Tanks of the USSR of the Great Patriotic War: characteristics and photos. The most massive tanks - participants in the Great Patriotic War What tanks were in the war

02.05.2020

The history of the creation of two famous WWII tanks is very interesting. It can explain the rather ambiguous assessment of these two vehicles, and gives an explanation for some of the failures of our tankers that took place in the summer of 1941. The whole problem is that not even experimental, but conceptual cars went into the series.
None of these tanks were designed to arm the army. They were only supposed to show what a tank of its class should look like.
Pre-war tanks manufactured by plant No. 183. From left to right: BT-7, A-20, T-34-76 with L-11 gun, T-34-76 with F-34 gun
Let's start with KV. When the leadership of the country of the Soviets realized that the tanks in service were so outdated that they were no longer tanks at all. Then the decision was made to create a new technique. Certain requirements for this technique were also put forward. So a heavy tank was supposed to have anti-shell armor and several guns in several turrets. Under this technical project, the design of machines named T-100 and SMK was started.
QMS

T-100

But the designer of the QMS, Kotin, believed that a heavy tank should have a single turret. And he had the idea to create another car. But all of his design bureau was busy creating the ordered QMS. And then he was lucky, a group of students of the armored academy arrived at the plant for the graduation project. These "students" were entrusted with creating a new tank. Those without hesitation shortened the body of the QMS, leaving room for one tower. A second cannon was stuck into this tower instead of a machine gun. And the machine gun itself was moved to the aft niche of the tower. The armor was strengthened, bringing the mass of the project to that specified in the task. They poked knots, the drawings of which were studied at the academy. They even took components from an American tractor, discontinued in the States, 20 years before. But they did not change the suspension, copying it from the QMS. Despite the fact that the length of the tank has decreased by 1.5 times. And the number of suspension units decreased by the same number. And their workload has increased. The only thing that the “students” themselves did was to install a diesel engine. And according to these drawings, the KV tank was created. Presented for testing along with the T-100 and QMS.
The very first KV, autumn 1939

But then the Finnish War began and all three tanks were sent to the front. Which revealed the complete superiority of the KV concept over other tanks. And the tank, despite all the objections of the chief designer, was put into service. The Great Patriotic War, which began soon, revealed all the shortcomings in the design of the HF. The tank turned out to be extremely unreliable, especially these tanks suffered from breakdowns of the suspension and components copied from the American tractor. As a result, in 1941, only about 20% of these vehicles were lost to enemy fire. The rest were abandoned due to breakdowns.
QMS in battle

Blown up on a landmine SMK in the depths of the Finnish positions

The military is generally a conservative people. If they considered a heavy tank to have many turrets, then they ordered this one. And if the tanks for the raids were wheeled-tracked, then they ordered just such a vehicle. In exchange for tanks of the BT-7 series. But they wanted to get a car protected from anti-tank artillery. Why was it supposed to make sloped armor. It was for such a car that the Koshkin military design bureau in Kharkov issued an order.
A-20

A-32

But he saw a completely different car. Therefore, together with the machine ordered by the military, which received the A-20 index, he made almost exactly the same, the A-32. Almost, with 2 exceptions. First, the mechanism of movement on wheels was removed. Secondly, the A-32 had a 76.2 mm gun. Instead of 45 mm on the A-20. At the same time, the A-32 weighed a ton less than the A-20. And in tests, the A-32 proved to be more preferable than the A-20. Especially when the next modification of the A-34 was released, with stronger armor and with the F-32 cannon, the same as on the KV. True, the weight of the tank increased by 6 tons. And inherited from the A-20, the candle suspension began to fail.
Tank A-34 (2nd prototype)

But the Red Army was in dire need of new tanks. And despite the identified defects, the tank went into production. And even with a more powerful and heavy gun F-34. Koshkin and gun designer Grabin knew each other. Therefore, even before the appearance of this gun in service, he received a set of drawings. And on the basis of them he prepared a place for a cannon. And on the medium T-34, the gun turned out to be more powerful than on the heavy KV. But as a result of design costs, the situation turned out to be close to the situation with HF. T-34s of the first releases were more often abandoned due to breakdown than due to combat damage.
The very first KV, but in the spring of 1940 after it was re-equipped according to the KV-2 project. And the tower from the very first KV, which had the number U-0, was installed on the tank number U-2.

It cannot be said that the designers did not recognize the shortcomings of their machines. Immediately began the fight against the "childhood diseases" of the structures. As a result, by 1943 we managed to get those famous T-34s and KVs that we know about. But in general, these vehicles were considered only as temporary, until the appearance of new tanks. So Kotin worked on the KV-3 with a 107 mm gun. And the design bureau in Kharkov over the T-34M. The design of the machine, with a transverse engine and vertical sides. The T-34M was even put into production. We made about 50 sets of parts for this type of tank. But before the capture of Kharkov, not a single tank was fully assembled.
T-34M, aka A-43.

And so it happened that the tanks of victory were tanks, the appearance of which was not envisaged. And their adoption into service was considered a temporary measure and not for long. Tanks that were not intended to be used as main tanks, and which were simply design concepts.
It cannot be said that in 1940, after the shortcomings of our new tanks were clarified, there were no attempts to create new vehicles. I already wrote about the T-34M project. There was an attempt to create a new heavy tank. Received the index KV-3. In the project of this machine, an attempt was made to remove the shortcomings inherent in the KV-1 and KV-2 tanks (the same KV-1, but with a new turret and 152-mm howitzer), the experience of the war with the Finns was also used in the project. It was planned to arm this tank with a 107-mm cannon. However, the tests of the first sample of the gun were not successful. It was difficult and inconvenient for the loader to work with ammunition of this size and weight. Therefore, the tank presented for testing in the summer of 1941 was armed with the same 76-mm cannon. But then the war began and in September 1941 the experimental machine went into battle on the Leningrad front. From which she did not return and is officially listed as missing. But there is a report from one of the commanders of the Red Army, who claimed that a tank that had broken through into the depths of the German defense was fired from 105-mm German howitzers. From the fire of which the ammunition detonated. The turret was torn off, and the tank itself was completely destroyed.
KV-3. Layout.

Newsreel footage is probably familiar to everyone. They show a seven-roller KV-3 with a turret from the KV-1.

