The heaviest tank in the world during the Second World War. Tank TG (Tank Grotte) Engine, Weight, Dimensions, Armament How much does a Russian tank weigh

Reading the title of the article, the question involuntarily arises - why is such a steel giant needed? Does weight determine the need to create the heaviest tank in the world so that it leads the ratings by a margin, praising the designers of the miracle weapon, the country that is able to organize its production, investing in it colossal funds, thoughts, labor of thousands of people. Of course it isn't. In fact, the weight is only a side, even excess, of an ideal weapon for a land theater of operations.

Already the first armored vehicles, which appeared on the fronts of the First World War, amazed, even horrified with their huge dimensions and weight. As a result, they were clumsy, had low cross-country ability, speed, maneuverability, which sharply reduced their undoubted advantages:

• Protection against small arms, shell fragments.
• The ability to break through the enemy defenses, passing through wire fences, overcoming trenches, trenches.
• Strong psychological pressure on the soldiers of the enemy, losing self-control, falling into a panic at the sight of man-made iron monsters.

Most of them, based on the colossal weight of cast iron and steel used for their manufacture, may well claim the title of the heaviest tank. But due to the often grotesque appearance, real military technical characteristics, non-participation in hostilities, non-serial, often experimental production, it is hardly worth considering them in this capacity.

Years passed, and by the beginning of the next war for the redivision of the world and even more so during the hostilities, the designers of the leading countries, taking into account the mistakes, the accumulated experience in using tanks, changed the priorities for their creation. Now they are:

The increase in armor thickness, new powerful engines, side armament with a considerable amount of ammunition inevitably increased the weight of the heavy tanks being created. But to have such mobile armored forts in the troops, capable of literally breaking open the enemy’s defenses, opening the way for infantry, was worth a lot in the literal and figurative sense. Therefore, Germany, the USSR and the countries of the anti-Hitler coalition that joined it did a lot in this field.

Armored giants

The Soviet Union, the only one of the countries participating in the war, by 1940 was armed with a heavy assault tank KV - "Kliment Voroshilov" with a combat weight of 52 tons. This is not surprising if you look at its characteristics:

A total of 204 such heavy tanks were produced, almost all of them were lost in the battles of 1941 during the containment of the Nazi blitzkrieg.

Created in 1943, the IS-2 with a mass of 46 tons, which did not claim to be the heaviest, was later deservedly called the "Victory tank". Its long-barreled 122 mm cannon, reliable armor - 90 - 120 mm, high maneuverability surpassed the best examples of German weapons, among which were:

Made in France over heavy tank TOG II, weighing 82.3 tons, was not mass-produced before the start of the war. Great Britain also made a small contribution to the design of such armored vehicles. Only in 1944, an order was placed for the production of 25 copies of the A-39 tank with a mass of up to 89 tons, but as a result, only 5 vehicles were manufactured, and those after the end of the war.

It must be said that the French and American super heavy tanks in fact, according to the international classification, they were assault self-propelled artillery mounts- Self-propelled guns of a breakthrough, since they did not have a rotating turret.

The heaviest tank in the world, created during the Second World War, is the Pz.Kpfw VIII Maus with a mass of 188 tons. This armored monster did not participate in battles, by 1945 two vehicles were made. An exhibition copy assembled from them can be seen in Kubinka in the Military History Museum of Armored Vehicles. Today, this principle of creating tanks, as well as the concept itself, have gone down in history. A modern tank takes not by weight, but by a unique combination of the latest technological developments - materials and systems.

The largest tanks in terms of weight and size in the world. Almost all super heavy tanks were built or developed during World War II.

Above, photos of a real gun that was supposed to be mounted on a Monster tank

Germany, 1942, 42 meters, weight 1500 tons, crew 100

In 1942, Hitler approved the design and construction of the monster tank, but the project was canceled in 1943 before construction had begun. The tank was supposed to be fifteen times larger than regular tank, it was supposed to be equipped with an 800 mm Krupp gun (conventional tanks are equipped with 75 - 122 mm guns).

The 800 mm Krupp gun is the largest of the artillery pieces ever built. Each projectile weighed 7 tons, firing range up to 37 km (23 mi).

Germaniz, 1942, 35 meters, weight 1000 tons, crew 20 people

Ratte was very much like a monster. It was also developed in 1942 and was also discontinued a year later. Unlike the Monster, the Ratte was to be armed with a warship turret with two 280mm guns. Other weapons on the Ratte: one 128 mm cannon, eight 20 mm anti-aircraft guns and several 15 mm machine guns.

Tank VIII Mouse is the largest tank ever built. It's small compared to the Monster and Ratte, but still three times the size of a normal tank. The design was completed in 1942 and production began the same year, but only two tanks were built before the end of the war.

The tanks were armed with one 128 mm gun and one 75 mm gun.

Tank VIII Mouse

Germany, 1944 - 10 meters, weight 188 tons, crew 6

Super heavy tank is very similar to tank VIII Mouse. This project was started in 1942, but not all tanks were built. One tank hull was completed in 1944, but the turret was not installed until the end of the war.

The E-100 Tiger Mouse was to use the same turrets as the VIII Mouse tank. Thanks to its lighter weight, this tank should be faster and more efficient on the battlefield than the VIII Mouse tank.

Germany, 1943 - 10 meters, weight 140 tons, crew 5 people

FCM F1 is the heaviest and most big tank not of Nazi origin. It was to replace the Char 2C, which was one of the heaviest tanks ever to see combat. Unfortunately, France was defeated before the FCM F1 project was completed, so none of these tanks were built.

The FCM F1 was to be armed with a 90mm cannon, a 47mm cannon, and six machine guns. It is worth noting that this tank was 10 meters long, but only a little over 3 meters wide, so that it could be transported by rail.

France, 1940, 11 meters, weight 139 tons, crew 9 people

O-I, this is Japan's attempt at a super heavy tank. AT various sources there are reports that one model was completed and sent to Manchuria during World War II, but this is very unlikely, more likely rumor than truth. The O-I was probably cancelled, as were most other super-heavy tank projects.

The O-I was supposed to have three towers. The main turret had a 105 mm cannon, a 37 mm cannon on the right turret, and three machine guns on the left.

Japan, 1944, 10 meters, weight 130 tons, crew 11

The K-Wagen was one of the first attempts at a super-heavy tank. Again, it was a crazy plan of engineers from Germany, but this time it was before the Nazi era.

K-Wagen didn't have a main turret. Instead, there were four 77 mm guns mounted on the sides and seven machine guns. It is the second largest tank ever actually built - only the VII Maus tank is larger, since all other super-heavy tank projects have not been completed.

Germany, 1917, 13 meters, weight 120 tons, crew 27

T-28

The T-28 was developed by the US military during World War II. It was to be used to break through German defenses and possibly invade Japan.

The T-28 did not have a normal turning turret, so it could be classified as a tank destroyer, self-propelled unit, not a super heavy tank. For this reason, it was redesignated from T-28 to T-95 and then back.

