"If now the former superiority of the enemy in the number of tanks, aircraft, mortars, machine guns has been eliminated, if our army does not now experience a serious shortage of weapons, ammunition, equipment, then in this, first of all, we must see the merit of our working class."
Exhibits from Germany
As an epigraph to this material, words were chosen that quite accurately characterize the situation at the turn of 1943-1944: in particular, the domestic tank industry was able to provide the front with the necessary amount of armored vehicles. At the same time, Hitler's tank industry was, of course, the main driver of the development of Soviet tanks. The trophies of the spring-summer of 1943 became the most valuable material for domestic engineers. The half-year research resulted in numerous publications in the "Bulletin of Tank Industry" in 1944. This period is of particular interest due to the special position of the Soviet Union: victory in the war was already obvious, it was only a matter of time. Oddly enough, but the authors of a specialized technical publication (and also a secret one) did not deny themselves an emotional assessment of the situation. So, engineer-lieutenant colonel Alexander Maksimovich Sych in the material "German heavy tanks" (No. 1, 1944) directly writes:
“The masterpieces of German tank building,“the most powerful tank in the world,”as they (the Nazis) called their armored“Tiger”, just like the“Panther”and“Ferdinand,”turned out to be machines vulnerable and beaten by Soviet military equipment, heroism and the training of the Red Army, the art of its commanders."
According to the author, by the way, he is the deputy head of the test site in Kubinka for scientific and testing activities, the new German heavy equipment had a large number of serious defects, weaknesses, vulnerabilities and even outright design flaws. At the same time, notes A. M. Sych, Hitler's "menagerie" is a serious and powerful enemy.
Among the general conclusions regarding the assessment of heavy tanks of the Third Reich, the engineers of the Kubinka Test Site highlight the constantly increasing armor protection. So, from 1941 to 1943, the frontal armor became 2 times thicker, and if compared with the pre-war years, then 3-6 times. The main problem, according to military engineers, was the insufficient power density of the tanks, which was steadily decreasing from the T-II model and reached the minimum for the Ferdinand self-propelled gun - only about 9, 5 hp / t. The article suggests that in the future the Germans will continue to force tank engines, although many power plants have already exhausted this potential. In addition, the Germans, according to the author, are in a hurry to convert tanks from T-I to T-IV into self-propelled gun mounts, taking them away from the first lines due to poor armor and weapons. Despite the fact that German designers are trying to preserve the generic features of Hitler's tanks (the location of the transmission, in particular), they do not shy away from borrowing ideas from their opponents. And all in a row, according to A. M. Sych and his colleagues. So, the shape of the hull and turret of the "Panther" is copied from the Soviet T-34 and T-70; control system "Tigers" and "Panthers" taken from the French "Somua"; viewing prisms are borrowed from American cars; the KV tank had the Germans (more precisely, F. Porsche) spotted the internal depreciation of the road wheels of the self-propelled gun "Ferdinand", and the two-torsion suspension of the "Panther" was stolen by the Germans from the Swedish "Landswerk".
These are the hodgepodge made in Germany during the Second World War. Analyzing the tactical and strategic situation on the fronts, engineers from Kubinka predict that the enemy will have new, even thicker tanks, or a significant modernization of existing ones. As history has shown, there were only a few months left to wait.
Among all the machines that passed through the hands of domestic engineers, the greatest impression was made by the Hitlerite "Panther". Describing the positive aspects of this tank, the engineers mention the reduction of machine-gun armament, which makes the conclusion about the predominantly anti-tank use of this vehicle. The unitary cannon cartridges, the electric trigger and the best in the world, according to the author of the material, the breakable binocular telescopic sight, also deserved praise. With regard to the frontal part of the tank, A. M. Sych does not tire of reminding that the rational angles of inclination are written off from the T-34, and gives the results of the test shelling. The 75-mm cannon does not penetrate the inclined upper frontal part of the Panther at any distance, but the vertical 200-mm armor plate of the Ferdinand self-propelled guns can penetrate from 200 meters.