But neither the T-34M nor the KV-3 were considered before the war as the main tank of the Red Army. They were supposed to be a car with the T-50 index. The prototype of this machine was created in 1940 and outwardly very much resembled the T-34, only it was somewhat smaller in size. But it had the same 45 mm sloping armor, although the vehicle was armed with a 45 mm cannon and 3 machine guns. The project was recognized as not entirely successful, the car turned out to be too high-tech. And it could not be mastered by the factories where it was planned to be produced. Yes, and the tank turned out to be too heavy for its class.
T-126 in Kubinka

Then it was decided to reduce the thickness of the armor to 37 mm, remove the forward machine gun, and put not a machine gun spork, but one machine gun in the turret. Apply a number of other technical solutions aimed at reducing the weight and manufacturability of production. All this pushed the start of production to June 1941. And serial vehicles appeared in the troops after the start of the war. In total, not many such tanks were produced, several dozen. The plant for their production was evacuated from Leningrad, and in a new place it was decided to start production of other types of machines.
T-50

His competitor created at the Kirov plant

But let's continue talking about the unknown Soviet tanks of the 2nd World War. I already wrote about the T-34M project, but the developments of this project turned out to be in demand. In 1943, the T-43 tank was adopted, which was the direct successor to the T-34M project. But the appearance on the battlefields of "Tigers" and "Panthers" did not allow this car to go into a large series. But it served as the basis for the best WWII tank, the T-44. By the middle of 1942, it became clear that the Red Army needed a new medium tank. The design of such a tank, called the T-43, was completed by June 1943. The main requirement of the military, to provide maximum protection with a minimum increase in mass, was fulfilled. Its hull, which inherited the T-34 configuration, already had circular 75 mm armor. The thickness of the frontal part of the tower, in which the 76.2-mm F-34 tank gun was installed, was increased to 90 mm (against 45 mm for the T-34). But the length of the engine compartment could not be reduced, as a result of which the fighting compartment turned out to be smaller. Therefore, in order to provide the crew with the necessary internal space, the designers used a torsion bar suspension, which is more compact than a candle suspension with vertical springs, as on the BT and T-34 tanks. Surpassing the T-34 in terms of armor protection and not inferior in armament to the heavy tank KV-1 and KV-1s, the medium tank T-43, however, approached heavy tanks in terms of ground pressure, which negatively affected the maneuverability and power reserve. And its design came out to the limit, excluding further modernization. And when the serial “thirty-four” was equipped with an 85-mm cannon, the need for the T-43 temporarily disappeared, although it was the tower from the T-43 with minor changes that was used for the T-34-85 tank, so the experience of working on it was not in vain. The fact is that the test run of the T-43 for 3 thousand km. clearly proved the correctness of the choice for a medium tank of a torsion bar suspension and the futility of a phased change in the traditional layout.
T-43

T-34 and T-43

It became clear that a fundamentally different machine was needed. It was her who began to design in the Morozov Design Bureau. As a result of the work, the T-44 tank turned out. The creation of the T-44 tank began at the end of 1943. The new tank received the designation "Object 136" and in the series - the designation T-44. The new car not only used a transverse engine, but also a number of other technical innovations. Being introduced separately, on different tanks, they would not have given a tangible effect, but together they made the design of the T-44 one that determined the development of domestic armored vehicles for decades. The height of the engine compartment was reduced by moving a new type of air cleaner from the collapse of the cylinders of the Y-shaped engine to the side. By the way, the V-44 diesel itself was equipped with improved fuel equipment, which made it possible to increase power from 500 to 520 hp. With. with the same volume of cylinders as on the previous B-34. In place of the fan, which protruded beyond the dimensions of the crankcase, a compact flywheel was installed. This made it possible to mount the diesel engine on a low, rigid, but light motor frame, and as a result, the body height decreased by 300 mm.
Two experimental samples of the T-44

The medium T-44 and its German counterpart, the heavy T-V Panther.

They also introduced other design developments that could not be implemented on serial T-34s. So the new layout of the engine compartment made it possible to shift the new design turret with the 85-mm ZIS-S-53 cannon to the center of the hull, where the tankers were less affected by the tiring angular vibrations of the vehicle, and the long-barreled gun could not stick into the ground when moving over rough terrain. Increased and accuracy of shooting. And most importantly, such alignment allowed the designers to bring the thickness of the frontal armor plate to 120 mm without overloading the front rollers. We add that the increase in the strength of the frontal sheet was also facilitated by the transfer of the driver's hatch to the roof of the hull, and the rejection of the ball mount of the course machine gun, since combat experience revealed its insufficient effectiveness. In the new tank, the course machine gun was rigidly fixed in the bow of the hull, and a fuel tank was placed in the vacated place next to the driver. On the prototype T-44-85, there was a small gap between the second and third road wheels. On serial machines, the gap was between the first and second rollers. In this form, the T-44 successfully passed state tests and was adopted in 1944 by the Red Army. T-44 tanks were mass-produced in Kharkov.
T-44

From the end of 1944 to 1945, 965 tanks were manufactured. T-44s did not take part in hostilities. Although they began to enter the troops in the spring of 1945. So until May 9, 1945, 160 tanks of this type entered service with individual guards tank brigades. Which were in the 2nd echelon of the army. And which should have been an unpleasant surprise for the Germans, if they had new types of tanks. For example, the Panther-2 being developed. But there was no need for this type of tank. And the T-44 did not take part in the fighting. Even against Japan. Thus falling out of the field of view of military historians. It's a pity. Because this tank was the best tank of the 2nd World War.

IS-2 (USSR).
The IS-2 ("Joseph Stalin") was the first Soviet tank to break into Berlin on April 24, 1945. A projectile fired from the powerful 122 mm gun of this heavy tank pierced through the German PzKpfw V Panther.

T-34 (USSR).
The legendary T-34 is the most recognizable Soviet tank. Almost all experts agree that the T-34 was the best tank that had a serious impact on the outcome of the war and the further development of tank building. This was recognized by the enemies. In early October 1941, General Guderian stated that the T-34 was no match for the best German tanks. Less than a month later, he recognized the clear advantage of the T-34 over the main tank Pz.IV.
The T-34 was produced from 1940 to 1958, more than 84,000 T-34s were produced.

Tiger I (“Tiger”, Germany).
After the attack of Nazi Germany on the Soviet Union, it quickly became clear that the main tank of the Wehrmacht PzKpfw IV was much inferior to the Soviet “thirty-fours”. The Henschel-Werke concern and the designer Ferdinand Porsche worked on the creation of a new heavy tank at the same time. The choice of the German military leadership fell on Henschel-Werke, and the first "Tigers" appeared on the Eastern Front on August 29, 1942 at the Mga station near Leningrad. Along with the advantages (a tank could hit a target at a distance of up to 4 km), the Tigers also had major drawbacks: they were very heavy, clumsy and difficult to repair. In addition, the Tiger I was twice as expensive as any tank of those times and cost 800,000 Reichsmarks.

