Tanks of the Great Patriotic War. Heavy tanks of the ussr of the second world war Tanks of the ussr world 2

The experience of using medium and heavy tanks in the war with Finland showed that 30-40 mm armor can no longer provide protection against anti-tank gun fire and that it is very difficult to control multi-turreted tanks in battle. For this reason, the new heavy tank KV-1 received projectile protection and was made with a single turret, with a classic layout. In front of the welded box-section hull there was a control compartment, in the middle - a fighting compartment, and power point was in the back of the case.

The tank was produced with two types of turret: welded from sheets with a thickness of 75 mm or cast with a wall thickness of 95 mm. During production, the armor protection of the hull was reinforced with additional 25 mm screens, and the wall thickness of the cast turret was increased to 105 mm. Therefore, it is not surprising that the KV-1 emerged victorious from the battle, sometimes carrying dozens of dents from shells on its armor. Initially, the 76.2 mm L-11 gun was installed, then the F-32 of the same caliber, and from 1941 the KV was produced with the 76.2 mm ZIS-5 gun. KV-1 was mass-produced from 1940 to 1942. A total of 4800 KV machines of various modifications were produced. The KV-2, KV-3, KV-8, KV-9 and other tanks were created on the basis of the KV-1.

Tank was adopted by the Red Army in May 1931. It was developed on the basis of the wheeled-tracked vehicle of the American designer Christie and was the first in the BT family (Fast Tank ) developed in the Soviet Union. Assembled by riveting from armor plates 13 mm thick, the tank hull had a box-shaped section. In the frontal sheet of the hull, the driver's access hatch was mounted. The armament was housed in a cylindrical riveted tower.The tank had high speed qualities. Thanks to the original design of the undercarriage, it could move both on tracks and on wheels. On each side there were four large-diameter rubber-coated road wheels, with the rear road wheels acting as driving wheels, and the front ones being steerable. The transition from one type of propulsion to another took about 30 minutes. The BT-2 tank, like the subsequent tanks of the BT family, was produced at the Kharkov Locomotive Plant named after. Comintern.

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)

PzKpfw III, better known as T-III - 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 optics of Carl Zeiss, 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 bulk tank Panzerwaffe - 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 serial 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, which was hopelessly bogged down in a swampy pond, and without any hesitation drove over it, pushing 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 the same impunity, as if it 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. KV was 2 times heavier than the big tank Wehrmacht.

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 they didn’t take it even at close range, and 50 mm guns - no further than 500 meters. At the same time, the long-barreled 76 mm gun F-34 (ZIS-5) made it possible to hit any German tank of that period from any direction from a distance of 1.5 kilometers.

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 tank battle against overwhelming enemy forces. Not in terms of numbers - it was not important for us, we were used to it. But against more good cars- it's terrible... Russian tanks are so nimble, at close range they will climb a slope or cross a swamp faster than you can turn the 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 tank 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 the optimal balance of mobility, firepower and security. 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“knock-knock mallet”, because when her shells hit the “thirty-four”, they just hit her 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 as soon as possible to establish mass production of these combat vehicles, 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 task:

If in initial period WWII german military doctrine had mainly an offensive orientation, 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".

July 21, 1943 the commander of the 3rd Panzer Corps Herman Bright, published following instruction on combat use tank "Tiger-I":

... 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 medium tank Wehrmacht.
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! 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 over 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. lower part the sides were additionally protected by two rows of rollers on each side.

4. Tank IS-2 (Joseph Stalin)

IS-2 was the most powerful and most heavily armored of the Soviet production tanks during the war, and one of the strongest tanks at that time in the world. 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 actions fortified cities such as Budapest, Breslau, Berlin. The tactics of actions in such conditions provided for the actions of the OGvTTP assault groups from 1-2 tanks, accompanied by an infantry squad of several submachine gunners, a sniper or a well-aimed rifle shooter 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 at the beginning of the war, managed to create such a balanced combat vehicle and to rivet by 1945 49,000 Shermans of various modifications. For example, in ground forces used "Sherman" with a gasoline engine, and in units Marine Corps received a modification of the M4A2, equipped with a diesel engine. 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 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 then it turned out that the Allies underestimated the degree of saturation German troops 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 German tanks first of all, they tried to hit Firefly, 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, it was 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 gun, could it be improved ballistic performance F-34 by increasing the length of the barrel? After all, the Germans did the same with their 75-mm gun on the Pz.lV.