It was armed with one 105 mm cannon and a single machine gun. He had 4 tracks instead of the traditional 2.

T-28

USA, 1945, 11 meters, weight 95 tons, crew 8 people

TOG2

TOG2 was the largest British tank ever built. Just like most other super-heavy tanks, it was developed during World War II. One prototype built in 1941, but the project was shelved and TOG2 never saw combat.

TOG2 was armed with one 76 mm cannon.

TOG2

Great Britain, 1940, 10 meters, weight 80 tons, crew 8 people

Another British super heavy tank. The tank was also developed during the Second World War, but was never put into production.

The A39 Turtle was armed with a 96mm cannon and three machine guns.

A39 Turtle

Great Britain, 1944 - 10 meters, weight 78 tons, crew 7 people

Why did the army abandon heavy tanks?

Interestingly, almost all tanks were built during the Second World War. What made the engineers at this time try to build such monsters, and why haven't such tanks been built so far?

The main reason for creating a super-heavy tank was immunity from enemy fire. The super heavy tank had thick armor that would have been impervious to most WWII guns. Patriotic War.

There are several reasons for abandoning these tanks:

There were cumulative shells. Which could penetrate armor up to 500 mm and even more;

The tank could be hit with aircraft;

Weak maneuverability of the tank during the offensive and retreat, which limited its use on the battlefield.

Another problem was the transportation of super-heavy tanks. Most of them were too big to be transported by rail, so they had to rely only on their ability to move. The problem is that most of them moved extremely slowly, so they cannot reach the battlefield at the right moment.

In addition, super-heavy tanks destroy roads. Therefore, they would have to drive over rough terrain, which would still slow down the movement.

Heavy tank IS-2 (video):

Heavy tank Grote R-1000 (video):

Heavy tanks IS-3, IS-7 (video):

This material by G. Malyshev is given as a discussion from the point of view of the layman and does not pretend to have any deep military scientific knowledge. Since some points in this publication seem controversial or superficial, we asked a specialist in armored vehicles briefly comment on the author's statements.

In the recent past, the Nizhny Tagil Tank Plant produced new model main battle tank called T-90MS "Tagil". The tank immediately attracted attention with interesting technical solutions that had not previously been used on serial domestic vehicles. It looks very impressive and modern - the design, although not from the Pininfarina studio, was definitely a success. The tank can claim the right to be considered one of the most powerful tanks in the world today.

It would be very interesting to analyze the design of this tank as much as possible. Find out what the designers did right and wrong, and what further improvements are possible in the design of this interesting machine.

Brief characteristics of the T-90MS are as follows:

Dimensions:
- Weight 48 tons.
- Length 9530 mm.
- Width 3780 mm.
- Height 2228 mm.

Armament:
- Gun-launcher 125-mm 2A46M-5 or 125-mm 2A82 - the main combat weapon of the tank, designed to destroy all types of ground, surface (within reach) and low-speed air targets. Ammunition 40 artillery shells of various types: BOPS, OFS, KS or guided missiles (UR) 9K119M "Reflex-M".

7.62-mm machine gun 6P7K (PKTM) coaxial with a cannon. It is intended to combat the enemy's manpower, which is located within the angles of fire of the main armament. The machine gun is paired with the cannon and has the same sector of fire with it. Ammunition 2000 rounds 7.62mmx54R various types. This weapon installed in a completely new tower of circular rotation with a developed turret niche.

Remote controlled machine gun mount T05BV-1 with 7.62 mm machine gun 6P7K (PKTM). Designed to fight enemy manpower, which takes cover or is higher than the sector of fire of the main weapon, for example, on upper floors buildings, steep mountain slopes. Either below the sector of fire of the main armament, in shelters, dugouts or directly at the tank in the so-called. "dead zone" for a tank gun and a machine gun coaxial with it. Thus, according to the plan of the designers, the combat stability of the tank in cramped and urban combat conditions should be ensured. Ammunition 800 cartridges 7.62mmx54R of various types.

Fire control system, surveillance and target detection:
- Fully digital highly automated control system "Kalina" with a CICS integrated into it. Thermal imaging and television devices designed, among other things, for all-round observation.

Security:
- Multi-layer combined armor latest scheme in the frontal area.
- Spaced booking in the side.

The latest built-in dynamic protection"Relic".
- Local protection of ammunition.
- Measures that reduce the thermal and noise signature of the tank.

Mobility:
- Multi-fuel diesel engine V12 V-92S2F2 with a capacity of 1130l.s. (831kW) + automatic transmission.
- Power-to-weight ratio ~23l.s./t.
- The maximum speed is 60-65 km/h on the highway.
- Power reserve 500 km.

The tank was created on the basis of previous modifications: T-90A and T-90S. Now let's understand in more detail what differences we see on this machine. What immediately catches your eye can be listed point by point:

1. A new tower with a developed aft niche.
2. New 125 mm 2A82 gun.
3. New dynamic protection "Relic".
4. Complex active protection tank KAZT "Arena-E" on the tank is missing.
5. There is no set of optoelectronic suppression of the KOEP "Shtora" on the tank.
6. Finally, the tank received a normal hard armored bulwark of the hull, generously "flavored" with elements of dynamic protection (DZ) "Relic" and lattice screens in the stern.
7. Anti-aircraft installation with a large-caliber 12.7 mm NSVT machine gun has sunk into oblivion. Its place was taken by a new machine gun mount with a 7.62 mm 6P7K machine gun.
8. Somewhat more powerful V-92S2F2 engine + automatic transmission.
9. The tank received an additional power unit in an armored container attached to the rear of the hull on the left.
What else can be said about this car?
1. The hull, like the previous modifications, mostly remained from the T-72.
2. In the chassis, there are also no significant differences from the T-72.
3. The new SLA "Kalina" is clearly superior to the 1A45T "Irtysh" of the T-90A tank.
Now let's try to analyze all these points. What has been done and what theoretically, in my opinion, could be done. So, let's begin.

Expert commentary. The sample of the modernized T-90S main battle tank shown at the REA-2011 arms exhibition was primarily aimed at foreign customers, so some of the systems mounted on it were for export. In this regard, I would like to point out to the author that the 125-mm 2A82 cannon is not installed on the export tank, the 2A46M-5 gun is installed on it.
As for the dynamic protection kit, 4S22 elements are installed on this tank, since 4S23 is prohibited for export.
The author complains in vain about the lack of an active protection complex for the Arena-E tank, since it can be installed at the request of the customer. In the same way, at the request of the customer, the TShU-1-2M system can be installed. In addition, the upgraded T-90S is equipped with the SPMZ-2E electromagnetic protection system against mines with magnetic fuses.

As for the power block. So far, the V-93 engine with a capacity of 1100 hp is being installed on the tank. There is no automatic transmission (automatic transmission) on it, but there is an automatic gear change.