Panther (“Panther”, Germany).
This combat vehicle was developed by MAN in 1941-1942. For the first time, the Wehrmacht used Panthers during the Battle of Kursk: 200 tanks were received by the 39th Tank Regiment. After a few days of fighting, 31 Panthers were irretrievably lost, and 131 tanks needed to be repaired. The superiority of the Panthers was evident only in frontal tank battles; Soviet anti-tank artillery burned the Panthers no worse than the rest.

M3 Lee (USA).
On the Eastern Front, American Lee tanks received under Lend-Lease appeared in the middle of 1942, but did not cause much enthusiasm. From the Soviet crews, he received the sad nickname "mass grave for six": the armor did not save from the powerful tank and anti-tank guns of the Wehrmacht.

M4 Sherman (USA).
The Soviet tankers "Sherman" had the nickname "emcha" (from M4). Several dozen Shermans participated in the Battle of Kursk. The tankers took the American tanks well. Since the spring of 1944, Shermans have taken part in almost all battles on the fronts of the Great Patriotic War. In general, the Shermans were not much inferior to the T-34s. From February 1942 to July 1945, 49,234 tanks were produced.

Analyzing the reasons for the victory of the Soviet people in the Great Patriotic War, one can consider many factors, proving its regularity and inevitability. However, in addition to moral superiority, the mass heroism of soldiers and officers, the feat of home front workers, attention should also be paid to such an important component of overall success as the technical support of the troops. Tanks were the main striking force of the ground forces during the Second World War. The USSR was armed with unsurpassed models of armored vehicles already at the end of the thirties. No other country in the world could achieve such a technological level for a long time.

First tanks

The basic ideas of tank building were formed painfully, the search for optimal layout schemes, criteria for the sufficiency of protection and the ratio of maneuverability to firepower was accompanied by many mistakes and insights. It was important to find the best suspension for the road wheels, the correct location of the drive wheels, calculate the gearbox, and choose the appropriate caliber for the turret guns. The first tanks of the USSR were produced abroad, more precisely, in France, by Renault. They were renamed in honor of the "freedom fighters comrades Lenin and Trotsky", and there were only two of them. There could be no experience of mass construction of tanks in Soviet Russia, and before the revolution this issue was not given sufficient attention. In fairness, it should be remembered that in the 1920s and 1930s, discussions continued between theorists of strategy about the primary importance of cavalry during deep invasion operations and in defense, not only in our country, but also abroad. abroad. You had to start almost from scratch.

20s

Blaming pre-war cavalry supporters for illiteracy and retrograde thinking has long been considered a win-win. These, of course, included Budyonny and Voroshilov, while Tukhachevsky, Blucher, Uborevich, and even Yakir, who suffered from Stalin, were just as schematically classified as “progressives”. In fact, the supporters of the "equestrian" theory, of course, had their own, and quite weighty arguments. In the early 30s, armored vehicles were, to put it mildly, imperfect. The armor is bulletproof, otherwise the low-power carburettor car engine could not move the car from its place. The armament was also in most cases at the level of the famous "cart-Rostovite". There was a logistical problem in the delivery of fuels and lubricants, a car is not a horse, you cannot feed it with grass. And yet, already in the twenties, the first tanks of the USSR appeared. Photos of these samples today are not impressive, and technical characteristics too. In most cases, they copied foreign analogues and did not stand out in any way.

Something had to be started. The starting point can be considered the T-18, which became the first mass-produced Soviet tank. It was produced in 1928-1931, 9 hundred copies were built. All the tanks of the USSR and Russia can be considered descendants of this "grandfather" of Soviet tank building. The same Renault-17 served as the basis for its creation. The work of designers was complicated by the need to "reinvent the wheel", since not all parts and assemblies were preserved after the Civil War. The tank was light, the armament consisted of one machine gun. Until the conflict on Lake Khasan, he remained in the service, and the main value of this machine is that it laid the foundation for the Soviet tank building school.

Wheeled-caterpillar concept

The middle of the 30s was marked by the flourishing of the wheel-tracked concept. Its essence was briefly reduced to the fact that in the upcoming offensive operations, speed would be a priority success factor, and cars moving along European highways like cars would be able to achieve it. But good roads still need to be reached, having overcome the chronic Russian impassability. Caterpillars could also be needed in order to cross fortified areas, trenches and ditches. The enemy should not be underestimated, he would certainly use all known methods of defense.

This is how the idea of a hybrid undercarriage arose, providing for the possibility of carrying out the initial stage of the offensive on tracks, then dropping them, and then developing success using actually wheeled tanks. The USSR was preparing for an offensive fleeting war on foreign territory, accompanied by minor losses, with the support of the insurgent proletariat of the liberated countries.

T-29

The T-29 became the first personification of the wheel-tracked concept. Theoretically, he absorbed all the most advanced technical ideas of his time, even going beyond them. The caliber of the turret gun was unthinkable for the mid-30s, it was as much as 76 mm, had a slightly larger size than the previous T-28 model, and with 30 mm armor thickness it could move quite quickly, no worse than the light tanks of the USSR of that time . The machine was let down by the complexity of production and low reliability, it remained experimental, but its role should not be underestimated.

Grotte's Mysterious Machine

The uninitiated in the intricacies of the history of tanks may consider the name of this Soviet model foreign. In a sense, it is.

In parallel with the T-28 and T-29, work was underway in the USSR to implement another secret project. Having become a communist, the German designer Edvard Grotte created his car in our country, using unusual and even revolutionary approaches. Some of his achievements were later used by Soviet engineers (welded technologies, for example), while others of his ideas were not continued (spiral suspension rollers and multi-tiered placement of weapons). Alas, the tank of the German engineer Grotte suffered from excessive complexity, was expensive to manufacture and unreliable.

Multi-tower SMK

The first heavy tanks of the USSR were named after the murdered leader of the Leningrad Bolsheviks, Sergei Mironovich Kirov. On the basis of the already tested design of the T-35, a means of breaking through the layered fortifications of the enemy was created. The mass of the vehicle was 55 tons, it was armed with two guns (caliber 76 and 45 mm) placed in individual towers. The original scheme assumed five-tower equipment, but the weight went off scale, and it was simplified. SMK - the most unusual tanks of the USSR. Their photos give an idea that the maneuverability of these machines leaves much to be desired. Their silhouette is immortalized on the obverse of the medal "For Courage". In the Great Patriotic War, this caterpillar artillery battery practically did not have to fight, but the experience of the Finnish campaign revealed the general constructive conceptual depravity of the multi-tower scheme.

