wehrmacht until the last days of the war. But they did not receive such fame as the 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r). Several converted 76, 2mm cannons were captured by the Allies in France.
76-mm divisional gun mod. 1942 (ZiS-3)
Although the 76, 2-mm divisional gun mod. 1939, in comparison with the "universal" gun F-22, was, of course, more balanced, for the "division" of the USV was too high, which made it difficult to camouflage it on the battlefield. The mass of the gun mod. 1939 was also large enough to negatively impact mobility. The placement of the sight and guidance mechanisms on opposite sides of the barrel made it difficult to fire direct fire at fast moving targets. The disadvantages of the gun led to its replacement with a more successful and technologically advanced 76, 2-mm divisional gun mod. 1942 (ZiS-3).
Structurally, the ZiS-3 was created by superimposing the swinging part of the previous model F-22USV on the carriage of the 57-mm anti-tank gun ZiS-2, while maintaining the ballistics of the divisional gun mod. 1939 Since the ZiS-2 carriage was designed for a lower recoil force, a muzzle brake appeared on the ZiS-3 barrel, which was absent in the F-22USV. When designing the ZiS-3, an important drawback of the F-22USV was eliminated - the placement of the aiming handles on opposite sides of the gun barrel. This allowed the crew numbers of four people (commander, gunner, loader, carrier) to perform only their functions. When creating a new weapon, great attention was paid to its manufacturability and cost reduction in mass production. Operations were simplified and reduced (in particular, high-quality casting of large parts was actively introduced), technological equipment and requirements for the machine park were thought out, requirements for materials were reduced, their savings were introduced, unification and in-line production of units were envisaged. All this made it possible to obtain a weapon that was almost three times cheaper than the F-22USV, while no less effective.
The development of the gun was started by V. G. Grabin in May 1941, without an official assignment from the GAU. Serial production of the ZiS-3 was launched at the end of 1941, at that time the gun was not accepted for service and was produced “illegally”. In early February 1942, official tests took place, which were actually a formality and lasted only five days. As a result, the ZiS-3 entered service on February 12, 1942. The order for the adoption of the new 76, 2-mm cannon was signed after they began to be used in hostilities.
The troops received three types of 76-mm guns mod. 1942, distinguished by elevation angles, riveted or welded frames, push-button or lever release, bolt and sighting devices. The guns directed into the anti-tank artillery were equipped with PP1-2 or OP2-1 direct-fire sights. The gun could fire at targets in a horizontal plane in the 54 ° sector, depending on the modification, the maximum aiming angle was 27 ° or 37 °.
The mass of the gun in the combat position was 1200 kg, with the gun front end in the stowed position - 1850 kg. Towing was carried out by horse teams, GAZ-67, GAZ-AA, GAZ-AAA, ZiS-5 vehicles, as well as Studebaker US6 or Dodge WC-51 vehicles supplied under Lend-Lease since the middle of the war.
Often, light tanks T-60 and T-70 were used to transport the guns of divisions attached to tank units, the protection of which after 1943 did not leave them a chance to survive on the battlefield. At the same time, the crews and boxes with shells were located on the armor.
Since 1944, due to a decrease in the effectiveness of 45-mm M-42 cannons and a shortage of 57-mm ZiS-2 cannons, the ZiS-3 gun, despite its insufficient armor penetration for that time, became the main anti-tank gun of the Red Army.
Armor-piercing 76, 2-mm projectile UBR-354A could penetrate the frontal armor of a medium German tank Pz. KpfW. IV Ausf. H from a distance of less than 300 m. The armor of a heavy tank PzKpfW VI was invulnerable to the ZiS-3 in the frontal projection and was weakly vulnerable at distances closer than 300 m in side projection. The new German PzKpfW V tank was also weakly vulnerable in the frontal projection for the ZiS-3. At the same time, the ZiS-3 confidently hit the side of the PzKpfW V and Pz. KpfW. IV Ausf. H tanks. The introduction in 1943 of the 76, 2-mm sub-caliber projectile BR-354P improved the anti-tank capabilities of the ZiS-3, allowing it to confidently hit 80 mm armor at distances closer than 500 m, but 100 mm armor remained unbearable for it.
The relative weakness of the anti-tank capabilities of the ZiS-3 was recognized by the Soviet military leadership, however, until the end of the war, it was not possible to replace the 76, 2-mm guns in the anti-tank subunits. 57-mm anti-tank guns ZiS-2 in 1943-1944 were produced in the amount of 4,375 units, and ZiS-3 over the same period - in the amount of 30,052 units, of which about half were sent to anti-tank fighter units. The insufficient armor penetration of the guns was partially compensated by the tactics of use, focused on the defeat of the vulnerable spots of armored vehicles. The fight against German tanks at the final stage of the war was largely facilitated by a decrease in the quality of armored steel. Due to the lack of alloying additions, armor smelted in Germany since 1944 had an increased hardness due to the increased carbon content and was brittle. When a projectile hit, even without breaking through the armor, chips often occurred on the inside, which led to the defeat of the crew members and damage to internal equipment.
During the Great Patriotic War, German troops managed to capture several hundred divisional guns Model 1942. The enemy used the ZiS-3 under the designation 7, 62 cm F. K. 298 (r).
Since the ZiS-3 had an almost ideal design for a gun of this caliber, German engineers did not make any changes, and the gun fought in its original form.
There are photographs that show that the Germans used captured T-70 light tanks with dismantled towers to transport the captured 76, 2-mm divisional guns. Unlike the 7, 62 cm Pak 36 (r), the 7, 62 cm F. K. 298 (r) did not gain such fame in the role of anti-tank and, apparently, were used mainly to provide fire support and destroy field fortifications. Nevertheless, the ZiS-3s available in the Wehrmacht were purposefully supplied with armor-piercing shells and fought until the end of hostilities. In the initial period of the war, the enemy had at his disposal large reserves of 76, 2-mm rounds with high-explosive fragmentation and shrapnel grenades. The source of armor-piercing shells was mainly unspent ammunition from the destroyed Soviet T-34 and KV-1 tanks, with 76, 2-mm F-34 and ZiS-5 cannons. Although the 7, 62 cm F. K. 298 (r) in terms of armor penetration was much inferior to the main German anti-tank 75 mm gun 7, 5 cm Pak. 40, from a distance of 500 m 76, a 2-mm armor-piercing projectile penetrated the frontal armor of the T-34 medium tank.
