From the first days of the Great Patriotic War, our ground forces fully felt the impact of the two main shock components of the German Wehrmacht - aviation and tanks. And they faced an obvious shortage of means of dealing with these opponents.
But if in terms of anti-tank weapons we had designs that were quite suitable in terms of efficiency and mastery of production and the main issue was the resumption of their release (mistakenly stopped before the war) in sufficient numbers, then the air defense of troops, especially in tactical depth, was in a more disastrous state. The main means of dealing with a low-altitude air enemy - small-caliber automatic anti-aircraft guns were clearly not enough. There were two reasons for this - the late adoption of the main army MZP - 37-mm gun 61-K mod. 1939 (25-mm MWP model 1940 appeared even later and until 1943 was not really deployed in production). And slow, and anti-aircraft guns - the most difficult type of mobile artillery, the development of production. The situation was aggravated by the problem of mass evacuation of industry, which led to the disruption of cooperative ties between suppliers, the cessation of production in general for a certain period, and a slow increase in output at new locations of enterprises.
Anti-aircraft machine guns were another component of the fight against assault aircraft and dive bombers - the main air opponents of the troops in the front-line zone. And the complexity of the period left the designers at this stage the opportunity to use only small arms. Moreover, the industrial base for the manufacture of machine guns was in a slightly better position than the manufacturers of artillery systems.
By this time, only two of the machine guns that were in service and production were fundamentally suitable for these purposes - the "maxim" and the DShK. Aviation ShVAK and ShKAS were not counted - they were demanded by aircraft builders (although there were developments that used these systems, some of which were used in "handicraft" execution in combat defensive operations).
For "Maxim" already existed anti-aircraft machine gun mounts (ZPU), created in variants - single, twin and quad mount. The latter - the model of 1931 - had a sufficient density of fire in the range of distances up to 1500 m. But by this time the insufficient power of the rifle cartridge when operating against modern air targets had already become clear. In addition, the rig weighed about half a ton and was quite cumbersome. To increase mobility, they were mounted on trucks. But even in this form, they were only suitable for air defense of near rear stationary objects - airfields, headquarters, transport hubs and storage points. And in no case - in the advanced combat formations of troops due to the limited cross-country ability of the base chassis and the absolute insecurity of the calculations.
The only alternative was DShK. At this point, it was mainly produced for naval pedestal installations. A natural solution to many issues related to its operation and methods of combat use in the army air defense system was the placement of the DShK on a protected self-propelled base. At the same time, the possibility of creating multi-barreled installations was facilitated and the problems of increasing the transportable ammunition were simplified.
At this time, the only possible bases for the creation of such systems could only be tracked chassis. Their basic models - in the form of tanks - were produced by enterprises of two people's commissariats - NKTP (People's Commissariat for Tank Industry) and NKSM (People's Commissariat for Medium Machine Building). Of course, the chance of using the chassis of tanks of the KV and T-34 families in their "original" form was completely ruled out due to the huge need for them at the front. Therefore, despite a number of fundamental shortcomings, it was necessary to rely only on the light tanks being produced.
Cars of this class were made by the enterprises of both people's commissariats, and therefore the Armored Directorate of the Main Armored Directorate of the Red Army issued in 1942 tactical and technical requirements (TTT) for the developers of both departments. For their implementation in the second half of 1942, the factories developed and manufactured three samples of self-propelled units based on light tanks in production. NKTP Plant No. 37 presented their bids in two versions - on the basis of the T-60 and T-70 chassis and GAZ - on the basis of the T-70M.
According to the categories of today, these machines belong to self-propelled anti-aircraft machine-gun installations, but at that time they were called tanks and so they remained in history.
Of the three options, the T-90 tank turned out to be the most successful, the GAZ proposal by now practically unknown to most interested readers.
Its design at the Gorky Order of Lenin Automobile Plant. V. M. Molotov began immediately after receiving TTT from BTU - in September 1942, defining the defense of motorized columns as the main task. Maklakov was the leading designer of the OKB OGK GAZ for the car. The direct management of the design work was carried out by the deputy chief designer of the plant N. A. Astrov under the general management of the director of the plant I. K. Loskutov (in October he was recalled to work in the People's Commissariat of Power Plants and was replaced by chief engineer A. M. Livshits), chief engineer K. V. Vlasov (appointed to replace Livshits) and chief designer A. A. Lipgart. In all stages of creation, a representative of the BTU, engineer-captain Vasilevsky, took part, with whom all deviations from the TTT and their changes were directly agreed and clarified.