Fleet

All light tanks of the USSR of the Second World War are considered obsolete, even taking into account the fact that their age in 1941 was measured over a period of several years. Their armor was modest, their armament was insufficient, at least, post-war historians claimed so. The BT series turned out to be of little use for the defense of the country, this is true. However, this does not detract from their technical merits. The 45-mm gun was enough to destroy any German tank in the initial period of hostilities. The machines of this series showed themselves perfectly during offensive operations at Khalkhin Gol in very difficult conditions. It was on them that the main ideas were tested, according to which all subsequent tanks of the USSR were built, including the rear location of the transmission unit, inclined armor and an indispensable diesel engine. The speed of the machines justified the name of the series (BT-2 - BT-7), it reached 50 or more km / h (on tracks), and exceeded 70 km / h on wheels.

floating

When mastering vast territories, the armed forces of any country face the problem of forcing numerous water barriers. Usually it is solved by landing and holding a bridgehead by them for the time necessary to establish a pontoon crossing. The capture of bridges can be considered an ideal case, but the retreating enemy, which is quite logical, seeks to destroy them before leaving. Immediately before the war, our designers created amphibious tanks. The USSR of the Second World War, according to the official historical version, did not expect, but prepared the Red Army to overcome numerous rivers and other bodies of water. T-38 and T-37 were built in large series (by 1938 there were over a thousand of them), and in 1939 the T-40 was added to them. They were of little use for defense, the armament was rather weak (7.62 or 12.7 mm machine gun), so at the initial stage of the war, almost all vehicles were lost. By the way, the German Wehrmacht did not have amphibious tanks at all.

Main tank T-34

The most famous and mass-produced tanks of the USSR in 1941-1945 are the “thirty-fours”. The designers of the warring countries failed to create the best car anyway. And it's not about the extra-thick protection or the unique caliber of the gun. The main advantage of this tank was its amazing survivability, mobility, the ability to repel projectiles, and manufacturability. All this was achieved thanks to the correct layout of the nodes. The designers lowered the silhouette by placing the drive rollers at the rear and removing the cardan shaft. The mass of armor has decreased, driving performance has improved. Modification of 1944 received a cast hexagonal turret and a gun with a caliber increased to 85 mm. A lot has been said and written about this tank, it deserves it, even despite the shortcomings, without which, however, not a single piece of equipment can do.

T-44

The T-44 became a further development of the T-34 concept. This machine was distinguished by an even more perfect layout, in particular, the diesel engine was placed in it coaxially with the drive rollers, perpendicular to the longitudinal line of the armored hull. This solution made it possible to reduce the length (as well as the mass), improve habitability, move the driver's hatch to a horizontal plane in front of the turret, and solve a number of other design problems. KhTZ produced 190 copies of the T-44 until May 1945. After the advent of modern T-54 tanks, the chassis of the "forty-fours" managed to serve as tractors, various auxiliary equipment was mounted on them. The film career of the T-44 is also noteworthy: for the filming of feature films, they were often "made up" under the German "Panthers".

"Klims" - the heaviest tanks - 1941

The USSR was preparing to crush the enemy's fortifications on foreign territory. By the end of 1938, in parallel with the aforementioned QMS, the Kirov Plant began to design a unique single-turret KV machine. A year later, the first copies were tested in quite combat conditions in Karelia. According to the established plan, in 1940 more than two hundred copies rolled off the assembly line, and in 1941 they were supposed to produce 1200 pieces. Weight - 47.5 tons, speed - 34 km / h, turret gun caliber - 76 mm. Not a single army in the world had such a machine. Its main purpose is to break into a layered defense equipped with powerful anti-tank weapons. Other WWII tanks also appeared at its base. By the beginning of hostilities, the USSR already had a well-thought-out and perfect technological chain that made it possible to use the successful KV undercarriage in combination with various types of towers and various artillery weapons (KV-1 KV-2, KV-3, etc.). Such a maneuverable heavy tank was not able to create the industry of Nazi Germany. However, the allies in the anti-Hitler coalition did not succeed either.

IS - Stalin in metal

In order to name a tank after the leader, one had to have courage, but even with it, caution was not superfluous. However, at the Kirov Plant there were owners of both advantages. Without a doubt, these were the most powerful and invulnerable tanks of the USSR. The Second World War had already swung its monstrous pendulum to the West, the Soviet Army went on the offensive, but the enemy was still strong and tried to turn the tide of hostilities in his favor, releasing more and more new monsters with extended trunks of long-range guns onto the battlefields. In 1943, tests of the IS-1 were completed, which were a deeply modernized version of the KV. This machine had a relatively small caliber, like the latest T-34 model (85 mm). The IS-2 was a further development of this series (caliber 122 mm), and for the IS-3 they came up with a new form of the reflective surface of the frontal armor, nicknamed the "pike nose".

After the war, many outstanding tanks were created, which are still considered the best in the world. The basis of science and practice in the production of armored vehicles was laid by WWII tanks. The USSR became the leading tank building power. This tradition continues in the new Russia.

During the Second World War, tanks played a decisive role in battles and operations, it is very difficult to single out the top ten from the many tanks, for this reason, the order in the list is rather arbitrary and the place of the tank is tied to the time of its active participation in battles and significance for that period.

10. Tank Panzerkampfwagen III (PzKpfw III)

The PzKpfw III, better known as the T-III, is a light tank with a 37 mm gun. Booking from all angles - 30 mm. The main quality is Speed (40 km / h on the highway). Thanks to the perfect Carl Zeiss optics, ergonomic crew jobs and the presence of a radio station, the “troikas” could successfully fight with much heavier vehicles. But with the advent of new opponents, the shortcomings of the T-III manifested themselves more clearly. The Germans replaced the 37 mm guns with 50 mm guns and covered the tank with hinged screens - temporary measures gave their results, the T-III fought for several more years. By 1943, the release of the T-III was discontinued due to the complete exhaustion of its resource for modernization. In total, German industry produced 5,000 triples.

9. Tank Panzerkampfwagen IV (PzKpfw IV)

The PzKpfw IV, which became the most massive Panzerwaffe tank, looked much more serious - the Germans managed to build 8700 vehicles. Combining all the advantages of the lighter T-III, the "four" had high firepower and security - the thickness of the frontal plate was gradually increased to 80 mm, and the shells of its 75 mm long-barreled gun pierced the armor of enemy tanks like foil (by the way, it was fired 1133 early modifications with a short-barreled gun).

