Less is more—at least sometimes. A smaller caliber can indeed sometimes be more effective than a large caliber - even if at first glance such a statement seems paradoxical.

On the threshold of 1942, German designers of armored vehicles were under tremendous pressure. Over the past few months, they have significantly improved the modification of existing German T-4 tanks, bringing the thickness of the lower frontal plate to 50mm, as well as equipping the vehicles with additional frontal plates 30mm thick.

Due to the increased weight of the tank by 10%, now amounting to 22.3 tons, it was necessary to increase the track width from 380 to 400 mm. To do this, it was necessary to make changes to the design of the guide and drive wheels. In the automotive industry, such improvements like to be called a model change - in the case of the T-4, the designation of the modification changed from "E" to "F".

However, these improvements were not enough to turn the T-4 into a full-fledged rival of the Soviet T-34. Primarily, weak point these machines were their weapons. Along with 88 mm anti-aircraft gun, as well as captured cannons from the stocks of the Red Army - 76-mm guns, which the Germans called "rach-boom" - in the autumn and summer seasons, only the 50-mm Pak 38 anti-tank gun proved its effectiveness, since it fired blanks with a tungsten core.

The leadership of the Wehrmacht was well aware of the existing problems. As early as the end of May 1941, before the attack on Soviet Union, the urgent equipment of the T-4 tank was discussed cannon pak 38, which was supposed to replace the short 75-mm tank gun KwK 37, which was called "Shtummel" (Russian cigarette butt). The Pak 38 was only two-thirds larger than the KwK 37.

Context

T-34 crushed Hitler?

The National Interest 02/28/2017

IL-2 - Russian "flying tank"

The National Interest 07.02.2017

A7V - the first German tank

Die Welt 05.02.2017
Due to the length of the gun at 1.8 m, it was impossible to give the projectiles sufficient acceleration, since their initial velocity was only 400-450 m/s. The muzzle velocity of the Pak 38 shells, despite the fact that the caliber of the gun was only 50 mm, reached more than 800 m/s, and later almost 1200 m/s.

In mid-November 1941, the first prototype of the T-4 tank, equipped with the Pak 38 gun, was to be ready. However, shortly before that, it was discovered that the envisaged modification of the T-4, which was considered a temporary solution on the way to creating a tank capable of resisting the T-34 tank, impossible to implement: Germany did not have enough tungsten to begin mass production of blanks.

On November 14, 1941, a meeting was held at the Fuhrer's headquarters, which cost the German engineers a quiet Christmas. Because Hitler ordered that the production of armored vehicles be completely reorganized as soon as possible. From now on, it was planned to produce only four types of machines: light reconnaissance tanks, medium battle tanks based on the old T-4s, new heavy tanks ordered for production at the end of June 1941 of the T-6 Tiger tanks, as well as additional "heaviest" tanks.

Four days later, an order was given to develop a new 75-mm cannon, the barrel of which was lengthened from 1.8 m to 3.2 m, and which was supposed to replace the Stummel. The muzzle velocity of the projectile increased from 450 to 900 m/s - this was enough to destroy any T-34 from a distance of 1000-1500 m, even using high-explosive shells.

However, there were also tactical changes. Until now, the T-3 tanks formed the basis of the military equipment of the German tank divisions. They were supposed to fight enemy tanks, while the heavier T-4 tanks were originally designed as auxiliary vehicles to destroy targets that small-caliber guns could not handle. However, even in battles against French tanks it turned out that only the T-4 could become a serious opponent.

Every German tank regiment nominally had 60 T-3 tanks and 48 T-4 tanks, as well as other tracked vehicles of a lighter design, some of which were produced in the Czech Republic. However, on July 1, 1941, in fact, on the entire eastern front, only 551 T-4 tanks were at the disposal of 19 fighting tank divisions. Despite the fact that the continuous supply of troops with armored vehicles in the amount of about 40 vehicles per month was carried out from factories in Germany for three army groups participating in hostilities in the Soviet Union, due to war-related interruptions in supplies, by the spring of 1942, the number of tanks increased only up to 552.

Nevertheless, according to Hitler's decision, T-4 tanks, which in the past were auxiliary vehicles, were to become the main combat vehicles of tank divisions. This also affected the subsequent modification of German combat vehicles, which at that time was under development, namely the T-5 tank, known as the Panther.

© RIA Novosti, RIA Novosti

This model, which began to be developed back in 1937, was put into production on November 25, 1941 and managed to gain experience in confronting T-34 tanks. It was the first German tank to have front and side armor plates mounted at an angle. However, it was clear that the supply of tanks of this model in more or less sufficient quantities could be realized no earlier than 1943.

Meanwhile, the T-4 tanks had to cope with the role of the main combat vehicles. The engineers of the companies involved in the development of armored vehicles, primarily Krupp in the city of Essen and Steyr-Puch in the city of St. Valentin (Lower Austria), managed to increase production by the new year and at the same time reorient it to the production of the F2 model, equipped with an elongated Kwk gun 40 delivered to the front since March 1942. Earlier, in January 1942, the production of 59 T-4 tanks in a month for the first time exceeded the established norm of 57 tanks.

Now the T-4 tanks in terms of artillery were approximately equal to the T-34 tanks, but were still inferior to the powerful Soviet cars in mobility. But at that time, another existing drawback was more important - the number of cars produced. For the whole of 1942, 964 T-4 tanks were produced, and only half of them were equipped with an elongated gun, while T-34s were produced in the amount of more than 12 thousand vehicles. And here even new guns could not change anything.

The materials of InoSMI contain only assessments of foreign media and do not reflect the position of the editors of InoSMI.

(Pz.III), power point is located at the rear, and the power transmission and drive wheels are at the front. The control compartment housed the driver and gunner-radio operator, firing from a machine gun mounted in a ball bearing. The fighting compartment was in the middle of the hull. A multifaceted welded tower was mounted here, in which three crew members were accommodated and weapons were installed.

T-IV tanks were produced with the following weapons:

• modifications A-F, assault tank with 75 mm howitzer;
• modification G, a tank with a 75-mm cannon with a barrel length of 43 caliber;
• N-K modifications, a tank with a 75-mm cannon with a barrel length of 48 calibers.