Now to the cons of this tank. The unbalanced turret seriously complicates the turn - obviously, this was a consequence of the forward movement of the cannon in the mask with a reserve for the installation of a more powerful weapon in the future. Due to the imbalance of the tower, a cumbersome hydromechanical turning system had to be built. Also, among the minuses, engineers single out the weak armor of the sides and stern, which does not correspond to the type of tank. Here, by the way, one can see the author's delusion regarding the classification of the "Panther" - in the Soviet Union it was considered a heavy tank, while in Germany it was only an average one. As a result, after a careful study of the "Panther" engineers from Kubinka recommend to take this enemy seriously and carefully prepare a counteraction. But "Tiger" A. M. Sych considers in every sense weaker than his younger brother.
Colonel Esser's Report
The enemy also had his own opinion about Soviet tank building. I think it will be interesting to get to know him. So, Colonel Esser's speech on December 3, 1942 at a meeting of the military-technical section of the Union of German Engineers, published in the MTZ specialized magazine almost a year later.
The material deals not only with Soviet tanks, but also with French, American and British tanks - Germany had enough opponents. We are interested in evaluating exclusively domestic tanks. Among light tanks, the T-70 and its 45-mm cannon stand out by the author, but the Germans saw nothing more outstanding in this category. But there is more information on medium and heavy tanks. The T-34 is praised for its serious armament (in the German manner, the caliber of the gun is written 7, 62-cm) and even cite our designers in this regard as an example to the British and French. The division of crew labor in the T-34 was not brought to the level of armored vehicles from Great Britain, and the fighting compartment in a Soviet tank seemed very cramped to the Germans. Esser could not resist humiliating the T-34. The colonel claims that the T-34 takes its roots from the BT, which, in turn, was copied by the Russians from the American Christie tank. But he immediately notes a high power-to-weight ratio of 18 hp / t, which allows the car to reach a record speed of 54 km / h, while consuming relatively little fuel. Regarding the KV-1, the Germans are restrained - they only note good mobility for the vehicle class, but the KV-2 with a 15 cm howitzer is described in more detail. Firstly, according to the Germans, this is not a tank, but a self-propelled artillery unit. Secondly, obviously, 40-kilogram separate loading projectiles seriously reduce the rate of fire of the gun. Thirdly, the tank compares favorably with its British and French counterparts by its high power density - about 10 liters. s. / t.
The Germans paid special attention to Soviet tank engines. Let's start with the diesel B-2. The use of one engine for medium and light tanks seemed to the Germans an absolute plus. Esser thought that the Russians in the development of motors give preference to weight loss, but the French and the British are thinking more about the resource. On the old tanks that fell into the hands of the Germans, there were aviation gasoline M-17s, which were copies of aviation BMW-IVs. About B-2, the name of which they did not know for sure at that time, Esser writes:
“This diesel is a development of the Russian design, using various foreign types. This motor is, both in terms of design and quality of processing for Russian conditions, undoubtedly a high stage of development. The fuel consumption is very low and provides the car with a long range."
The Germans experimentally calculated the oil consumption of a Soviet tank diesel engine and were horrified - 15 kg per 100 kilometers! Most likely, an error crept into the colonel's calculations, or a faulty diesel engine came to the test for the Germans.
In the opinion of the Germans, everything is bad with the gearboxes of the Russian tanks. The reasons are in the primitiveness of the system of movable gears, in which the gear wheels mesh with each other, as well as in the aft arrangement of the gearbox. This arrangement forces the installation of long levers with high backlash and intermediate links. In general, Esser considers the gearbox and its shifting mechanism to be the most important disadvantage of the T-34 and KV - almost all the trophies that fell into his hands were with a collapsed clutch.
In conclusion - the conclusions regarding Soviet tanks, which Esser voiced at the end of his material:
“The USSR began building tanks more than 10 years ago, copying large quantities of foreign vehicles, namely the American Christie tank and the British Vickers-Armstrong tank. In large maneuvers, these machines have been tried out on a wide scale, and lessons have been learned from this experience. In further consistent development, in some cases slavishly adopting individual parts and assemblies of foreign-made tanks, the Russians created tanks that, in constructive and production terms, taking into account Soviet conditions, certainly deserve attention and in some respects are superior to the combat vehicles of our other opponents."