The weak points of the machine are too thin sides and feed (only 30 mm on the first modifications), the designers neglected the slope of the armor plates for the sake of manufacturability and the convenience of the crew.

Panzer IV - the only German tank that was in mass production throughout the Second World War and became the most massive tank of the Wehrmacht. Its popularity among German tankers was comparable to the popularity of the T-34 among ours and the Sherman among the Americans. Well-designed and extremely reliable in operation, this combat vehicle was in the full sense of the word the “workhorse” of the Panzerwaffe.

8. Tank KV-1 (Klim Voroshilov)

“... from three sides we fired at the iron monsters of the Russians, but everything was in vain. Russian giants came closer and closer. One of them approached our tank, hopelessly bogged down in a swampy pond, and without any hesitation drove over it, pressing its tracks into the mud ... "
- General Reinhard, commander of the 41st tank corps of the Wehrmacht.

In the summer of 1941, the KV tank smashed the elite units of the Wehrmacht with impunity as if it had rolled out onto the Borodino field in 1812. Invincible, invincible and extremely powerful. Until the end of 1941, in all the armies of the world, there was generally no weapon capable of stopping the Russian 45-ton monster. The KV was twice as heavy as the largest Wehrmacht tank.

Bronya KV is a wonderful song of steel and technology. 75 millimeters of steel firmament from all angles! The frontal armor plates had an optimal angle of inclination, which further increased the projectile resistance of the KV armor - German 37 mm anti-tank guns did not take it even at close range, and 50 mm guns - no further than 500 meters. At the same time, the long-barreled 76 mm F-34 (ZIS-5) gun made it possible to hit any German tank of that period from a distance of 1.5 kilometers from any direction.

The crews of the KV were staffed exclusively by officers, only driver-mechanics could be foremen. The level of their training was much higher than the level of the crews who fought on tanks of other types. They fought more skillfully, and therefore the Germans remembered ...

7. Tank T-34 (thirty-four)

“... There is nothing worse than a tank battle against superior enemy forces. Not in terms of numbers - it was not important for us, we were used to it. But against better vehicles, it's terrible... Russian tanks are so nimble, at close range they'll climb a slope or cross a swamp faster than you can turn a turret. And through the noise and roar, you hear the clang of shells on the armor all the time. When they hit our tank, you often hear a deafening explosion and the roar of burning fuel, too loud to hear the death cries of the crew ... "
- the opinion of a German tanker from the 4th Panzer Division, destroyed by T-34 tanks in the battle near Mtsensk on October 11, 1941.

Obviously, the Russian monster had no analogues in 1941: a 500-horsepower diesel engine, unique armor, a 76 mm F-34 gun (generally similar to the KV tank) and wide tracks - all these technical solutions provided the T-34 with an optimal ratio of mobility, fire power and protection. Even individually, these parameters for the T-34 were higher than for any Panzerwaffe tank.

When the Wehrmacht soldiers first met the T-34s on the battlefield, they were, to put it mildly, shocked. The cross-country ability of our vehicle was impressive - where the German tanks did not even think to meddle, the T-34s passed without much difficulty. The Germans even nicknamed their 37mm anti-tank gun the "tuk-tuk mallet" because when its shells hit the "thirty-four", they simply hit it and bounced off.

The main thing is that the Soviet designers managed to create the tank exactly the way the Red Army needed it. The T-34 was ideally suited to the conditions of the Eastern Front. The extreme simplicity and manufacturability of the design made it possible to establish mass production of these combat vehicles as soon as possible, as a result, the T-34s were easy to operate, numerous and ubiquitous.

6. Tank Panzerkampfwagen VI "Tiger I" Ausf E, "Tiger"

“... we went around through the beam and ran into the Tiger. Having lost several T-34s, our battalion returned back ... "
- a frequent description of meetings with PzKPfw VI from the memoirs of tankers.

According to a number of Western historians, the main task of the Tiger tank was to fight enemy tanks, and its design corresponded to the solution of this particular problem:

If in the initial period of the Second World War the German military doctrine was mainly offensive, then later, when the strategic situation changed to the opposite, tanks began to play the role of a means of eliminating German defense breakthroughs.

Thus, the Tiger tank was conceived primarily as a means of fighting enemy tanks, whether in defense or offensive. Accounting for this fact is necessary to understand the design features and tactics of using the "Tigers".

On July 21, 1943, the commander of the 3rd Panzer Corps, Herman Bright, issued the following instructions for the combat use of the Tiger-I tank:

... Taking into account the strength of the armor and the strength of the weapon, the "Tiger" should be used mainly against enemy tanks and anti-tank weapons, and only secondarily - as an exception - against infantry units.

As battle experience has shown, the Tiger's weapons allow it to fight enemy tanks at distances of 2000 meters or more, which especially affects enemy morale. Strong armor allows the "Tiger" to move closer to the enemy without the risk of serious damage from hits. However, you should try to start a battle with enemy tanks at distances of more than 1000 meters.

5. Tank "Panther" (PzKpfw V "Panther")

Realizing that the "Tiger" is a rare and exotic weapon for professionals, German tank builders created a simpler and cheaper tank, with the intention of turning it into a mass Wehrmacht medium tank.
Panzerkampfwagen V "Panther" is still the subject of heated debate. The technical capabilities of the car do not cause any complaints - with a mass of 44 tons, the Panther was superior in mobility to the T-34, developing 55-60 km / h on a good highway. The tank was armed with a 75 mm KwK 42 cannon with a barrel length of 70 calibers! An armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile fired from its infernal vent flew 1 kilometer in the first second - with such performance characteristics, the Panther's cannon could pierce any Allied tank at a distance of more than 2 kilometers. Reservation "Panther" by most sources is also recognized as worthy - the thickness of the forehead varied from 60 to 80 mm, while the angles of the armor reached 55 °. The board was weaker protected - at the level of the T-34, so it was easily hit by Soviet anti-tank weapons. The lower part of the side was additionally protected by two rows of rollers on each side.

4. Tank IS-2 (Joseph Stalin)

The IS-2 was the most powerful and most heavily armored of the Soviet mass-produced tanks of the war period, and one of the strongest tanks in the world at that time. Tanks of this type played a big role in the battles of 1944-1945, especially distinguishing themselves during the storming of cities.