Due to the constant increase in the thickness of the armor, the weight of the vehicle during production increased from 17.1 tons (modification A) to 24.6 tons (modification H-K). Since 1943, to enhance armor protection, armored screens were installed on the sides of the hull and turret. The long-barreled gun introduced on modifications G, H-K allowed the T-IV to withstand enemy tanks of equal weight (a 75-mm sub-caliber projectile pierced 110-mm armor at a distance of 1000 meters), but its maneuverability, especially of the overweighted latest modifications, was unsatisfactory. In total, about 9,500 T-IV tanks of all modifications were produced during the war years.

When there was no Pz.IV tank yet

Tank PzKpfw IV. History of creation.

In the 1920s and early 1930s, the theory of the use of mechanized troops, in particular tanks, was developed by trial and error, the views of theorists changed very often. A number of supporters of tanks believed that the appearance of armored vehicles would be made with tactical point view of the impossible trench warfare in the fighting style of 1914-1917. In turn, the French relied on the construction of well-fortified long-term defensive positions, such as the Maginot Line. A number of experts believed that the main armament of the tank should be a machine gun, and the main task of armored vehicles is to fight the infantry and artillery of the enemy, the most radically thinking representatives of this school considered the battle between tanks to be pointless, since, supposedly, neither side could inflict damage on the other. There was an opinion that the side that could destroy large quantity enemy tanks. As the main means of fighting tanks, special weapons with special shells were considered - anti-tank guns with armor-piercing shells. In fact, no one knew what the nature of hostilities would be in a future war. An experience civil war in Spain also did not clarify the situation.

The Treaty of Versailles forbade Germany to have combat tracked vehicles, but could not prevent German specialists from working on studying various theories of the use of armored vehicles, and the creation of tanks was carried out by the Germans in secrecy. When in March 1935 Hitler abandoned the restrictions of Versailles, the young "Panzerwaffe" already had all the theoretical studies in the field of application and organizational structure tank regiments.

There were two types of light armed tanks PzKpfw I and PzKpfw II under the guise of "agricultural tractors" in mass production.
The PzKpfw I tank was considered a training vehicle, while the PzKpfw II was intended for reconnaissance, but it turned out that the "two" remained the most massive tank of panzerdivisions until medium tanks came to replace it PzKpfw III, armed with a 37 mm cannon and three machine guns.

The beginning of the development of the PzKpfw IV tank dates back to January 1934, when the army gave the industry a specification for new tank fire support weighing no more than 24 tons, the future vehicle received the official designation Gesch.Kpfw. (75 mm)(Vskfz.618). Over the next 18 months, specialists from Rheinmetall-Borzing, Krupp and MAN worked on three competing projects for the battalion commander's vehicle ("battalionführerswagnen" abbreviated as BW). The VK 2001/K project, presented by Krupp, was recognized as the best project, the shape of the turret and hull is close to the PzKpfw III tank.

However, the VK 2001 / K machine did not go into series, because the military was not satisfied with the six-support chassis with wheels of medium diameter on a spring suspension, it needed to be replaced with a torsion bar. The torsion bar suspension, compared to the spring suspension, provided a smoother movement of the tank and had a greater vertical travel of the road wheels. Krupp engineers, together with representatives of the Arms Procurement Directorate, agreed on the possibility of using an improved spring suspension design with eight small-diameter road wheels on board on the tank. However, Krupp had to largely revise the proposed original design. In the final version, the PzKpfw IV was a combination of the hull and turret of the VK 2001 / K vehicle with a chassis newly developed by Krupp.

When there was no Pz.IV tank yet

The PzKpfw IV tank was designed according to the classic layout with a rear engine. The commander's place was located along the axis of the tower directly under the commander's cupola, the gunner was located to the left of the cannon breech, the loader was to the right. In the control compartment, located in front of the tank hull, there were jobs for the driver (to the left of the vehicle axis) and the radio operator's gunner (to the right). Between the driver's seat and the arrow was the transmission. An interesting feature of the design of the tank was the displacement of the tower by about 8 cm to the left of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle, and the engine - by 15 cm to the right to pass the shaft connecting the engine and transmission. Accepted such constructive solution made it possible to increase the internal reserved volume on the right side of the hull for the placement of the first shots, which the loader could most easily get. Turret turn drive - electric.

Click on the picture of the tank to enlarge

The suspension and chassis consisted of eight small-diameter road wheels grouped into two-wheeled carts suspended on leaf springs, drive wheels installed in the stern of the sloth tank and four rollers supporting the caterpillar. Throughout the history of the operation of PzKpfw IV tanks, their undercarriage remained unchanged, only minor improvements were introduced. The prototype of the tank was manufactured at the Krupp plant in Essen and tested in 1935-36.

Description of the tank PzKpfw IV

armor protection.
In 1942, consulting engineers Mertz and McLillan conducted a detailed survey of the captured PzKpfw IV Ausf.E tank, in particular, they carefully studied its armor.

Several armor plates were tested for hardness, they all had machining. The hardness of the machined armor plates outside and inside was 300-460 Brinell.
- Overhead armor plates with a thickness of 20 mm, with which the armor of the hull sides is reinforced, are made of homogeneous steel and have a hardness of about 370 Brinell. The reinforced side armor is unable to "hold" 2-pound projectiles fired from 1000 yards.

On the other hand, a tank attack conducted in the Middle East in June 1941 showed that a distance of 500 yards (457 m) can be considered as the limit for effective frontal engagement of a PzKpfw IV with a 2-pounder gun. A report prepared in Woolwich on the study of armor protection of a German tank notes that "armor is 10% better than similarly processed mechanically English, and in some respects better homogeneous."

At the same time, the method of connecting the armor plates was criticized, a specialist from Leyland Motors commented on his research: "The quality of the welding is poor, the welds of two of the three armor plates in the area where the projectile hit the projectile diverged."