The developed T-90 differed from the serial T-70M only in the fighting compartment - the turret. A high degree of continuity with the base vehicle made it possible to complete the project and manufacture the tank in metal in just two months. In November 1942, the vehicle entered preliminary tests. Their program was agreed with the senior military representative of the GABTU KA at GAZ, Lieutenant Colonel Okunev, and provided for testing only newly developed elements - the turret and weapons, since the T-70M base tank had already been tested earlier.
The main issues were: the ability to conduct aimed fire at air and ground targets, the reliability of the automatic weapons in the entire range of firing angles, the effect of shooting and marches on the stability of the alignment of aiming lines, the operation of guidance mechanisms and ease of maintenance.
The determination of the combat and operational characteristics of the new vehicle was carried out in the period from 12 to 18 November 1942 in the daytime and at night at the training grounds of two units of the Red Army. It included: mileage (to assess the influence of movement factors on weapons) and shooting. At ground, masked and unmasked targets they shot aimingly during the day. Night firing with illuminated scope scales was carried out against bonfires. Anti-aircraft firing, due to the lack of real target targets, was carried out only in the evaluative mode of barrage fire indirectly and only during the day. In total, about 800 shots were fired, of which half were at ground targets. About 70 shots were fired while continuously changing the elevation angle of the machine gun mount. Of the total number of shots fired, about half were made in the mode of simultaneous firing from both machine guns, the rest - separately with the right and left, with an equal number for each.
Run tests were 55 kilometers over rough terrain with unlocked weapons and a turret and another 400 kilometers with fixing on travel stoppers.
The test results showed the correctness of the selected technical solutions. Guidance in both planes did not cause difficulties and provided the declared speed of movement of the weapon when aiming, tracking targets and transferring it. There were no complaints about the operation of machine guns in all modes. The shooter's placement was found to be satisfactory. Due to the constructive primitiveness of the collimator sight, which does not have a lead-in mechanism, aiming was carried out visually along the trail of tracer bullets. The lack of self-braking of the rotary mechanism allowed the possibility of overshoot when hovering and this issue required improvement. The efforts on the flywheels of the lifting and turning mechanisms did not tire the gunner, but the pedal descents with cable wiring turned out to be tight and it was proposed to keep them as redundant ones by introducing an electric release. Replacing the stores did not cause any difficulties, they noted only the insufficient protection of their necks from dust in the packing. Moreover, the installation of the radio station interfered.
Other comments were presented as a number of small, and, of course, solved without difficulty issues.
The leadership of GAZ and representatives of the GABTU who participated in the tests came to the conclusion that it was advisable to build an experimental batch of T-90s of 20 pieces for conducting military tests and confirming the fundamental suitability of the machine for adoption by the Red Army. On the results of the work carried out, a report was drawn up with its submission to the People's Commissar of the NKSP and the Deputy People's Commissar of Defense Fedorenko.
But, as mentioned earlier, by this time the machines of the plant No. 37 of NKTP had already been created and it was possible to conduct comparative, as they later began to call interdepartmental tests of three samples. In December 1942, all of them were presented to the customer, but only two tanks were allowed to be tested - the T-90 and the T-70 "anti-aircraft". The second sample of plant No. 37 - T-60 "anti-aircraft" due to the incorrect installation of the anti-aircraft collimator sight and the inconvenient location of the weapon in the turret did not begin to test.
In terms of the main tactical and technical characteristics, the two remaining vehicles differed slightly: the T-90 had a larger ammunition load - 16 magazines for 480 rounds, versus 12 magazines for 360 rounds for the T-70 "anti-aircraft". The latter had a slightly higher maximum angle of declination of the weapon - -7 °, but the T-90 had a lower height of the line of fire - 1605 mm versus 1642 mm for the T-70 "anti-aircraft".
Their comparative tests were carried out in the period from 5 to 12 December 1942. This time the program provided for a 50-kilometer run, including 12 km with unlocked weapons and firing in the amount of 1125 shots from both machine guns at various targets.