The armor thickness of the IS-2 reached 120 mm. One of the main achievements of Soviet engineers is the cost-effectiveness and low metal consumption of the IS-2 design. With a mass comparable to the mass of the Panther, the Soviet tank was much more seriously protected. But too tight layout required the placement of fuel tanks in the control compartment - when the armor was broken, the crew of the Is-2 had little chance of surviving. The driver, who did not have his own hatch, was especially at risk.

Storms of cities:
Together with self-propelled guns based on it, the IS-2 was actively used for assault operations on fortified cities such as Budapest, Breslau, and Berlin. The tactics of operations in such conditions included the actions of the OGvTTP by assault groups of 1-2 tanks, accompanied by an infantry squad of several submachine gunners, a sniper or a well-aimed marksman from a rifle, and sometimes a knapsack flamethrower. In the event of weak resistance, tanks with assault groups planted on them broke through at full speed along the streets to squares, squares, parks, where it was possible to take up all-round defense.

3. Tank M4 Sherman (Sherman)

Sherman is the pinnacle of rationality and pragmatism. It is all the more surprising that the United States, which had 50 tanks by the beginning of the war, managed to create such a balanced combat vehicle and rivet 49,000 Shermans of various modifications by 1945. For example, the Sherman with a gasoline engine was used in the ground forces, and the M4A2 modification equipped with a diesel engine entered the Marine Corps. American engineers rightly believed that this would greatly simplify the operation of tanks - diesel fuel could be easily found among sailors, unlike high-octane gasoline. By the way, it was this modification of the M4A2 that entered the Soviet Union.

Why did the Emcha (as our soldiers called the M4) so pleased the command of the Red Army that they were completely transferred to elite units, for example, the 1st Guards Mechanized Corps and the 9th Guards Tank Corps? The answer is simple: "Sherman" had the optimal ratio of armor, firepower, mobility and ... reliability. In addition, the Sherman was the first tank with a hydraulic turret drive (this provided special aiming accuracy) and a gun stabilizer in a vertical plane - the tankers admitted that in a duel situation their shot was always the first.

Combat use:
After the landing in Normandy, the Allies had to come close to the German tank divisions that were thrown into the defense of Fortress Europe, and it turned out that the Allies underestimated the degree of saturation of the German troops with heavy types of armored vehicles, especially Panther tanks. In direct clashes with German heavy tanks, the Shermans had very little chance. The British, to a certain extent, could count on their Sherman Firefly, whose excellent gun made a great impression on the Germans (so much so that the crews of German tanks tried to hit the Firefly first of all, and then deal with the rest). The Americans, who were counting on their new gun, quickly found out that the power of its armor-piercing shells was still not enough to confidently defeat the Panther in the forehead.

2. Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf. B "Tiger II", "Tiger II"

The combat debut of the Royal Tigers took place on July 18, 1944 in Normandy, where the 503rd heavy tank battalion managed to knock out 12 Sherman tanks in the first battle.
And already on August 12, the Tiger II appeared on the Eastern Front: the 501st heavy tank battalion tried to interfere with the Lvov-Sandomierz offensive operation. The bridgehead was an uneven semicircle, resting at the ends against the Vistula. Approximately in the middle of this semicircle, covering the direction to Staszow, the 53rd Guards Tank Brigade was defending.

At 07:00 on August 13, the enemy, under cover of fog, went on the offensive with the forces of the 16th Panzer Division, with the participation of 14 King Tigers of the 501st Heavy Tank Battalion. But as soon as the new Tigers crawled out to their original positions, three of them were shot from an ambush by the crew of the T-34-85 tank under the command of junior lieutenant Alexander Oskin, which, in addition to Oskin himself, included the driver Stetsenko, gun commander Merkhaydarov, radio operator Grushin and loader Khalychev . In total, the tankers of the brigade knocked out 11 tanks, and the remaining three, abandoned by the crews, were captured in good condition. One of these tanks, number 502, is still in Kubinka.

Currently, the Royal Tigers are on display at Saumur Musee des Blindes in France, RAC Tank Museum Bovington (the only surviving copy with a Porsche turret) and the Royal Military College of Science Shrivenham in the UK, Munster Lager Kampftruppen Schule in Germany (transferred by the Americans in 1961) , Ordnance Museum Aberdeen Proving Ground in the USA, Switzerlands Panzer Museum Thun in Switzerland and the Military Historical Museum of armored weapons and equipment in Kubinka near Moscow.

1. Tank T-34-85

The medium tank T-34-85, in essence, is a major modernization of the T-34 tank, as a result of which a very important drawback of the latter was eliminated - the tightness of the fighting compartment and the impossibility of a complete division of labor of the crew members associated with it. This was achieved by increasing the diameter of the turret ring, as well as by installing a new triple turret much larger than that of the T-34. At the same time, the design of the hull and the layout of components and assemblies in it did not undergo any significant changes. Consequently, there were also disadvantages inherent in machines with aft engine and transmission.

As you know, the most widespread in tank building are two layout schemes with a bow and aft transmission. Moreover, the disadvantages of one scheme are the advantages of another.

The disadvantage of the layout with the aft location of the transmission is the increased length of the tank due to the placement in its hull of four compartments that are not aligned along the length or the reduction in the volume of the fighting compartment with a constant length of the vehicle. Due to the large length of the engine and transmission compartments, the combat with a heavy turret shifts to the nose, overloading the front rollers, leaving no room on the turret sheet for the central and even lateral placement of the driver's hatch. There is a danger of "sticking" the protruding gun into the ground when the tank moves through natural and artificial obstacles. The control drive is becoming more complicated, connecting the driver with the transmission located in the stern.

The layout of the tank T-34-85

There are two ways out of this situation: either increase the length of the control compartment (or combat), which will inevitably lead to an increase in the overall length of the tank and a deterioration in its maneuverability due to an increase in the ratio L / B - the length of the supporting surface to the track width (for the T-34 - 85, it is close to optimal - 1.5), or radically change the layout of the engine and transmission compartments. What this could lead to can be judged by the results of the work of Soviet designers in the design of new medium tanks T-44 and T-54, created during the war years and put into service, respectively, in 1944 and 1945.