Changing the design of the frontal part of the tank hull

Power point.
The Maybach engine is designed to operate in moderate climatic conditions where its characteristics are satisfactory. At the same time, in the tropics or high dustiness, it breaks down and is prone to overheating. British intelligence, after studying the PzKpfw IV tank captured in 1942, concluded that engine failures were caused by sand getting into the oil system, distributor, dynamo and starter; air filters are inadequate. There were frequent cases of sand getting into the carburetor.

The Maybach engine manual requires the use of gasoline only with an octane rating of 74 with a complete lubricant change after 200, 500, 1000 and 2000 km of run. The recommended engine speed under normal operating conditions is 2600 rpm, but in hot climates (southern regions of the USSR and North Africa) such a number of revolutions does not provide normal cooling. The use of the engine as a brake is permissible at 2200-2400 rpm, at a speed of 2600-3000 this mode should be avoided.

The main components of the cooling system were two radiators installed at an angle of 25 degrees to the horizon. The radiators were cooled by an airflow forced by two fans; fan drive - belt driven from the main motor shaft. The circulation of water in the cooling system was provided by a centrifuge pump. Air entered the engine compartment through a hole covered with an armored shutter from the right side of the hull and was thrown out through a similar hole on the left side.

The synchro-mechanical transmission proved to be effective, although pulling power in high gears was low, so 6th gear was only used on the highway. The output shafts are combined with the braking and turning mechanism into a single device. To cool this device, a fan was installed to the left of the clutch box. The simultaneous disengagement of the steering control levers could be used as an effective parking brake.

On tanks of later versions, the spring suspension of the road wheels was heavily overloaded, but replacing the damaged two-wheeled bogie seemed to be a fairly simple operation. The tension of the caterpillar was regulated by the position of the sloth mounted on the eccentric. On the Eastern Front, special track expanders, known as "Ostketten", were used, which improved the maneuverability of tanks in winter months of the year.

An extremely simple but effective device for dressing a jumped caterpillar was tested on experimental tank PzKpfw IV. It was a factory-made tape that had the same width as the tracks, and perforation for engagement with the gear rim of the drive wheel. One end of the tape was attached to the track that had come off, the other, after it was passed over the rollers, to the drive wheel. The motor was turned on, the drive wheel began to rotate, pulling the tape and the tracks fastened to it until the rims of the drive wheel entered the slots on the tracks. The whole operation took several minutes.

The engine was started by a 24-volt electric starter. Since the auxiliary power generator saved battery power, it was possible to try to start the engine more times on the "four" than on tank PzKpfw III. In the event of a starter failure or when severe frost the grease thickened, an inertial starter was used, the handle of which was connected to the engine shaft through a hole in the aft armor plate. The handle was turned by two people at the same time, the minimum number of turns of the handle required to start the engine was 60 rpm. Starting the engine from an inertial starter has become commonplace in the Russian winter. Minimum temperature engine, at which it began to work normally was t=50 gr.C with a shaft rotation of 2000 rpm.

To facilitate starting the engine in the cold climate of the Eastern Front, a special system was developed, known as the "Kuhlwasserubertragung" - a cold water heat exchanger. After starting up and warming up to normal temperature one tank engine warm water from it was pumped into the cooling system of the next tank, and cold water came to an already working motor - there was an exchange of refrigerants between the working and non-working motors. After the warm water warmed up the motor a little, it was possible to try to start the engine with an electric starter. The "Kuhlwasserubertragung" system required minor modifications to the tank's cooling system.

< Назад		Next >

(Pz.III), the power plant is located at the rear, and the power transmission and drive wheels are at the front. The control compartment housed the driver and gunner-radio operator, firing from a machine gun mounted in a ball bearing. The fighting compartment was in the middle of the hull. A multifaceted welded tower was mounted here, in which three crew members were accommodated and weapons were installed.

T-IV tanks were produced with the following weapons:

• modifications A-F, assault tank with a 75-mm howitzer;
• modification G, a tank with a 75-mm cannon with a barrel length of 43 caliber;
• N-K modifications, a tank with a 75-mm cannon with a barrel length of 48 calibers.

Due to the constant increase in the thickness of the armor, the weight of the vehicle during production increased from 17.1 tons (modification A) to 24.6 tons (modification H-K). Since 1943, to enhance armor protection, armored screens were installed on the sides of the hull and turret. The long-barreled gun introduced on modifications G, H-K allowed the T-IV to withstand enemy tanks of equal weight (a 75-mm sub-caliber projectile pierced 110-mm armor at a distance of 1000 meters), but its maneuverability, especially of the overweighted latest modifications, was unsatisfactory. In total, about 9,500 T-IV tanks of all modifications were produced during the war years.

When there was no Pz.IV tank yet

Tank PzKpfw IV. History of creation.

In the 1920s and early 1930s, the theory of the use of mechanized troops, in particular tanks, was developed by trial and error, the views of theorists changed very often. A number of tank supporters believed that the appearance of armored vehicles would make positional warfare in the style of fighting 1914-1917 impossible from a tactical point of view. In turn, the French relied on the construction of well-fortified long-term defensive positions, such as the Maginot Line. A number of experts believed that the main armament of the tank should be a machine gun, and the main task of armored vehicles is to fight the infantry and artillery of the enemy, the most radically thinking representatives of this school considered the battle between tanks to be pointless, since, supposedly, neither side could inflict damage on the other. There was an opinion that the side that could destroy the largest number of enemy tanks would win the battle. As the main means of fighting tanks, special weapons with special shells were considered - anti-tank guns with armor-piercing shells. In fact, no one knew what the nature of hostilities would be in a future war. The experience of the Spanish Civil War also did not clarify the situation.

The Treaty of Versailles forbade Germany to have combat tracked vehicles, but could not prevent German specialists from working on studying various theories of the use of armored vehicles, and the creation of tanks was carried out by the Germans in secrecy. When in March 1935 Hitler abandoned the restrictions of Versailles, the young "Panzerwaffe" already had all the theoretical studies in the field of application and organizational structure of tank regiments.

There were two types of light armed tanks PzKpfw I and PzKpfw II under the guise of "agricultural tractors" in mass production.
The PzKpfw I tank was considered a training vehicle, while the PzKpfw II was intended for reconnaissance, but it turned out that the "two" remained the most massive tank of panzer divisions until it was replaced by medium tanks PzKpfw III, armed with a 37-mm cannon and three machine guns.