New tower with a developed aft niche

How it's done. At first glance, the turret looks vulnerable compared to the T-90A or T-72B turrets. Most likely, this is the case. The T-72B and T-90A turrets were relatively small and had a special shape. The aft vulnerable part of the turret was narrowed and covered with a powerful armored front part within the heading angles of ±30º. And even such towers managed to penetrate from RPGs and ATGMs into the most vulnerable aft zones. Needless to say, getting into the aft or onboard part of the T-90MS turret, which is the size of a Leopard-2 or Abrams turret, will not be a problem at all. Thus, in terms of security, the aft part of the T-90MS turret is inferior to the security of the towers of all previous tanks of the T-72 model line.

It would seem - a clear regression? Not at all. The fact is that the result of breaking through the aft or rear side of the T-72B turret, very often, was a fire or detonation of ammunition (AM) and, accordingly, a partially or completely dead crew. It's all about the location of the BC: in all tanks of the T-72 series, as well as in the T-90, T-90S and T-90A, only 22 shots of separate-cartridge loading are located under the fighting compartment (BO) in the automatic loader (AZ) of the carousel type. This carousel, in contrast to the loading mechanism (MZ) of the T-64 and T-80 tanks, is relatively well protected: in front with the most powerful frontal armor of the hull, in the back with an engine, from the sides with road wheels and side screens. In addition, the "terrain screen" itself rarely allows you to hit the tank in the lower part of the battle regiment.

The problem was mainly in the placement of the rest of the BC. These 23-26 shots with shells or missiles were located literally everywhere: on the floor, on the walls of the hull and almost throughout the rear hemisphere of the tower. The limited interior space of the T-72 tank simply does not allow to place this AZ that does not fit into the carousel firepower, somewhere else. As a result, this “non-mechanized” ammunition most often catches fire or detonates - it’s just as lucky (which is not yet known worse).

You can object, they say, on the old T-34-85, KV-85, T-54, T-55, IS-3 and T-10 tanks, the ammunition was located in much the same way. In this case, the comparison is inappropriate. The ammunition of these tanks consisted of unitary shots. The charge of gunpowder was placed in a metal sleeve and the fire hazard of these old machines was incomparably lower. And the charges in the partially burning T-72 sleeve are ready to blaze from any touch of the cumulative jet.

The way out of this situation can be as follows - do not take into battle that part of the ammunition that is located in a non-mechanized ammunition rack. But then you will have to rely only on those 22 shots that are in the AZ carousel. They often did so. But this, of course, does not suit either tankers or self-respecting designers. The problem was finally solved in the T-90MS tank: the carousel for 22 shots was left, additionally protecting it with local armor, and the remaining 18 shots were placed in the aft niche of the tower, providing it with knockout panels following the example of Abrams and Leopard-2. If desired, these 18 shots can also not be taken with you. In the conditions of urban combat, it would probably be better to do so.

As a result: despite the fact that the T-90MS turret has become more vulnerable to enemy fire compared to the turrets of its predecessors - the T-72B or T-90A, the level of tank survivability, and more importantly, the survivability of the crew, has become incomparably higher. The level of survivability of the T-90MS and the survivability of its crew in the event of a tank defeat, in principle, began to correspond to Western tanks. Another plus of such a tower is greater comfort and more interior space for the habitable compartment of the tank.

Aft niche of the T-90MS turret

How could it be done. Apparently not. If you do not take into account some extravagant innovations, then other technical solutions are not suitable for this tank. The old Soviet layout with the placement of the entire BC along with the crew has become obsolete. And to place the ENTIRE BC in the aft niche, following the example of the Abrams, from a certain point of view, it is unreasonable and within a given mass of 50 tons is practically unrealizable. So the offset.

Expert commentary. The author is greatly mistaken when drawing conclusions about the reduction in the protection of the turret of the new tank. The tower in the projection on the plane still provides protection within the heading angles of 30 degrees, and from the stern is securely closed by an armor box.
In general, the fighting compartment of the modernized T-90S tank, including the turret, is much less vulnerable than its predecessors. In other words, the whole paragraph about the new tank turret contains a lot of discussion about something that doesn't exist.
Clarification on the location of ammunition. There are 22 shots in the autoloader, 8 shots in a non-mechanized stowage near the MTO partition, and another 10 shots in an armored box isolated from the fighting compartment at the rear of the tower.

New 125 mm 2A82 gun

How it's done. The most powerful 125-mm smoothbore gun of the latest design 2A82 is completely new development. It is believed that this gun is significantly superior to the previous 125-mm guns of the 2A46 series, 122-mm rifled 2A17 and 120-mm NATO Rheinmetall guns with a barrel length of 44 and 55 calibers. 2A82 surpasses them both in accuracy and in the power of fire. The same applies to the Chinese 125 mm gun of the ZTZ-99A2 (Type-99A2) tank, which is just an improved "pirate" version of the 2A46. However, the T-90MS apparently can also be equipped with the former 125-mm 2A46M5 gun, which is installed on the T-90A. From this we can conclude that tanks with the new 2A82 cannon will be supplied to the Russian army, and 2A46M5 tanks will be equipped for export. At the same time, knowing the realities of today, it is possible that everything will be done exactly the opposite.

How could it be done. Numerous experimental electrochemical and electromagnetic guns have not yet reached the stage of their installation in a real tank, so we immediately discard them. As an option, it would be possible to install a new 140-mm or 152-mm gun on the T-90MS (for example, from the "object 292"). But, in addition to technical difficulties, this could provoke Western countries to similarly upgrade their tanks, which means new round caliber racing. So at this stage, we decided to develop the 125 mm caliber for the time being, which has not yet fully revealed its full potential. And 140-152 mm guns were left in reserve. Offset.

Expert commentary. It is completely incomprehensible why the author suddenly describes the possibility of installing the 2A82 gun on export tanks. I repeat that this gun is not compatible with 2A46 modifications in terms of ammunition and is prohibited for export.

As for the powerful 152-mm 2A83 gun, which the author proposes to install on the T-90, this is impossible.

New dynamic protection "Relic"

How it's done. Dynamic protection of the new generation "Relic" refers to the built-in type of remote sensing. It increases armor resistance to HEAT ammunition by 2 times and resistance to APCR shells by 1.5 times. Front and top DZ closes the tank tightly and without gaps. The weakened zones near the gun are also covered by remote sensing elements. The roof over the driver's hatch is also closed. This is an offset. But there is also a “fly in the ointment”: the lower front sheet does not have it. This is a miscalculation - the tank can be pierced into the lower frontal sheet. The T-72B had at least one row of NDZ "Contact-1" there. The T-90MS has nothing, although theoretically hinged screens can be installed there.