The layout of the T-54 tank

On these combat vehicles, a layout was used with a transverse (and not with a longitudinal, as in the T-34-85) placement of a 12-cylinder V-2 diesel engine (in the V-44 and V-54 variants) and a combined significantly shortened (by 650 mm ) engine compartment. This made it possible to lengthen the fighting compartment up to 30% of the hull length (24.3% for the T-34-85), increase the turret ring diameter by almost 250 mm, and install a powerful 100-mm cannon on the T-54 medium tank. At the same time, it was possible to shift the turret to the stern, allocating space on the turret plate for the driver's hatch. The exclusion of the fifth crew member (shooter from the course machine gun), the removal of the ammunition rack from the floor of the fighting compartment, the transfer of the fan from the engine crankshaft to the stern bracket and the reduction in the overall height of the engine ensured a decrease in the height of the T-54 tank hull (compared to the T-34- tank hull). 85) by about 200 mm, as well as a reduction in the booked volume by about 2 cubic meters. and increased armor protection by more than two times (with an increase in mass by only 12%).

Such a radical re-arrangement of the T-34 tank was not done during the war, and, probably, this was the right decision. At the same time, the diameter of the turret ring, while maintaining the same shape of the hull, was almost limiting for the T-34-85, which did not allow placing a larger-caliber artillery system in the turret. The possibilities of upgrading the tank in terms of armament were completely exhausted, unlike, for example, the American Sherman and the German Pz.lV.

By the way, the problem of increasing the caliber of the main armament of the tank was of paramount importance. Sometimes you can hear the question: why did you need to switch to an 85-mm cannon, could it be possible to improve the ballistic characteristics of the F-34 by increasing the barrel length? After all, the Germans did the same with their 75-mm gun on the Pz.lV.

The fact is that German guns have traditionally been distinguished by better internal ballistics (ours are just as traditionally external). The Germans achieved high armor penetration by increasing the initial speed and better working out of ammunition. We could adequately answer only by increasing the caliber. Although the S-53 cannon significantly improved the firing capabilities of the T-34-85, but, as Yu.E. Maksarev noted: “In the future, the T-34 could no longer directly, duel hit new German tanks.” All attempts to create 85-mm guns with an initial speed of over 1000 m / s, the so-called high-power guns, ended in failure due to rapid wear and destruction of the barrel even at the testing stage. For the "duel" defeat of German tanks, a transition to 100-mm caliber was required, which was carried out only in the T-54 tank with a turret ring diameter of 1815 mm. But in the battles of the Second World War, this combat vehicle did not take part.

As for the placement of the driver's hatch in the frontal hull sheet, one could try to follow the path of the Americans. Recall that on the Sherman, the driver's and machine gunner's hatches, originally also made in an inclined front hull plate, were subsequently transferred to the turret plate. This was achieved by reducing the angle of inclination of the front plate from 56° to 47° to the vertical. The T-34-85 had a 60° frontal hull plate. By reducing this angle also to 47 ° and compensating for this by some increase in the thickness of the frontal armor, it would be possible to increase the area of the turret sheet and place the driver's hatch on it. This would not require a radical redesign of the hull design and would not entail a significant increase in the mass of the tank.

The suspension has not changed on the T-34-85 either. And if the use of better quality steel for the manufacture of springs helped to avoid their rapid subsidence and, as a result, a decrease in clearance, then it was not possible to get rid of significant longitudinal vibrations of the tank hull in motion. It was an organic defect of the spring suspension. The location of the habitable compartments in front of the tank only exacerbated the negative impact of these fluctuations on the crew and weapons.

A consequence of the layout scheme of the T-34-85 was the absence of a rotating tower poly in the fighting compartment. In battle, the loader worked, standing on the covers of the cassette boxes with shells laid on the bottom of the tank. When turning the tower, he had to move after the breech, while he was prevented by spent cartridges that fell right here on the floor. When conducting intense fire, the accumulated cartridge cases also made it difficult to access the shots placed in the ammunition rack on the bottom.

Summarizing all these points, we can conclude that, unlike the same "Sherman", the possibilities for upgrading the hull and suspension of the T-34-85 were not fully used.

Considering the advantages and disadvantages of the T-34-85, one more very important circumstance must be taken into account. The crew of any tank, as a rule, in everyday reality does not care at all at what angle of inclination the frontal or any other sheet of the hull or turret is located. It is much more important that the tank as a machine, that is, as a combination of mechanical and electrical mechanisms, works accurately, reliably and does not create problems during operation. Including problems associated with the repair or replacement of any parts, assemblies and assemblies. Here, the T-34-85 (like the T-34) was all right. The tank was exceptionally maintainable! It is paradoxical, but true - and the layout is “to blame” for this!

There is a rule: to arrange not to ensure convenient installation - dismantling of units, but based on the fact that the units do not need to be repaired until they completely fail. The required high reliability and non-failure operation are achieved when designing a tank based on ready-made, structurally proven units. Since, when creating the T-34, practically none of the tank units met this requirement, its layout was also carried out contrary to the rule. The roof of the engine compartment was easily removable; All this was of tremendous importance in the first half of the war, when more tanks went out of action due to technical malfunctions than from enemy influence (for example, on April 1, 1942, the active army had 1,642 serviceable and 2,409 serviceable tanks of all types, while while our combat losses in March amounted to 467 tanks). As the quality of the units improved, which reached the highest level for the T-34-85, the value of the maintainable layout decreased, but the language does not dare to call this a disadvantage. Moreover, good maintainability turned out to be very useful during the post-war operation of the tank abroad, primarily in Asia and Africa, sometimes in extreme climatic conditions and with personnel who had a very mediocre, if not more, level of training.

Despite all the shortcomings in the design of the "thirty-four", a certain balance of compromises was observed, which favorably distinguished this combat vehicle from other tanks of the Second World War. Simplicity, ease of operation and maintenance, combined with good armor protection, maneuverability and powerful enough weapons, became the reason for the success and popularity of the T-34-85 among tankers.

to favorites to favorites from favorites 2

I will say right away that the article is old and not the deepest. But still I decided to raise it, since the article gets good traffic. So I propose to read the publication of the distant 2012.

In the process of searching for information on rare modifications of tanks, I set out to compare the tanks of the USSR and Germany during WWII. There is no lack of information on the Internet, so it is not difficult to conduct a comparative analysis of tanks Red Army and Wehrmacht in June 1941. I conditionally divide all tanks into 4 categories: tankettes, light tanks, artillery tanks, medium tanks.