The beginning of the development of the PzKpfw IV tank dates back to January 1934, when the army gave the industry a specification for a new fire support tank weighing no more than 24 tons, the future vehicle received the official designation Gesch.Kpfw. (75 mm)(Vskfz.618). Over the next 18 months, specialists from Rheinmetall-Borzing, Krupp and MAN worked on three competing projects for the battalion commander's vehicle ("battalionführerswagnen" abbreviated as BW). The VK 2001/K project, presented by Krupp, was recognized as the best project, the shape of the turret and hull is close to the PzKpfw III tank.

However, the VK 2001 / K machine did not go into series, because the military was not satisfied with the six-support undercarriage with medium-diameter wheels on spring suspension, it needed to be replaced with a torsion bar. The torsion bar suspension, compared to the spring suspension, provided a smoother movement of the tank and had a greater vertical travel of the road wheels. Krupp engineers, together with representatives of the Arms Procurement Directorate, agreed on the possibility of using an improved spring suspension design with eight small-diameter road wheels on board on the tank. However, Krupp had to largely revise the proposed original design. In the final version, the PzKpfw IV was a combination of the hull and turret of the VK 2001 / K vehicle with a chassis newly developed by Krupp.

When there was no Pz.IV tank yet

The PzKpfw IV tank was designed according to the classic layout with a rear engine. The commander's place was located along the axis of the tower directly under the commander's cupola, the gunner was located to the left of the cannon breech, the loader was to the right. In the control compartment, located in front of the tank hull, there were jobs for the driver (to the left of the vehicle axis) and the radio operator's gunner (to the right). Between the driver's seat and the arrow was the transmission. An interesting feature of the design of the tank was the displacement of the tower by about 8 cm to the left of the longitudinal axis of the vehicle, and the engine - by 15 cm to the right to pass the shaft connecting the engine and transmission. Such a constructive solution made it possible to increase the internal reserved volume on the right side of the hull for the placement of the first shots, which the loader could most easily get. Turret turn drive - electric.

Click on the picture of the tank to enlarge

The suspension and chassis consisted of eight small-diameter road wheels grouped into two-wheeled carts suspended on leaf springs, drive wheels installed in the stern of the sloth tank and four rollers supporting the caterpillar. Throughout the history of the operation of PzKpfw IV tanks, their undercarriage remained unchanged, only minor improvements were introduced. The prototype of the tank was manufactured at the Krupp plant in Essen and tested in 1935-36.

Description of the tank PzKpfw IV

armor protection.
In 1942, consulting engineers Mertz and McLillan conducted a detailed survey of the captured PzKpfw IV Ausf.E tank, in particular, they carefully studied its armor.

Several armor plates were tested for hardness, all of them were machined. The hardness of the machined armor plates outside and inside was 300-460 Brinell.
- Overhead armor plates with a thickness of 20 mm, with which the armor of the hull sides is reinforced, are made of homogeneous steel and have a hardness of about 370 Brinell. The reinforced side armor is unable to "hold" 2-pound projectiles fired from 1000 yards.

On the other hand, a tank attack conducted in the Middle East in June 1941 showed that a distance of 500 yards (457 m) can be considered as the limit for effective frontal engagement of a PzKpfw IV with a 2-pounder gun. A report prepared at Woolwich on the study of armor protection of a German tank notes that "armor is 10% better than similar machined English, and in some respects even better than homogeneous."

At the same time, the method of connecting the armor plates was criticized, a specialist from Leyland Motors commented on his research: "The quality of the welding is poor, the welds of two of the three armor plates in the area where the projectile hit the projectile diverged."

Changing the design of the frontal part of the tank hull

Power point.
The Maybach engine is designed to operate in moderate climatic conditions, where its performance is satisfactory. At the same time, in the tropics or high dustiness, it breaks down and is prone to overheating. British intelligence, after studying the PzKpfw IV tank captured in 1942, concluded that engine failures were caused by sand getting into the oil system, distributor, dynamo and starter; air filters are inadequate. There were frequent cases of sand getting into the carburetor.

The Maybach engine manual requires the use of gasoline only with an octane rating of 74 with a complete lubricant change after 200, 500, 1000 and 2000 km of run. The recommended engine speed under normal operating conditions is 2600 rpm, but in hot climates (southern regions of the USSR and North Africa), this speed does not provide normal cooling. The use of the engine as a brake is permissible at 2200-2400 rpm, at a speed of 2600-3000 this mode should be avoided.

The main components of the cooling system were two radiators installed at an angle of 25 degrees to the horizon. The radiators were cooled by an airflow forced by two fans; fan drive - belt driven from the main motor shaft. The circulation of water in the cooling system was provided by a centrifuge pump. Air entered the engine compartment through a hole covered with an armored shutter from the right side of the hull and was thrown out through a similar hole on the left side.

The synchro-mechanical transmission proved to be effective, although pulling power in high gears was low, so 6th gear was only used on the highway. The output shafts are combined with the braking and turning mechanism into a single device. To cool this device, a fan was installed to the left of the clutch box. The simultaneous disengagement of the steering control levers could be used as an effective parking brake.

On tanks of later versions, the spring suspension of the road wheels was heavily overloaded, but replacing the damaged two-wheeled bogie seemed to be a fairly simple operation. The tension of the caterpillar was regulated by the position of the sloth mounted on the eccentric. On the Eastern Front, special track expanders, known as "Ostketten", were used, which improved the maneuverability of tanks in the winter months of the year.

An extremely simple but effective device for dressing a jumped-off caterpillar was tested on an experimental PzKpfw IV tank. It was a factory-made tape that had the same width as the tracks and a perforation for engagement with the gear rim of the drive wheel. One end of the tape was attached to the track that had come off, the other, after it was passed over the rollers, to the drive wheel. The motor was turned on, the drive wheel began to rotate, pulling the tape and the tracks fastened to it until the rims of the drive wheel entered the slots on the tracks. The whole operation took several minutes.