Test results: the T-90 withstood them, demonstrating the full ability to conduct aimed fire at ground and air enemies, while the T-70 "anti-aircraft" showed the impossibility of firing at the same targets due to insufficient balance of the swinging part of the weapon. The most significant for the T-90 was the proposal to work out an increase in the transportable ammunition load up to 1000 rounds. The main conclusion of the Commission for Comparative Tests coincided with the results of the preliminary November ones - the tank, after eliminating the shortcomings (and they were not fundamentally important), can be recommended for adoption.
But the course and experience of the Red Army's hostilities, the stabilization of the industrial base for the production of weapons and a change in views on the type of required armored vehicles based on the results of combat use, reasonably brought about a way out. Decisions on the termination of production - first of the T-70 (T-70M) tanks, and then of the new T-80. This deprived
T-90 cloudless prospects for the provision of the chassis. The way out of the situation was the possibility of switching to the Su-76 chassis, but the TTT soon changed to a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun. Machine-gun armament in the composition as provided for by the TTT in 1942 was clearly not enough to justify the production of even such an inexpensive machine.
Description of the design of the T-90
The main difference from the serial T-70M was only the new tower itself, the installation of weapons in it and the placement of ammunition. The design provided for the possibility of its installation on the T-80 chassis and with minor alterations (this was implemented during a major overhaul) - on the T-60. Due to the identity of the chassis, this article omits the typical structural elements of the T-70M tank and for more informational content only a description of the new development is given - the T-90 fighting compartment itself.
Due to the impossibility of using the standard tower from the T-70M, it had to be created anew, using the already existing experience and production base. Therefore, the design turned out to be quite similar - in the form of an octagonal truncated pyramid and was formed from sheets of rolled armor with a thickness equal to that used on the T-70M and connected by welding. Unlike the tank turret, where the angle of inclination of the sheets was 23 °, it was increased on the T-90. The roof was absent, which was caused by the need to provide free visual observation of air targets. To protect it from dust and bad weather, it was replaced by a folding tarpaulin awning, which, however, as tests showed, did not quite cope with this task and required improvement.
The machine guns were mounted on a machine without shock absorbers (a similar method of installing weapons was previously used on the T-40 tank) and were protected by swinging L-shaped armor.
Targeting was carried out by mechanical manual drives - the commander rotated the guidance flywheel in azimuth with his left hand, and in elevation with his right hand.
Sights are separate. For firing at air targets, the installation was completed with a K-8T collimator sight. Aiming at ground targets was carried out with the TMPP telescopic sight. For the convenience of using the sights, the commander's seat (mounted on a rotating floor) was made quickly adjustable in height using a pedal.
Control of trigger mechanisms of machine guns - pedal, with the ability to fire only the right machine gun or both at the same time.
Cocking and reloading of weapons was carried out manually and also in two ways: at elevation angles up to + 20 ° - with a special swinging lever, at large angles - directly by a platoon of machine gun handles.
The weapon is fed from a store, in accordance with the machine guns supplied by the BTU for this machine. In this case, they were equipped with non-modernized regular magazines - for 30 cartridges (the capacity of the modernized ones is 42 cartridges).
To collect spent cartridges to the right of the commander, a collection box was placed on the rotating floor of the fighting compartment, into which they were diverted using flexible fabric sleeves of the sleeve catchers.
On the right, on the rotating floor, the 9P radio transceiver was also installed. During the tests, such an arrangement was recognized as unsuccessful - the radio embarrassed the commander and it was recommended to use other radio stations - such as RB or 12RP.
Internal communication between crew members - light signal - from the commander to the driver.
The fulfillment by one person (commander) of the functions of a loader, a gunner, a gunner, and a radio operator - naturally, excessively overloaded him and reduced the effectiveness of combat work while increasing fatigue. All designers of light tanks with a crew of two faced this problem. And according to the results of preliminary tests, in its conclusion, the Commission recommended the introduction of a third crew member (subject to the transition to a base with an extended turret ring of the T-80 tank, where this was implemented in practice).
In the same conclusion, it was also recommended to switch to machine guns of 14, 5-mm caliber to increase the ability to fight not only an air enemy, but also tanks. But such machine guns at that time existed only in prototypes, and even then they were not always suitable for installation in armored vehicles. An expedient design - the KPV machine gun appeared only in 1944 and until now it has been quite successfully completing a number of transportable and portable anti-aircraft installations and is the main weapon of almost all
in service with domestic wheeled armored vehicles of the main purpose. Thus, it can be considered a long-liver record holder among the samples adopted for service during the Great Patriotic War.