The fact is that German guns traditionally distinguished by the best internal ballistics(ours is just as traditional-external). The Germans achieved high armor penetration by increasing the initial speed and better work 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 initial speed 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 for 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 negative impact 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 spent cartridges that fell right there 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; field conditions. All this was of tremendous importance in the first half of the war, when, due to technical malfunctions, more tanks than from the impact of the enemy (on April 1, 1942, for example, in the active army there were 1642 serviceable and 2409 defective tanks of all types, 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 use 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.

Second World War demonstrated the power of tanks in all its glory. heavy armored vehicles became at the head of the German blitzkrieg strategy, when autonomous tank formations inflicted unexpected blows on the enemy, breaking through great depth and destroying infrastructure command posts and so on.

After the start of the Great Patriotic War confrontation began not only the strongest armies of that time, but also design schools of tank building.

What about the names, descriptions and photos of the most interesting specimens?

In total, there are about 60 different armored vehicles, including those received under Lend-Lease and with the exception of experimental or not in serial production.

The most notable are the following soviet tanks Great Patriotic War.

T-50

A light tank produced to replace the obsolete T-26. When developing, the designers were inspired German PzKpfw III, which has excellent mobility and reliability for its class.

A total of 77 units were produced, and the car itself was recognized as successful. The appearance of the T-34 made the T-50 practically unnecessary, which ended the history of this combat vehicle.

T-28

This medium three-turreted tank is often overlooked, however, it outperformed most Wehrmacht tanks in the initial period of the war in terms of performance characteristics.

good armor and firepower often not used due to inexperienced crews and depreciation of equipment. Reliability and service life were extremely low, and the multi-tower design had become obsolete.

The Red Army used the T-28 until 1944, and Finland until 1951.

T-34

Medium T-34, known throughout the world and one of the symbols of victory. The most massive, superior in characteristics to the enemy at the time of its appearance. Simple and cheap.

Later, the Germans got Pz.Kpfw.VI Tiger, Pz.Kpfw. Tiger Ausf. B and PzKpfw V Panther, which had better armor protection and firepower, but their reliability, mass production and cost left much to be desired.

KV-1 - the first serial heavy of the USSR

However, the strength Soviet army was not only in heavy tanks. A very important role in the battles was played by medium tanks, of which the USSR also had a lot, and often they surpassed their foreign counterparts. He played a very special role in the war, and his modification T-34-85. This tank was not only the most massive, but, according to Soviet and foreign experts, the most best tank Second World War.

There were a lot of light tanks in the USSR, both pre-war and produced and developed already in World War II. True, in this war, light tanks were no longer able to cope with many tasks, but with their proper use, they provided serious support to the infantry. Of the Soviet light tanks, it stood out in particular, recognized as one of best lungs tanks of that time. However, very little of it was produced for many reasons, and the T-60 and T-70 were used much more actively by the Red Army.

It is also worth mentioning the T-37A, T-38 and T-40 - the only amphibious tanks in World War II. Unfortunately, they were mainly used simply as light tanks, although there are also known cases of their intended use, that is, for forcing water barriers.

It is also worth noting that only the USSR and Germany were armed with modern self-propelled guns.

In general, it can be said that in the Second world USSR possessed the most extensive and, without a doubt, the most powerful tank fleet in the whole world. In addition, Soviet designers reacted very quickly to the improvement of enemy equipment, immediately releasing new, more durable tanks with increased firepower.

Before World War II, Japan basically only bought and researched foreign tanks. In the 1920s and 1930s, several vehicles were developed, but Japan lagged far behind both the USSR and Germany, and even the United States, and very few tanks were produced here. One of the most advanced vehicles was the Chi-Khe tank and its Chi-Nu modification. A self-propelled guns based on Chi-Khe was also created. The Japanese actively used tanks only against the Americans, however, to no avail.

Tanks of Italy

In the early 30s, Italy did not have a developed tank industry and more or less modern tanks, however, such tanks were extremely needed. To create them, they bought the MKVI tankette from future opponents, modernized it and began to produce it under the name C-V-29. Then came the C-V-33 and C-V-35 (L3/35), which were called tanks, but were actually tankettes.

In 1939, the M11 / 39 was launched into production, a year later - the M13 / 30, and during the war two more cars - the M14 and M15. The latter were classified as medium tanks, although in fact they were light.

As a result, at the beginning of World War II, the Italians had about one and a half thousand tanks, but their combat power was extremely low. Before the surrender in 1943, the Italian industry produced 2,300 vehicles, but they were ineffective in battle and were used ineptly, so they did not play a special role in the battles.