The engine was started by a 24-volt electric starter. Since the auxiliary electric generator saved battery power, it was possible to try to start the engine more times on the "four" than on the PzKpfw III tank. In the event of a starter failure, or when the grease thickened in severe frost, an inertial starter was used, the handle of which was connected to the engine shaft through a hole in the aft armor plate. The handle was turned by two people at the same time, the minimum number of turns of the handle required to start the engine was 60 rpm. Starting the engine from an inertial starter has become commonplace in the Russian winter. The minimum temperature of the engine, at which it started to work normally, was t = 50 ° C when the shaft rotated 2000 rpm.

To facilitate starting the engine in the cold climate of the Eastern Front, a special system was developed, known as the "Kuhlwasserubertragung" - a cold water heat exchanger. After the engine of one tank was started and warmed up to normal temperature, warm water from it was pumped into the cooling system of the next tank, and cold water was supplied to the already running engine - the refrigerants of the working and idle engines were exchanged. After the warm water warmed up the motor a little, it was possible to try to start the engine with an electric starter. The "Kuhlwasserubertragung" system required minor modifications to the tank's cooling system.

The decision to create a medium tank with a short-barreled 75 mm gun was made in January 1934. Preference was given to the project of the Krupp company, and in 1937 - 1938 it produced about 200 machines of modification A, B, C and D.

These tanks had a combat weight of 18 to 20 tons, armor up to 20 mm thick, a road speed of no more than 40 km / h and a cruising range of 200 km on the highway. A 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 23.5 caliber was installed in the tower, coaxial with a machine gun.

During the attack on Poland on September 1, 1939, the German army had only 211 T-4 tanks. The tank proved to be a good side and was approved as the main one along with the T-3. From December 1939, its mass production began (in 1940 - 280 pieces.).

By the beginning of the campaign in France (May 10, 1940), there were only 278 T-4 tanks in the German tank divisions in the West. The only result of the Polish and French campaigns was an increase to 50 mm in the thickness of the armor of the frontal part of the hull, onboard up to 30 and turret up to 50 mm. The mass reached 22 tons (modification F1, produced in 1941 - 1942). The track width was increased from 380 to 400 mm.

Soviet tanks T-34 and KV (see below) from the first days of the war demonstrated the superiority of their weapons and armor over the T-4. The Nazi command demanded that their tank be re-equipped with a long-barreled gun. In March 1942, he received a 75 mm cannon with a barrel length of 43 caliber (machines of the T-4F2 modification).

In 1942, modifications G were produced, since 1943 - H and since March 1944 - J. The tanks of the last two modifications had 80 mm frontal armor of the hull and were armed with 48-caliber guns. The mass increased to 25 tons, and the cross-country ability of the vehicles noticeably worsened. On modification J, the fuel supply was increased and the cruising range increased to 300 km. Since 1943, tanks began to install 5-mm screens that protected the sides and the turret (side and rear) from artillery shells and bullets from anti-tank guns.

The welded hull of a tank of simple design did not have a rational inclination of the armor plates. There were many hatches in the hull, which facilitated access to units and mechanisms, but reduced the strength of the hull. Internal partitions divided it into three compartments. In front of the control compartment there were final drives, the driver (on the left) and the gunner-radio operator, who had his own observation devices, were located. The fighting compartment with a multifaceted turret housed three crew members: commander, gunner and loader. The tower had hatches in the sides, which reduced its projectile resistance. The commander's cupola is equipped with five viewing devices with armored shutters. There were also viewing devices on both sides of the gun mantlet and in the side hatches of the turret. The rotation of the tower was carried out by an electric motor or manually, vertical aiming - manually. The ammunition included high-explosive fragmentation and smoke grenades, armor-piercing, sub-caliber and cumulative shells. An armor-piercing projectile (weight 6.8 kg, muzzle velocity - 790 m/s) pierced armor up to 95 mm thick, and a sub-caliber (4.1 kg, 990 m/s) - about 110 mm at a distance of 1000 m (data for a gun in 48 calibers).

In the engine compartment in the aft part of the hull, a 12-cylinder water-cooled Maybach carburetor engine was installed.

The T-4 turned out to be a reliable and easy-to-operate machine (this is the most bulk tank Wehrmacht), however, poor maneuverability, a weak gasoline engine (tanks burned like matches) and undifferentiated armor were disadvantages in front of Soviet tanks.

Second world war the German army entered with a rather strange situation in the system of tank weapons. The medium tank Pz.Kpfw.III, which was created as the main one, in fact at that time turned out to be the smallest in the Wehrmacht. As for the other medium tank, the Pz.Kpfw.IV, it was designed as a support vehicle, but at the same time, there were almost four times more such vehicles in the troops than the Pz.Kpfw.III. The German industry was able to equalize the number of tanks of these two types in the army only at the very end of 1939. By this time, the series had already gone a new version support tank - Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D, moreover, in a sense, it became a return to the original concept.

Return of the course machine gun

The spring of 1938 was decisive for further fate Pz.Kpfw.IV. The fact is that the 6th department of the Arms Administration seriously thought about removing the brainchild of the Krupp concern from the production program. Instead of the Pz.Kpfw.IV, it was supposed to create a support tank based on the Pz.Kpfw.III, thus unifying both medium tanks in terms of the main components and assemblies.

On the one hand, the idea was sound. However, it should be noted that the Pz.Kpfw.III at that time was far from experiencing better times. And the production of the Pz.Kpfw.IV was not without problems, but it still went on, and the Krupp designers got into the weight category determined by the customers from the first time.

Thus, when on May 2, 1938, Erich Wolfert, Krupp's chief engineer, sharply criticized the idea of ​​\u200b\u200bcombining two tanks on one platform, victory was on his side. The 6th department of the Armaments Directorate was forced to give in, because behind Wolfert was not only an industrial giant, but also common sense.

The lesson, however, did not benefit, and the 6th Department of the Armaments Directorate continued to compete with the idea of ​​​​a single chassis for two types of tanks throughout the war. This impulse, one of the initiators of which was Heinrich Kniepkamp (Heinrich Ernst Kniepkamp), with enviable constancy turned into a rake race, and each time the proper conclusions were not drawn from what had happened before.

Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D in original configuration. In metal, the car looked a little different.

The requirements for a support tank, meanwhile, continued to grow. Back in early January 1938, discussions began on the characteristics of the fourth modification of the tank, which received the designation 4.Serie / B.W.

One of the first items on the agenda was the return to the place of the course machine gun. Someone upstairs finally realized that you can’t even shoot much from the pistol port, let alone hit somewhere. It was decided to use the Kugelblende 30 mount, developed for the Z.W.38 (future Pz.Kpfw.III Ausf.E). It had much more successful protection than the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.A ball mount. In connection with the return of the course machine gun, the front plate of the turret box again received a characteristic step.

Diagram showing clearly internal organization tank

On March 10, 1938, a meeting was held in Berlin, where employees of the Krupp concern and the 6th department of the Arms Administration discussed the possibility of strengthening the tank's armor. The thickness of the side armor of the hull, turret box and turret, which was 14.5 mm, was considered insufficient. It was necessary to increase it to 20 mm, so that at long distances the tank would not be hit by the fire of 20 mm automatic guns. In addition, the military asked to increase the thickness of the bottom from 8 to 10 mm.

The answer to the new requirements came on April 12. According to the calculations of engineers, the increase in the thickness of the armor increased the combat weight of the tank by 1256 kg, to almost 20 tons. This was followed by changes in individual elements of the hull. The hatches in the area of ​​the support rollers received a different shape, the air intakes of the engine compartment have changed. At the end of April, tracks with increased teeth were developed, and the number of suspension travel stops was increased to five per side (one for the three front bogies and two for the rear).

Serial Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D, spring 1940

Certain changes were made to the design of the tower. First of all, the armor of the gun system was reworked. The fact is that the previously used design turned out to be very vulnerable to enemy fire. A bullet or a fragment of a projectile, falling into the gap between the elements of the armor, could well jam the gun in a vertical plane. At the end of May 1938, the development of a new protection for the gun began. The new armor of the system was located on the outside of the tower and coped with its task much better. The thickness of the armor has been increased to 35 mm.

In addition, viewing devices on the side hatches and sides of the tower were replaced.

Hinge a large number spare tracks was very common

When, on July 4, 1938, a contract was finally signed with the Krupp concern for the manufacture of tanks of the 4.Serie / B.W. modification, the car changed quite a lot. According to the contract, the factories of Grusonwerk, one of the divisions of Krupp, were to produce 200 tanks of this series. In October, the contract was extended. The SS troops ordered 48 tanks, which received the designation 5.Serie/B.W. In fact, they were no different from the 4.Serie/B.W. By the way, in the end, these vehicles did not get into the SS unit, since it was decided to order StuG III assault self-propelled guns instead.

Tanks of the 4th and 5th series received the designation Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D. The machines were assigned serial numbers in the range 80501–80748.

Based on the experience of the first two campaigns

Serial production of the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D began in October of 1939. Unlike the Pz.Kpfw.III, whose production was accelerated by manufacturers, there were no special breakthroughs in the production of support tanks. Until the end of 1939, 45 tanks were assembled, later the volumes averaged 20-25 vehicles per month. In total, by May 1, 1940, 129 machines of this modification were manufactured.

Broken turrets were a fairly common occurrence for the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D. France, May 1940

Meanwhile, back in March of 1939, it was decided that in the future the Wehrmacht would continue to order these tanks, and the vehicles of the 6th series (6.Serie / B.W.) would henceforth be designated as Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E. New contract for the manufacture of 223 tanks of this type was signed in July 1939. In general, this tank was supposed to repeat its predecessor, but already in May some changes began to appear.

To begin with, it was decided to change the driver’s viewing device, which did not change from the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.B, to the Fahrersehklappe 30. This device was distinguished by the fact that instead of massive parts going up and down, it used an “eyelash” thick 30 mm. It covered the viewing slot covered with glass block much more reliably, and its design turned out to be much simpler.

A rather large ventilation hatch from the roof of the tower also disappeared, and a fan appeared instead. A hatch for signal flags has moved to the place of the periscope device. The shape of the commander's cupola has also changed.

Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D, issued in April 1940, with shielding of the turret box, and at the same time additional armor of the frontal hull plate

It became clear after the Polish campaign in September 1939 that the Ausf.E would not go into production as planned, and that the Ausf.D would also undergo certain changes. The fact is that Polish troops massively used 37-mm anti-tank guns Armata przeciwpancerna 37 mm wz against German tanks. 36 Bofors. Even though the Polish shells were not the most best quality, they confidently pierced German vehicles in all projections. The strengthening of the frontal part up to 30 mm did not help much here either.

In the autumn of 1939, studies began to be carried out to identify the possibility of additionally loading the Pz.Kpfw.IV with another 1.5 tons of armor and bringing its combat weight to 21.4 tons. Tests have shown that the tank quite easily tolerates such an increase in mass.

On December 18, 1939, the 6th Department of the Ordnance Directorate adjusted the task for 4.Serie / B.W. and 5.Serie/B.W. The last 68 tanks were to receive hulls with front plates reinforced to 50 mm. But by the start of the campaign in France, which began on May 10, 1940, the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D still continued to be produced with a 30 mm thick front plate.

Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E from the 20th tank division, summer 1941

The very first battles showed that such slowness is extremely reckless. Of course, the 37-mm short-barreled guns that were installed on a number of French tanks, including the FCM 36 and Renault R 35, could not penetrate 30 mm thick frontal armor. But they were not at all the main opponents of German tanks. The French were doing well with anti-tank artillery, and for her armor 30 mm thick was by no means something outrageous. Even worse for the Germans was that whole line French tanks had 47 mm guns as their main armament.

The losses of the Pz.Kpfw.IV in France were even higher than in September 1939 in Poland. Of the 279 Pz.Kpfw.IVs available in units on May 10, 1939, 97, that is, more than a third, were irretrievably lost. The battles of May-June 1940 also showed that the 75-mm short-barreled gun was almost powerless against tanks with anti-cannon armor.