The DShK machine gun was used for a long time for anti-aircraft self-defense of most tanks and self-propelled artillery installations. In a portable version on an anti-aircraft machine, it turned out to be an effective air defense tool in the specific semi-guerrilla conditions of warfare in a number of military conflicts in Southeast Asia and Afghanistan.
The parallel work on the creation of cannon ZSUs continued in the USSR until the end of the war and eventually led to the emergence of self-propelled anti-aircraft guns ZU-37, created at the plant N 40 NKSM. Until May 1945, 12 of them were produced - four units each in February, March and April. But at this stage, they were also experienced and were intended only for military tests in combat conditions.
Of the self-propelled anti-aircraft machine gun installations, the most famous during the Second World War were the American M16s with four 12, 7-mm M2NV machine guns on the chassis of the M3 half-track armored personnel carrier.
The performance characteristics of the T-90 tank
Combat weight - 9300 kg
Loading weight (without crew, fuel, ammunition and water) - 8640 kg
Full length 4285 mm
Full width - 2420 mm
Full height - 1925 mm
Track - 2120 mm
Clearance - 300 mm
Specific ground pressure kg / sq. cm:
- without immersion - 0, 63
- with immersion to 100 mm - 0, 49
Maximum travel speeds in various gears:
- in first gear - 7 km / h
- in second gear - 15 km / h
- in third gear - 26 km / h
- in fourth gear - 45 km / h
- reverse gear - 5 km / h
Average travel speed:
- on the highway - 30 km / h
- on a dirt road - 24 km / h
The angle of rise is 34 degrees.
The maximum lateral roll is 35 degrees.
The width of the ditch to be overcome - 1, 8 m
The height of the overcome wall - 0, 65 m
Fording depth - up to 0.9 m
Specific power - 15.0 hp / t
Fuel tank capacity (2 tanks but 220 l) - 440 l
Power reserve (approximate):
- on the highway - 330 km
- on a dirt road - 250 km
Armament:
- two 12, 7-mm DShKT machine guns in a twin installation
- one PPSh submachine gun with three magazines for 213 rounds
- 12 hand grenades
Horizontal angle of fire - 360 degrees.
The declination angle is -6 degrees.
Elevation angle - +85 degrees.
Ranges of angles of work of sights:
- K-8T - + 20-85 deg.
- TMPP - -6 +25 degrees.
Reservation of the riveted-welded hull and turret (armor thickness / angle of inclination):
- side sheets - 15 mm / 90 degrees.
- nasal top sheet - 35 mm / 60 degrees.
- nasal frontal sheet - 45 mm / 30 degrees.
- aft bottom sheet - 25 mm / 45 deg.
- stern roof - 15 mm / 70 deg.
- body roof - 10 mm / 0
bottom:
- front part - 15 mm
- middle part - 10 mm
- aft part - 6 mm
- tower walls - 35 mm / 30 deg.
Power unit: - two six-cylinder carburetor engines connected in one line by an elastic coupling - maximum power of each engine - 70 hp. at 3400 rpm
Note: the project provided for the possibility of installing and engines with a capacity of 85 liters. with.
Electrical equipment:
- single-wire
- voltage - 12 V
- one generator GT-500s with a power of 350 W
- two starters of simultaneous inclusion
- two rechargeable batteries 3-STE-112
Transmission:
- clutch two-disc dry
- friction disc material - steel with riveted asbestos-bakelite linings
- side clutches - multi-disc, dry with steel discs
- brakes - tape type with a ferrodo copper-asbestos fabric riveted onto a steel tape
- main gear - a pair of bevel gears - final drive - a pair of cylindrical gears
Chassis:
- leading sprockets - front location
- the number of links in both tracks - 160 pcs.
- track links material - cast manganese steel
- the number of supporting rollers - 6 pcs.
- diameter and width of the roller - 250 x 126 mm
- type of support rollers suspension - independent torsion bar
- number of road wheels - 10 pcs.
- diameter and width of the road roller and sloth - 515 x 130 mm
- design of the track tensioning mechanism - rotation of the sloth crank by a removable lever
- road wheels and sloths have rubber tires