Next is the side of the hull. It is closed all the way to the MTO, just like the T-72B, and then comes the lattice screen. The T-72B had only rubber-fabric screens, so this solution for the T-90MS is much better. Let me explain. The rubber-fabric screens of the T-72B and T-72A simply initiated the detonation of a cumulative warhead (warhead) of a rocket-propelled grenade at some distance from the main side armor (70 mm). The lattice screen, on the other hand, breaks the body of a rocket-propelled grenade or ATGM, they are destroyed by these sharp bars. In this case, the warhead may not work at all.

The side of the tower - things are not so good here. At T-72B, the tower was closed by DZ to half the length. The role of anti-cumulative screens of the rear hemisphere was played by boxes of spare parts and elements of OPVT. The T-90MS has a large and long turret, there is no DZ on the sides of the aft niche, but there is an ammunition rack there. Another vulnerable area is the aft hull sheet and the rear of the turret. There were cases when a rocket-propelled grenade that got into the stern sheet of the hull pierced the MTO right through the engine and hit the fighting compartment of the tank, and there people and ammunition. It is not noticeable that the designers paid at least some attention to this important aspect of protection on the new T-90MS tank. In terms of resistance to a blow to the rear of the hull, it is no better than the base T-72 Ural.

How could it be done. Protect the turret and hull around the entire perimeter, including the lower frontal part of the hull, with elements of the Relict DZ. This will not increase the mass of the tank by much, but the protection will become much stronger, and most importantly - from all sides, which plays a huge role in urban battles. In general, despite the clear progress, it is impossible to put an unambiguous offset. Although an obvious failure too.

Expert commentary. Regarding the alleged "miscalculation" of the designers who did not protect the lower frontal part of the hull. I inform the author that the NLD accounts for less than one percent of hits - even from the experience of fighting in a flat desert area. At the same time, the elements of dynamic protection installed on the NLD are definitely damaged when making any long march off the roads.
The author's statements about the vulnerability of the tank from hitting the side and rear of the tower do not correspond to reality at all. DZ blocks on the sides of the tower cover the entire projection, and the armor box reliably closes the stern.

The complex of active protection of the tank KAZT "Arena-E" on the tank is missing

How it's done. The newest T-90MS does not have KAZT, but similar systems were installed on old T-55AD and T-62D tanks. It is sad that such a complex necessary for the tank is missing.

How could it be done. Install the latest KAZT on the T-90MS. Expensive? The cost of a T-90MS tank blown up by an ATGM or RPG hit is even higher, not to mention the lives of tankers. Failed.

Expert commentary. Again, I repeat: this is a question for the customer. If there is an order for equipment, a full-fledged KAZT will be installed on the tank without any problems: for Russian army this is Afganit, and for export deliveries - Arena-E. Both complexes are interfaced with the Kalina control system.

There is no set of optoelectronic suppression KOEP "Shtora" on the tank

How it's done. The T-90MS does not have a Shtora KOEP, although it does exist on previous models of the T-90, T-90A, T-90S, and even the Iraqi T-72M1. But here it is not. Meanwhile, the thing is useful, as it significantly reduces the likelihood of guided missiles hitting a tank.

How could it be done. Install on the tank KOEP "Shtora-1". Only not instead of elements of remote sensing, as unsuccessfully done with the T-90A, but on them. Failed.

Expert commentary. Same as above: according to customer's requirement this system installed on the tank without problems.

Rigid armored bulwark of the hull with elements of the "Relikt" DZ and lattice screens

How it's done. Finally, our tank received a normal hard armored bulwark, moreover, generously "flavored" with elements of dynamic protection. There is no such thing either on previous modifications or on T-72B tanks.

In order to create something ultra-modern, you need to catch the right trend, “which way the wind blows”, so to speak, and then attach a ruler to this correct vector and extend the line by 10 lengths of this vector. An example is the IS-2 heavy tank. How did it turn out? Our designers caught a trend towards increasing the caliber of tank guns: from 45 mm to 76 mm and, subsequently, to 85 mm, and for the Germans - from 50 mm to 75 mm and, in the end, to 88 mm. Not following the saying “a teaspoon per hour”, but simply taking and attaching a ruler to this vector and “lengthening” it, they immediately installed a powerful 122-mm gun, which ensured the IS-2 simply overwhelming superiority in firepower over any tank in the world of that period.

But, unfortunately, this correct design approach, for some reason, did not spread to the side screens. I will explain to the reader the meaning and purpose of the onboard screen. Its essence is that the screen initiates the operation of a cumulative warhead at such a distance from the main armor. when its penetration power drops sharply. If the screen is rigid and metal, then it also reduces the penetration of kinetic ammunition, as it can change the angle of contact of the projectile with the main armor, tear off the “Makarov tip” from it, or simply damage the core. Rigid steel screens made of armor 10-20 mm thick appeared during the Second World War on the German tanks Pz.IV and Pz.V "Panther", the British "Churchill" and "Centurion". They were also on domestic tanks T-28 and T-35. Since then, our Western neighbors have been in no hurry to give them up.

It is paradoxical, but true - despite the fact that these screens appeared on domestic tanks (T-28 and T-35) in step with the times, their further use and elements of their design in domestic combat vehicles went along a dubious path of development. While the majority western tanks there were developed and quite “adult” side screens, which were already an integral part of their spaced side armor, this was how things were with us.

On the post-war T-54, T-55 and T-62, there were no side screens at all. All of their side armor was actually an armored side of the hull 80 mm thick, which was somewhat shielded by relatively large road wheels. Thus, tanks of these types were easy targets even for first-generation RPGs. On the IS-3M and a series of powerful tanks of the T-10 family, there were such “embryos” of side screens that only slightly covered the side from above.

Next - a new generation tank T-64A. On it were six "skinny", rotary "windows" with dubious effectiveness. It was the same on the first T-72s. The next stage of the long-suffering path of development of side screens domestic tanks appeared on the T-64B, T-72A and T-80. They finally have a solid 10-mm side screen, BUT - rubber-fabric! It is clear that such screens, with a small gain in weight compared to metal ones, almost do not protect against kinetic projectiles, are very easily damaged and come off, exposing the weakly armored side of the hull. I don’t even talk about how such a screen looks after several touches on obstacles or hits (and the tank as a whole).

The next stage of evolution is the T-72B tank. It has the same rubber-fabric screen as the T-72A, but “boxes” of 4С20 elements of dynamic protection “Kontakt-1” were hung on it over the entire area (up to the MTO zone). This significantly increased the protection of the side projection of the T-72B tank. But not everything is as good as it seems: the weight of the resulting design turned out to be large, the thin rubber-fabric screen bends under the weight of the NDZ blocks. After two or three hits from RPGs or ATGMs, all this "economy" can simply fall off with all the ensuing consequences.

On the T-64BV, force screens were introduced under the onboard elements of the NDZ. Appearance is improved, strength - almost none.

Finally we come to the "flying" tank T-80U. He received an almost normal side screen - 10-mm armor with elements of dynamic protection "Contact-5" built into it. Why "almost"? Because all this "wealth" reaches only half the length of the hull, and even the vulnerable T-80U ammo rack is not completely covered by a powerful screen. Further into the stern is the same rubber-fabric screen as in the T-72A or T-80.