It became clear that the problem must be solved, and solved quickly. On May 15, the Krupp concern reported that shielding for the hull and turret box had been manufactured and tested. The forehead of the turret box received additional sheets 30 mm thick, due to which their total thickness increased to 60 mm. The sides were reinforced with 20 mm thick screens. Later, in addition to these screens, a reinforcement was made for the frontal hull sheet, while corners appeared at the top and bottom for additional reinforcement.

Nevertheless, until the end of the French campaign, the troops did not receive a single shielding kit. Deliveries began only on June 25, when they were already, in general, not really needed. From July 1940, tanks began to be equipped with screens as standard. At the same time, the thickness of the front hull plate, turret and armor of the gun mantlet increased to 50 mm.

As you can see, not all Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E received screens

Another serious metamorphosis with the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D happened in August 1940. According to the decision made on June 3 of the same year, the last 68 4.Serie / B.W. and 5.Serie/B.W. were made with turrets and turret boxes 6.Serie/B.W. The last such vehicles were delivered to the troops in October 1940, after which tanks of the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E modification went into production.

The machines of this series received serial numbers 80801-81006. They can be distinguished from the latest 68 Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.Ds only if the vehicle's serial number is known. Additional confusion in what is happening is the fact that not all Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E, not to mention Ausf.D, received screens on the frontal part of the turret box.

Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D with additional Vorpanzer armor, 1942

At the beginning of 1941, some tank units tried to do shielding on their own, but an order came from above to stop this activity. However, another modification was born, also known as the Vorpanzer. It differed in that quite massive screens were attached to the front of the tower. They were installed on tanks of the Ausf.D, E and F modifications. Apparently, the Vorpanzer were used exclusively by the Grossdeutschland (Großdeutschland) Panzer Division. It is believed that the division used them only in exercises, but there are also front-line photographs that refute such claims.

For crossings and other purposes

Orders for Pz.Kpfw.IV tanks of the 4th, 5th and 6th series were not fulfilled in full. Some of total number ordered Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D went to other targets. 16 chassis produced in March-April 1940 went to the manufacture of bridge tanks Brückenleger IV b. These vehicles were included in the engineering battalions assigned to tank divisions. They were used as part of the units that fought during the May-June 1940 campaign in France.

Brückenleger IV b, in the spring of 1940 a series of 16 of these vehicles was produced

Meanwhile, in the summer of 1940, Krupp produced 16 sets of turret boxes and turrets. Later, three bridge tanks with numbers 80685, 80686 and 80687 were converted into regular Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D. According to a report for May 1941, out of 29 Pz.Kpfw.IVs produced, 13 belonged to 4.Serie/B.W. Thus, 247 vehicles of the Ausf.D modification nevertheless went to the troops as ordinary tanks. The last, 248th car with serial number 80625 was used as a test chassis.

Brückenleger IV c from the 39th tank engineer battalion, 1941

A slightly different situation developed with the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E. Instead of the 223 tanks that were originally planned to be built, 206 vehicles were produced in one form or another, of which 200 were ordinary tanks. In January 1941, 4 chassis 6.Serie/B.W. was sent to Magirus, where they were built bridge layers Brückenleger IV c. Like the vehicles of the previous series, they went to the 39th tank engineering battalion, attached to the 3rd tank division. In this form, they participated in the battles on the Eastern Front in the summer of 1941.

This is what Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E 81005 and 81006 looked like with a new chassis

The fate of the last two tanks of the 6th series, numbers 81005 and 81006, turned out to be even more interesting. On December 14, 1940, the 6th Department of the Armaments Directorate gave the go-ahead to the Krupp concern to develop a new undercarriage. Its main difference was that the diameter of the road wheels grew to 700 mm, and in order for all of them to fit, they had to be placed in a checkerboard pattern. The width of the tracks at the same time increased to 422 mm. During 1941-42, these vehicles were actively tested, and then tank 81005 ended up in training center Wunsdorf. Also, at least one tank was converted into an ammunition carrier for the Gerät 040 ("Karl") heavy self-propelled mortar.

Tauchpanzer IV from the 18th Panzer Division

Finally, part production tanks was converted into very specific special vehicles. In August-July 1940, 48 Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.Ds were converted into Tauchpanzer IV, a tank for crossing rivers along the bottom. Attachments for special sealed covers were installed on the tank, and covers were also placed on the air intakes. In addition, a special hose with a float was used, through which air was supplied to the machine. Similarly, a number of Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.Es produced in January-March 1940 were redone. Similar vehicles were used in June 1941 as part of the 18th Panzer Division.

Blitzkrieg support vehicle

In April 1941, production of 7.Serie/B.W., aka Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.F., began. This tank was created taking into account the experience of the campaigns of the first two years of the war. But the main support tank german army he became only in the autumn of 1941. Of the 441 Pz.Kpfw.IV, which by June 22, 1941 concentrated on the border with the USSR, they were a minority. The basis was Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D and Ausf.E.

By that time, the tanks of these modifications had changed somewhat. On February 14, 1941, the first German tanks arrived in Tripoli, and on the 16th, the Afrika Korps was formed. In this regard, back in early February, a “tropical” set for the ventilation system was developed.

Since March, they began to put a turret box for personal belongings on tanks. Since it was originally designed for the Afrika Korps, it was nicknamed the "Rommel box". It was not placed on all tanks. On many tanks, boxes on the turrets were not installed at all, and instead of them, an analogue was placed on the side of the hull. And in some units they developed their own "Rommel Box", which differs in shape from the regular one.

And this was only the beginning of all sorts of alterations that were introduced at the level of tank divisions, and sometimes even at the level of battalions. The body kit itself, which the Pz.Kpfw.IV received only in 1941, is a topic for a separate large material.

The Pz.Kpfw.IVs that ended up in Africa found themselves, figuratively speaking, in greenhouse conditions. In February 1941, 20 tanks were sent there, 3 of which were lost on the way, 20 more units arrived in April. The only truly dangerous enemy for them was the Matildas, which was primarily due to the thick armor of these English tanks. The 2-pounder (40-mm) guns on the British vehicles could only penetrate the shielded forehead of the Pz.Kpfw.IV at point-blank range, and such cases were rare.