So at the beginning of the war in the Wehrmacht there were such tanks:

— T-I (Pz I)(two 7.92 mm machine guns)

— T-II ( PzII) (20 mm cannon, machine gun 7.92 mm);

— 38(t) ( PzKpfw 38(t)) (37 mm cannon, 2 machine guns 7.92 mm), letter t means Czech tank;

— T III(37 mm or 50 mm cannon, 3 machine guns);

— T-IV(75 mm short-barreled gun, two 7.92 mm machine guns);

The Red Army is represented by the following tanks:

— T-35(76 mm cannon, 2 cannons 45 mm, 5 machine guns 7.62 mm)

—

- (152 mm howitzer, 4 machine guns 7.62 mm)

— T-28(76 mm cannon, 4 machine guns 7.62 mm)

— T-34(76 mm cannon, 2 machine guns 7.62 mm)

—

- (45 mm cannon, 1 machine gun 7.62 mm)

- (37 mm cannon, 1 machine gun 7.62 mm)

— T-26(45 mm cannon, 2 machine guns 7.62 mm)

— T-40(2 machine guns 12.7 mm and 7.62 mm) floating

— T-38(1 machine gun 7.62 mm)

— T-37(1 machine gun 7.62 mm)

Comparison of wedges in Germany and the USSR

To "wedges" let's take the German tanks T-I and T-II and Soviet T-26, T-37, T-38. For comparison, let's take the German "cannon" T-II tank and our outdated T-26, which was discontinued by the beginning of the war.

Although the thickness of the armor of the T-II tank is 2 times greater than that of the T-26 tank, this did not turn it into a tank with anti-ballistic armor. The gun of the Soviet T-26 tank type 20K 45-mm caliber confidently penetrated such armor at a distance of 1200 m, while the projectile of the 20-mm KwK-30 gun retained the necessary penetration only at a distance of 300-500 m. This combination of armor and armament parameters allowed the Soviet tank, with its proper use, to shoot German tanks with virtually impunity, which was confirmed in the battles in Spain. The T-II tank was also unsuitable for the main task - the destruction of enemy firepower and manpower, since the 20-mm cannon projectile was completely ineffective for this task. To hit the target, a direct hit was required, as from a rifle bullet. At the same time, a “normal” high-explosive fragmentation projectile weighing 1.4 kg was developed for our gun. Such a projectile hit targets such as a machine-gun nest, a mortar battery, a log dugout, etc.

Comparison of light tanks

Next, consider the comparative combat characteristics of the second category - "light tanks". These include all Wehrmacht tanks armed with a 37 mm cannon and machine guns. These are German-made T-III tanks of the D, E, F series and Czech-made tanks 35 (t) and 38 (t). On the Soviet side, we will take for comparative analysis the light tanks BT-7 and BT-7 M.

In terms of “armor, mobility and armament”, our “light tanks” BT-7, at least two are not inferior to the German “troikas”, and Czech tanks are significantly superior in all respects. Frontal armor with a thickness of 30 mm for the T-III tanks of these series, as well as for the T-II tanks, did not provide projectile protection. Our tank with a 45 mm cannon could hit a German tank at a kilometer range, while remaining relatively safe. In terms of mobility and power reserve, the BT-7 (7M) tanks were the best in the world. The fragmentation projectile (610 g) of the 37-mm Skoda tank gun was 2 times smaller than the Soviet 20K gun projectile, which led to a significantly lower damaging effect on infantry. As for the action against armored targets, the 37-mm caliber guns were ineffective (they were nicknamed "army door knockers" in the German troops).

medium tanks

Infantry artillery support tanks were not originally intended to deal with similar targets. A distinctive feature of tanks in this category were short-barreled guns (the T-IV tank has a barrel length in calibers L equal to 24), the initial velocity of the projectile of which and, consequently, the penetration of these guns was very low (the 45-mm Soviet 20K gun was superior in armor penetration to 75-mm German gun of the T-IV tank at all distances). To fight the infantry, our T-28 tank (due to the presence of two separate machine-gun turrets) was better armed. In addition, some of the T-28 tanks of the last years of production were armed with longer-barreled guns and shielded with additional armor plates 20-30 mm thick. A similar modernization in terms of strengthening the armor took place with German tanks (T-IV tanks of the first series A, B, C, etc. had forehead armor - 30 mm, side - 20 mm). As for the short-barreled gun, it was replaced by a long-barreled gun (L 43) only in April 1942. The wide tracks of the Soviet T-28 tank provided it with better maneuverability. In general, in terms of the entire set of tactical and technical characteristics, these tanks were equivalent.

Finally, consider the best that was in service with the tank divisions of the Wehrmacht and the tank divisions of the Red Army on June 22, 1941, conditionally included in the category of "medium tanks".

"The best" this is not my opinion, and the opinion of the state commission (of fifty engineers, designers and intelligence officers), which, under the leadership of People's Commissar Tevosyan, three times in 1939-1941, got acquainted in detail with the state of German tank production and, from all that he saw, selected for purchase only a single T-III tank. The T-III of the H and J series became the best tank due to two circumstances: the new 50-mm KwK-38 cannon and the frontal armor of the hull with a thickness of 50 mm. All other types of tanks were not of interest to our specialists.

This tank was thoroughly studied and tested by shooting at armored targets at the Soviet training ground. Therefore, our military-political leadership was well aware of the level of German tanks and the state of the German tank industry as a whole.

In the Red Army, the "best" of the "medium tanks" category was the T-34 tank.

In all respects - mobility, armor protection, armament, the T-34 tank surpassed the best German T-III tank of the H and J series in June 1941. The long-barreled 76-mm gun T-34 pierced any armor of the most protected German tanks at a distance of 1000-1200 meters. At the same time, not a single Wehrmacht tank could hit the "thirty-four" even from 500 meters.

A powerful diesel engine provided not only high speed and relative fire safety, but also allowed to travel more than 300 km at one gas station.

The most complete and qualified assessment of the Soviet T-34 tank was given by German General B. Müller-Gillebrand:

“The appearance of the T-34 tank was an unpleasant surprise, because due to its speed, high cross-country ability, enhanced armor protection, armament and, mainly, the presence of an elongated 76-mm cannon, which had increased shooting accuracy and penetrating ability of shells at large, until now considered unattainable distance, was a completely new type of tank weapon. Although the German infantry divisions each had a total of 60-80 anti-tank guns and had a sufficient number of other anti-tank weapons, with a caliber of 37 mm guns, they had almost no damaging effect on the thirty-fours. The 50-mm anti-tank gun introduced into service with the German troops at that time was also not an effective means ... "

“The appearance of T-34 tanks radically changed the tactics of tank troops. If until now certain requirements were imposed on the design of the tank and its armament, in particular, to suppress infantry and infantry-supporting means, now the main task was to hit enemy tanks at the maximum range in order to create the prerequisites for subsequent success in battle.

Other generals of the Wehrmacht make similar reviews.