The T-90 series is generally a regression and a return almost back to the T-72A. Instead of the relatively normal side screens of the T-80U, T-72B and T-64BV, the T-90 has the same screen as the T-72A, and six sort of "squares" of armor with dynamic protection "Contact-5" - three from each sides. Moreover, they do not close the middle of the hull opposite the ammunition rack, which would be logical, but its front part. Strange construction. When the enemy is everywhere, turning your forehead to him will not work.

And finally, the T-90MS appeared. He has a normal armored side screen with bars opposite the MTO. Everything is correct.

How could it be done. Everything was as it should be, but it should have been done FORTY years ago - on the T-72 Ural tank! But still - Offset.

Old british tank"Centurion". The 16mm thick steel side screens do not bend and make the appearance of this tank "powerful" and quite decent. Good example

The place of the anti-aircraft installation with a heavy 12.7-mm machine gun NSVT was taken by a new remote installation with a 7.62-mm machine gun 6P7K

How it's done. The design of domestic medium and main battle tanks is interesting in that with the constant improvement in the quality of the main armament, there was no progress in the auxiliary. Auxiliary weapons have remained virtually unchanged for decades. The period of searches and experiments in this area for medium tanks remained in the distant past of the military and prewar years. Starting with the T-55 and ending with the T-90A, the auxiliary armament consists of a 7.62 mm machine gun coaxial with a cannon and an anti-aircraft mount with a 12.7 mm machine gun on the roof of the tower. Of course, this scheme is outdated and needs to be changed.

Such an attempt was made on the T-90MS tank, but it was unsuccessful. The designers, at the cost of abandoning the large-caliber anti-aircraft gun, tried to adapt the tank to combat in urban conditions and ensure the possibility of effective combat with enemy manpower, primarily grenade launchers. To do this, instead of a 12.7 mm machine gun, a more “nimble” and maneuverable anti-personnel machine gun mount with a 7.62 mm machine gun and very large vertical pointing angles was installed.

What happened? With regards to the anti-aircraft component. The T-72B tank, in the event of an air threat, had at its disposal two air defense echelons:

1. Long-range - provided with guided missiles, allowed to fight helicopters and other low-speed air targets, range from 1.5-2 to 4-5 km.

2. If the target broke through to closer, then a short-range echelon came into action - an anti-aircraft gun with a 12.7-mm machine gun NSVT "Utes". He operated at ranges up to 2-2.5 km. Everything is quite logical. The T-90A tank had an even more advanced remote-controlled anti-aircraft gun, similar to the T-64 and T-80UD.

But for the T-90MS tank, this middle echelon was "cut off", which, no doubt, worsened its protective anti-aircraft properties. A 7.62 mm caliber bullet is hardly capable of inflicting any serious damage on a modern attack helicopter, and even more so of shooting it down. But maybe now the tank will successfully fight enemy infantry hidden in the urban jungle? Also no. the main problem tank in such a situation - to see the enemy in the window opening. At the training ground, manpower is imitated by bright and multi-colored balloons that hang in window openings. It is easy to guess that a real grenade launcher will not show off in a window opening with a grenade launcher at the ready in front of a tank gun aimed at him. He will hide next to the window, behind the wall and look out from time to time, being sure that the tank crew does not see him, and wait for the right moment.

Now, no devices capable of seeing through concrete walls like an X-ray have yet been invented, and therefore there is only one way out for a tank - to shoot a high-explosive fragmentation projectile into an empty window, where the enemy is supposedly located. Sometimes it helps when they guess, but no amount of ammunition is enough to shoot through all the windows, doors and hatches. There is also a way to shoot a machine gun at the wall next to the window or under the windowsill. If an enemy hides there, he will be hit. But for this, the bullet must penetrate the wall of the house. Can this be done by a 7.62-mm bullet from a coaxial machine gun or an anti-personnel installation of the T-90MS tank? Unlikely. And that means there will be almost no sense from it. But the 12.7-mm bullet from the NSVT is quite capable of this. Conclusion: The new remote installation looks nice, but - Failed.

How could it be done. The main battle tank T-64A "grew" from the medium tank T-64, which, in turn, was a revolutionary vehicle that absorbed latest achievements design thought and industry, as well as the best technical solutions for Soviet medium and heavy tanks.

The T-10M is a cold and precise death machine. The most powerful tank in the world of the period of the 50s - early 60s of the XX century. It was about the size of the Abrams and had the optimal combination of high mobility, powerful armor protection and huge firepower with a weight of 51.5 tons.

Why did I suddenly mention heavy tanks? Because in service with the Soviet army long time consisted of an exceptionally powerful and perfect tank, a meeting with which in battle for any other tank of that time most likely would have been the last. His name is T-10M. A powerful, 52-ton handsome man, produced in the amount of 8000 units and stood in service with the Soviet army for about 40 years. This tank had many technical solutions that favorably distinguished it from medium tanks and from main battle tanks too (not excluding the T-90MS).

Auxiliary armament of the T-10M consisted of a 14.5-mm KPVT machine gun coaxial with a cannon and another of the same in an anti-aircraft mount on the roof of the tower. Armor-piercing 14.5-mm bullet B-32 from a distance of 500 m calmly pierces armor 32 mm thick normally. The total rate of fire of both machine guns is 1200 rounds per minute. This allowed the T-10M tank to “cut” any armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle in half without any problems, without even resorting to using the main 122-mm M-62-T2S gun. The concrete walls of houses and shelters are also pierced by such machine guns with a bang.

Thus, the T-10M in terms of firepower was fully adapted to the conduct of hostilities in the city. If necessary, he could “saw through” the wall all over the floor, where the enemy could hide. It was necessary to put the same machine guns on the T-90MS. At least one - in an anti-aircraft installation on the roof. For a machine gun coaxial with a cannon, there is a good alternative - a 12.7-mm YakB-12.7 machine gun from attack helicopter Mi-24V.

Installation USPU-24 with a 4-barreled 12.7-mm machine gun YakB-12.7

This machine gun fires 5000 rounds per minute and is air-cooled - just what you need for the T-90MS. If the tank had one such 12.7 mm “lawn mower” and a powerful 14.5 mm KPVT machine gun in an anti-aircraft mount, the issue of air defense and actions in dense urban areas for the T-90MS with its devices would be resolved. In the presence of an independent vertical guidance system coaxial with a 125-mm 2A82 cannon of a 4-barreled 12.7-mm machine gun YakB-12.7, the tank will have all the qualities of a widely advertised BMPT and at the same time will not lose the main advantage of the tank - powerful cannon. By the way, the BMPT is not the world's first machine of this class. If we analyze - the T-28 and T-35 are the direct ideological ancestors of the BMPT.