The result of the meeting of the Pz.Kpfw.IV with the KV-2, summer 1941

Quite different conditions turned out to be on the Eastern Front. During the fighting at the end of June 1941, only 15 Pz.Kpfw.IVs were irretrievably lost. This is largely due to the fact that their opponents were T-26 and BT, who performed in a completely different weight category. The atmosphere of complete confusion in the first weeks of the Great Patriotic War also contributed. However, already in July, 109 tanks, that is, a quarter of the original number, were scrapped. In August, 68 more cars were added to them. In total, in 1941, the Germans lost 348 Pz.Kpfw.IV on the Eastern Front, that is, more than 3/4 of their original number.

The German tank crews could quite rightly blame the 6th department of the Armaments Directorate for such significant losses, which approached the issue of strengthening the armor very lightly. In fact, the shielding installed on the tanks corresponded to the experience of the September 1939 campaign. At the same time, the fact that the French already had 47-mm tank and anti-tank guns was ignored. And this was done in vain: even a 47-mm SA 35 tank gun with a barrel length of 32 caliber, as shown by tests in the USSR, could easily penetrate 50 mm armor of German tanks at a distance of 400 meters.

Even more depressing for the Germans were the characteristics of the 47 mm Canon de 47 Mle.1937 anti-tank gun, in which the barrel length was 50 calibers. At a distance of a kilometer, she pierced armor with a thickness of 57 mm. The Germans could rightly assume that the French were not the only ones with more powerful anti-tank artillery and tank guns than the Poles.

Captured Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E from the 20th Panzer Division, NIIBT Polygon, August 1941

Ultimately, the Wehrmacht had to pay for the miscalculations of the military leadership in assessing the weapons of the enemy with tanks and their crews. While the main opponents of the Pz.Kpfw.IV were the T-26 and BT, everything was going relatively well for the German tankers. In the future, more and more often they had to deal with the T-34 and KV-1, armed with 76-mm guns. In addition, some of the tanks ended up with only partially thickened armor, which significantly reduced the chances of surviving even under fire from 45-mm tank and anti-tank guns.

The KV-2 heavy tanks also made a certain contribution. The hit of his 152-mm projectile on a German tank turned it into a pile of scrap metal. However, penetration by other shells did not bring anything good. Cases of ammunition detonation were quite common for the Pz.Kpfw.IV. It is worth noting that German tanks were almost powerless against the T-34 and KV-1. Established armor-piercing shells had almost no effect against new Soviet tanks, and the 7.5 cm Gr.Patr.38 Kw.K. Hitler allowed the use only in February 1942.

The same car in front. Hits and a split screen are visible in the area of ​​\u200b\u200bthe driver's viewing device

Already in August 1941, the captured Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E from the 20th Panzer Division was delivered to the Scientific Research testing institute armored vehicles (NIIBT Polygon) to Kubinka. The car was quite badly damaged: there were several hits in the frontal part of the hull, and the shielding in the area of ​​​​the driver's viewing device was also partially shot down. Polygon staff compiled a brief description of, according to which the combat weight of the tank, designated as "Medium tank T-IV release of 1939-40”, was estimated at 24 tons, and top speed- at 50 km/h. After preliminary calculations, the following conclusions were made:

.“Armor protection tank T-IV hit by artillery of all calibers.

The tank turret, inspection hatches, the ball mount of the radio operator's machine gun are affected by large-caliber small arms.

Captured Pz.Kpfw.IV from the end of 1941 became a fairly frequent occurrence. Nevertheless, the NIIBT Polygon did not engage in bringing the tank captured back in the summer of 1941 into working condition or trying to get a running trophy.

This is largely due to the fact that the Soviet military did not show much interest in the tank. It seems that they considered it as an addition to the Pz.Kpfw.III, despite the fact that combat weight and the engine of the two medium tanks were similar. For approximately the same reasons, the StuG III Ausf.B was not restored to running condition. Studying the driving characteristics of the captured PzIII and Pz38(t) was considered a more important task, and spending time on secondary vehicles was considered a pointless exercise.

Unlike the StuG III, the frontal armor of the captured Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.E was quite tough for a 45mm shell.

In September 1942, tests took place, during which fire was fired at the captured tank. various weapons. First of all, he was fired from a DShK machine gun. It turned out that the side of the DShK turret did not penetrate even from a distance of 50 meters, but at a distance of 100 meters it was possible to break through the side and rear of the hull.

Much more interesting were tests by shelling from a 45-mm cannon installed in the T-70 tank. At a distance of 50 meters, a frontal hull sheet 50 mm thick was pierced. It is worth noting that the same gun did not penetrate the captured StuG III self-propelled guns. Boards with a thickness of 40 mm (20 + 20 mm) were pierced at a distance of 400 meters.

final verdict German tank turned out to be shelling from a 76-mm F-34 cannon mounted in a T-34 medium tank. The frontal sheet was pierced at a distance of 500 meters (inlet diameter of the through hole - 90 mm, output - 100 mm). Next shot, made from a distance of 800 meters, split the sheet into two parts. When firing from a distance of 800 meters into the side of the hull, the projectile pierced the 40-mm armor on the right side, exploded inside and exited from the left side. When shooting high-explosive projectile the side turret hatch was torn off by the first hit, the commander's turret was torn off by the second projectile, and a hit on the side of the engine compartment (20 mm thick) led to a breach measuring 130 × 350 mm. It was decided not to fire from long distances - and so everything was clear.

In addition to shelling, NII-48 specialists studied the design of the hull and turret.

One of the Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.Ds re-armed with the 7.5 cm KwK 40 cannon and fitted with side shields

In July 1942, the few Ausf.D and Ausf.E tanks remaining in service were upgraded. Instead of a regular gun, they installed a long-barreled 7.5 cm KwK 40 gun. In addition, from May 1943, side screens began to be installed on the hull and turret. By that time, these machines were withdrawn from the first line and transferred training units, including the institutions of the NSKK (National Socialist Mechanized Corps).

Such tanks were also part of tank units stationed in France. One of them (Pz.Kpfw.IV Ausf.D, serial number 80732, released in July 1940) was captured by the British in the summer of 1944. It is now on display at the Bovington Tank Museum.