Expert commentary. Lots of empty words. Let it be known to the author: in addition to the PKT, a 12.7-mm machine gun and a 30-mm AGS grenade launcher can be placed on the remote installation platform of the upgraded T-90S tank, depending on the customer's wishes. Moreover, the digital ballistic path of the Kalina control system makes it possible to replace weapons of a remote installation in field conditions depending on the assigned tasks.

More powerful V-92S2F2 engine with automatic transmission gear

How it's done. The engine produces 1130 hp, which is 130 hp. more than the previous T-90A tank (1000 hp). Initially, there were rumors that the engine would have a power of 1200 hp, but apparently it was not possible to achieve this. The engine has a pleasant, smooth sound of operation and provides T-90MS power density 23 hp/t. The maximum speed of the tank on the highway is 60-65 km / h. This is good, but not the best indicator. To live up to the adage “the armor is strong and our tanks are fast…” the T-90MS must accelerate to at least 70-75 km/h. A lighter tank should be faster than heavy, western ones. And in order to bring the mobility indicators of the T-90MS to the level of the T-80, he doesn’t even need an engine, but, most likely, it will be enough to redo the transmission. For example, the T-80BV tank with a mass of 43.7 tons and an engine power of 1100 hp. accelerates to 80 km / h. What prevents the T-90MS from driving the same way? The engine is normal. So the transmission needs to be improved.

How could it be done. The limited MTO volume of the T-72 tank makes increasing engine power a difficult task. The same applies to the hull of the T-90MS tank, which is the direct successor to the T-72. It is necessary to improve the transmission of the tank, which was done, and to select the right gear ratios. So anyway - Offset.

was adopted by the Russian armed forces in 1993. Rocket and gun tanks T-90 - a new generation of Russian tanks, which includes the original design developments and the best layout and design solutions for the T-72 and T-80 tanks.
The T-90S tank was created on the basis of a thorough study and understanding of the tactics and strategy of using tanks in real conditions modern combat taking into account many years of experience in military operation of T-72 tanks in various countries of the world, as well as the results of many years of intensive testing in the most severe conditions.

Tank T-90S retains the feature of domestic tank building - the classic layout scheme, in which:
- the main armament is located in a rotating turret;
- the power plant and transmission are located in the aft part of the hull;
- crew - separately: tank commander and gunner in the fighting compartment, driver in the control compartment.

The T-90S tanks are characterized by:
- optimal adaptability for combat operations in extreme situations;
– exceptional reliability of all components and assemblies, mechanisms and complexes;
- excellent mobility and maneuverability regardless of any climatic and road conditions, including in conditions of high dustiness and high mountains;
— minimum costs for the training of highly qualified specialists.

Almost every unit or system of the T-90S tank has a new quality.
Automated fire control system designed for effective aimed shooting at long range artillery shells and a guided projectile from a tank gun on the move and from a place on moving and stationary targets by the gunner and commander, day and night, as well as from a coaxial machine gun.
The fire control complex provides an increase in the range of effective fire and an increase in the range of vision at night, including due to the installation of a television sight in the tank.

Guided weapons complex with a laser-beam control channel allows you to fire a guided missile through the gun barrel from a place and on the move at stationary and moving targets at ranges from 100 to 5000 m.

Optoelectronic suppression complex provides protection for the tank from being hit by anti-tank guided missiles with semi-automatic guidance systems with feedback by tracer. The system of automatic all-round visibility, detection and protection of the tank from anti-tank projectiles with semi-automatic laser homing heads provides interference to anti-tank weapon control systems with laser rangefinders and target designators.

Closed anti-aircraft installation allows the commander to conduct aimed fire using remote control drives at air targets, and in a stabilized mode at ground targets, while remaining under reliable armor protection.

Built-in dynamic protection effective against armor-piercing sub-caliber and cumulative projectiles. The combination of built-in dynamic protection and multi-layered armor gives the tank additional options for surviving in extreme combat conditions.

The main armament of the T-90S is a smoothbore gun. caliber 125 mm increased accuracy and high ballistics. The use of an automatic loader made it possible to achieve a high rate of fire (up to 7-8 rounds per minute), which distinguishes the T-90S tank from most foreign tanks. The capabilities of a tank gun to combat ground armored and low-flying air targets have been expanded through the use of a guided weapon system, which makes it possible to destroy any modern tank before he gets within effective range of his cannon.

The tank is traditionally installed diesel engine, the main advantage of which compared to a gas turbine engine, especially in hot climates and sandy soils, are:
- slight power drop high temperatures environment;
— high reliability in the conditions of strong dust content;
- 1.8-2 times lower fuel consumption.

Main combat tank T-90S can overcome the bottom water obstacles up to 5 meters deep with non-stop performance of combat missions after overcoming a water barrier. The machine has built-in equipment for self-digging, a device for mounting mine trawls and can be transported by all modes of transport.

Tactical and technical characteristics
Combat weight- 46.5 tons.
Crew - 3 people
Engine - multi-fuel diesel, liquid cooling, power 1000 hp.
Length with gun forward - 9.5 m.
The height on the roof of the tower is 2.2 m.
Speed:
- average dry dirt road 40-45 km/h;
- maximum 60 km / h.
Cruising on the highway - 550 km.
The capacity of fuel tanks is 1200 + 400 liters.
Crossable ford (with preliminary preparation) - 1.2 (1.8) meters.
Crossable water barrier with OPVT - up to 5 meters.

Armament:
- 125-mm smoothbore gun 2A46M, automatic loading, rate of fire up to 8 rounds per minute; type of shot - armor-piercing sub-caliber, cumulative, high-explosive fragmentation;
-guided missile;
- 7.62 mm PKTM machine gun, coaxial with a cannon;
- anti-aircraft weapons 12.7-mm machine gun "Kord".
Ammunition:
- shots to the gun 43 pcs. (of which 22 in the automatic loader);
- cartridges for a machine gun 2000 pcs.

Guided weapon system 9K119 "Reflex"
- Maximum firing range 5000 m;
- Fire control system: daytime rangefinder sight, built-in sight alignment control device, night sight gunner (electronic-optical or thermal imaging);
- Target identification range of the "tank" type up to 3000 meters (thermal imaging channel);
— Two-plane stabilizer.
Sighting and observation complex commander:
target identification range of the "tank" type:
- at night 700-1200 m.
- in the afternoon 4000-10000 m.

Protection:
- combined armor 800-830 mm against BPS, 1150-1350 mm against cumulative ammunition;
- built-in dynamic protection "Contact-5";
- complex of active protection "Arena";
- systems for launching smoke grenades, protection against weapons of mass destruction, automatic PPO.
Means of communication:
— VHF radio R-163-50U
— VHF receiver R-163-UP

/Based on materials topwar.ru and arms-expo.ru/

Modern battle tanks Russia and the world photo, video, pictures watch online. This article gives an idea of ​​the modern tank fleet. It is based on the classification principle used in the most authoritative reference book to date, but in a slightly modified and improved form. And if the latter in its original form can still be found in the armies of a number of countries, then others have already become a museum exhibit. And all for 10 years! To follow in the footsteps of the Jane's guide and not consider this combat vehicle (quite by the way, curious in design and fiercely discussed at the time), which formed the basis of the tank fleet of the last quarter of the 20th century, the authors considered it unfair.

Films about tanks where there is still no alternative to this type of armament of the ground forces. The tank was and probably will remain a modern weapon for a long time due to the ability to combine such seemingly contradictory qualities as high mobility, powerful weapons and reliable protection crew. These unique qualities of tanks continue to be constantly improved, and the experience and technologies accumulated over decades predetermine new frontiers of combat properties and military-technical achievements. In the age-old confrontation "projectile - armor", as practice shows, protection from a projectile is being improved more and more, acquiring new qualities: activity, multi-layeredness, self-defense. At the same time, the projectile becomes more accurate and powerful.

Russian tanks are specific in that they allow you to destroy the enemy from a safe distance, have the ability to perform quick maneuvers on impassable roads, contaminated terrain, can “walk” through the territory occupied by the enemy, seize a decisive bridgehead, induce panic in the rear and suppress the enemy with fire and caterpillars . The war of 1939-1945 became the most difficult test for all mankind, since almost all countries of the world were involved in it. It was the battle of the titans - the most unique period that theorists argued about in the early 1930s and during which tanks were used in large quantities virtually all warring parties. At this time, a "check for lice" and a deep reform of the first theories of the use of tank troops took place. And it is the Soviet tank troops that are most affected by all this.

Tanks in battle that became a symbol of the past war, the backbone of the Soviet armored forces? Who created them and under what conditions? How did the USSR, which lost most their European territories and with difficulty recruiting tanks for the defense of Moscow, was he able to launch powerful tank formations on the battlefield already in 1943? When writing the book, materials from the archives of Russia and private collections of tank builders were used. There was a period in our history that was deposited in my memory with some depressing feeling. It began with the return of our first military advisers from Spain, and stopped only at the beginning of forty-third, - said the former general designer of self-propelled guns L. Gorlitsky, - there was some kind of pre-stormy state.

Tanks of the Second World War, it was M. Koshkin, almost underground (but, of course, with the support of "the wisest of the wise leader of all peoples"), who was able to create that tank that, a few years later, would shock German tank generals. And what’s more, he didn’t just create it, the designer managed to prove to these stupid military men that it was his T-34 that they needed, and not just another wheeled-tracked “highway”. The author is in slightly different positions that he formed after meeting with the pre-war documents RGVA and RGAE Therefore, working on this segment of the history of the Soviet tank, the author will inevitably contradict something "generally accepted". this work describes the history of Soviet tank building in the most difficult years - from the beginning of a radical restructuring of all the activities of design bureaus and people's commissariats as a whole, during a frantic race to equip new tank formations of the Red Army, the transfer of industry to wartime rails and evacuation.

Tanks Wikipedia the author wants to express his special gratitude for the help in the selection and processing of materials to M. Kolomiyets, and also to thank A. Solyankin, I. Zheltov and M. Pavlov, the authors of the reference publication "Domestic armored vehicles. XX century. 1905 - 1941" because this book helped to understand the fate of some projects, unclear before. I would also like to recall with gratitude those conversations with Lev Izraelevich Gorlitsky, the former Chief Designer of UZTM, which helped to take a fresh look at the entire history of the Soviet tank during the Great Patriotic War Soviet Union. Today, for some reason, it is customary to talk about 1937-1938 in our country. only from the point of view of repressions, but few people remember that it was during this period that those tanks were born that became legends of the wartime ... "From the memoirs of L.I. Gorlinkogo.

Soviet tanks, a detailed assessment of them at that time sounded from many lips. Many old people recalled that it was from the events in Spain that it became clear to everyone that the war was getting closer to the threshold and it was Hitler who would have to fight. In 1937, mass purges and repressions began in the USSR, and against the backdrop of these difficult events soviet tank began to turn from a "mechanized cavalry" (in which one of its combat qualities was emphasized by lowering others) into a balanced combat vehicle, possessing at the same time powerful weapons sufficient to suppress most targets, good maneuverability and mobility with armor protection, capable of maintaining its combat capability under shelling the most massive anti-tank weapons of a potential enemy.

Large tanks were recommended to be added to the composition only special tanks- floating, chemical. The brigade now had 4 separate battalions of 54 tanks each and was reinforced by the transition from three-tank platoons to five-tank ones. In addition, D. Pavlov justified the refusal to form in 1938 to the four existing mechanized corps three more additionally, believing that these formations are immobile and difficult to control, and most importantly, they require a different organization of the rear. The tactical and technical requirements for promising tanks, as expected, have been adjusted. In particular, in a letter dated December 23 to the head of the design bureau of plant No. 185 named after. CM. Kirov, the new chief demanded to strengthen the armor of new tanks so that at a distance of 600-800 meters (effective range).

The latest tanks in the world when designing new tanks, it is necessary to provide for the possibility of increasing the level of armor protection during modernization by at least one step ... "This problem could be solved in two ways. Firstly, by increasing the thickness of the armor plates and, secondly," by using increased armor resistance". It is easy to guess that the second way was considered more promising, since the use of specially hardened armor plates, or even two-layer armor, could, while maintaining the same thickness (and the mass of the tank as a whole), increase its resistance by 1.2-1.5 It was this path (the use of specially hardened armor) that was chosen at that moment to create new types of tanks.

Tanks of the USSR at the dawn of tank production, armor was most massively used, the properties of which were identical in all directions. Such armor was called homogeneous (homogeneous), and from the very beginning of the armor business, the craftsmen strove to create just such armor, because uniformity ensured stability of characteristics and simplified processing. However, at the end of the 19th century, it was noticed that when the surface of the armor plate was saturated (to a depth of several tenths to several millimeters) with carbon and silicon, its surface strength increased sharply, while the rest of the plate remained viscous. So heterogeneous (heterogeneous) armor came into use.

In military tanks, the use of heterogeneous armor was very important, since an increase in the hardness of the entire thickness of the armor plate led to a decrease in its elasticity and (as a result) to an increase in brittleness. Thus, the most durable armor, other things being equal, turned out to be very fragile and often pricked even from bursts of high-explosive fragmentation shells. Therefore, at the dawn of armor production in the manufacture of homogeneous sheets, the task of the metallurgist was to achieve the highest possible hardness of the armor, but at the same time not to lose its elasticity. Surface-hardened by saturation with carbon and silicon armor was called cemented (cemented) and was considered at that time a panacea for many ills. But cementation is a complex, harmful process (for example, processing a hot plate with a jet of lighting gas) and relatively expensive, and therefore its development in a series required high costs and an increase in production culture.

Tank of the war years, even in operation, these hulls were less successful than homogeneous ones, since for no apparent reason cracks formed in them (mainly in loaded seams), and it was very difficult to put patches on holes in cemented slabs during repairs. But still, it was expected that a tank protected by 15-20 mm cemented armor would be equivalent in terms of protection to the same, but covered with 22-30 mm sheets, without a significant increase in mass.
Also, by the mid-1930s, in tank building, they learned how to harden the surface of relatively thin armor plates by uneven hardening, known from late XIX century in shipbuilding as the "Krupp method". Surface hardening led to a significant increase in the hardness of the front side of the sheet, leaving the main thickness of the armor viscous.

How tanks shoot videos up to half the thickness of the plate, which, of course, was worse than carburizing, since despite the fact that the hardness of the surface layer was higher than during carburizing, the elasticity of the hull sheets was significantly reduced. So the "Krupp method" in tank building made it possible to increase the strength of armor even somewhat more than carburizing. But the hardening technology that was used for sea armor of large thicknesses was no longer suitable for relatively thin tank armor. Before the war, this method was almost never used in our serial tank building due to technological difficulties and relatively high cost.

Combat use of tanks The most developed for tanks was the 45-mm tank gun mod 1932/34. (20K), and before the event in Spain, it was believed that its power was enough to perform most tank tasks. But the battles in Spain showed that the 45-mm gun could only satisfy the task of fighting enemy tanks, since even the shelling of manpower in the mountains and forests turned out to be ineffective, and it was possible to disable a dug-in enemy firing point only in the event of a direct hit . Shooting at shelters and bunkers was ineffective due to the small high-explosive action of a projectile weighing only about two kg.

Types of tanks photo so that even one hit of a projectile reliably disables an anti-tank gun or machine gun; and thirdly, to increase the penetrating effect of a tank gun on the armor of a potential enemy, as in the example French tanks(already having an armor thickness of the order of 40-42 mm) it became clear that the armor protection of foreign combat vehicles tends to be significantly strengthened. There was a right way to do this - increasing the caliber of tank guns and simultaneously increasing the length of their barrel, since a long gun of a larger caliber fires heavier projectiles at a higher muzzle velocity over a greater distance without correcting the pickup.

The best tanks in the world had a large caliber gun, also has big sizes breech, significantly more weight and increased recoil reaction. And this required an increase in the mass of the entire tank as a whole. In addition, the placement of large shots in the closed volume of the tank led to a decrease in the ammunition load.
The situation was aggravated by the fact that at the beginning of 1938 it suddenly turned out that there was simply no one to give an order for the design of a new, more powerful tank gun. P. Syachintov and his entire design team were repressed, as well as the core of the Bolshevik Design Bureau under the leadership of G. Magdesiev. Only the group of S. Makhanov remained at liberty, who from the beginning of 1935 tried to bring his new 76.2-mm semi-automatic single gun L-10, and the team of plant No. 8 slowly brought the "forty-five".

Photos of tanks with names, the number of developments is large, but in mass production in the period 1933-1937. not a single one was accepted ... "In fact, none of the five air-cooled tank diesel engines, which were worked on in 1933-1937 in the engine department of plant No. 185, was brought to the series. Moreover, despite the decisions on the highest levels of the transition in tank building exclusively to diesel engines, this process was held back by a number of factors.Of course, diesel had significant efficiency.It consumed less fuel per unit of power per hour.Diesel fuel is less prone to ignition, since the flash point of its vapors was very high.

Even the most advanced of them, the MT-5 tank engine, required reorganization of engine production for serial production, which was expressed in the construction of new workshops, the supply of advanced foreign equipment (there were no machine tools of the required accuracy yet), financial investments and strengthening personnel. It was planned that in 1939 this diesel engine with a capacity of 180 hp. will go to mass-produced tanks and artillery tractors, but due to investigative work to find out the causes of tank engine accidents, which lasted from April to November 1938, these plans were not fulfilled. The development of a slightly increased six-cylinder gasoline engine No. 745 with a power of 130-150 hp was also started.

Brands of tanks with specific indicators that suited the tank builders quite well. Tank tests were carried out according to a new methodology, specially developed at the insistence of the new head of the ABTU D. Pavlov in relation to military service in wartime. The basis of the tests was a run of 3-4 days (at least 10-12 hours of daily non-stop traffic) with a one-day break for technical inspection and restoration work. Moreover, repairs were allowed to be carried out only by field workshops without the involvement of factory specialists. This was followed by a "platform" with obstacles, "bathing" in the water with an additional load, simulating an infantry landing, after which the tank was sent for examination.

Super tanks online after the improvement work seemed to remove all claims from the tanks. And the general course of the tests confirmed the fundamental correctness of the main design changes - an increase in displacement by 450-600 kg, the use of the GAZ-M1 engine, as well as the Komsomolets transmission and suspension. But during the tests, numerous minor defects again appeared in the tanks. Chief designer N. Astrov was suspended from work and was in custody and under investigation for several months. In addition, the tank received a new improved protection turret. The modified layout made it possible to place on the tank a larger ammunition load for a machine gun and two small fire extinguishers (before there were no fire extinguishers on small tanks of the Red Army).

US tanks as part of modernization work, on one serial model of the tank in 1938-1939. the torsion bar suspension developed by the designer of the Design Bureau of Plant No. 185 V. Kulikov was tested. It was distinguished by the design of a composite short coaxial torsion bar (long monotorsion bars could not be used coaxially). However, such a short torsion bar in tests did not show enough good results, and therefore the torsion bar suspension did not immediately pave its way in the course of further work. Obstacles to be overcome: rises not less than 40 degrees, vertical wall 0.7 m, overlapping ditch 2-2.5 m.

YouTube about tanks work on the production of prototypes of D-180 and D-200 engines for reconnaissance tanks justifying his choice, N. Astrov said that the wheeled-tracked non-floating reconnaissance aircraft (factory designation 101 or 10-1), as well as the amphibious tank variant (factory designation 102 or 10- 2), are a compromise solution, since it is not possible to fully satisfy the requirements of ABTU.Option 101 was a tank weighing 7.5 tons with a hull like a hull, but with vertical side sheets of cemented armor 10-13 mm thick, since : "Sloping sides, causing a serious weighting of the suspension and hull, require a significant (up to 300mm) broadening of the hull, not to mention the complication of the tank.

Video reviews of tanks in which the power unit of the tank was planned to be based on the 250-horsepower MG-31F aircraft engine, which was mastered by the industry for agricultural aircraft and gyroplanes. Gasoline of the 1st grade was placed in a tank under the floor of the fighting compartment and in additional onboard gas tanks. The armament fully met the task and consisted of coaxial machine guns DK caliber 12.7 mm and DT (in the second version of the project even ShKAS appears) caliber 7.62 mm. The combat weight of a tank with a torsion bar suspension was 5.2 tons, with a spring suspension - 5.26 tons. The tests were carried out from July 9 to August 21 according to the methodology approved in 1938, and Special attention given to tanks.