Military Review

Anti-aircraft guns against tanks. Part 1

74



the USSR

Anti-aircraft artillery appeared shortly after airplanes and airships began to be used for military purposes. Initially, conventional medium-caliber infantry guns on various improvised machine guns were used to fire at air targets. When this was used shrapnel shells with a distance tube. However, even taking into account the fact that the first combat aircraft were very far from perfect, and their speed did not exceed that developed by a modern passenger car of the middle class, the effectiveness of the fire of improvised anti-aircraft guns was low. This is explained by the fact that the fire from the guns was carried out "by eye", there were no anti-aircraft fire control devices, and the rate of fire of the piston-bolt guns was not too high.

Special mention should be made of naval rapid-fire “mine” guns of the caliber 37-120 mm, designed to repel the attacks of destroyers. By their characteristics, these guns with semi-automatic shutters, which had good ballistics, were best suited for anti-aircraft fire. But initially in their ammunition there were no shrapnel or fragmentation grenades with a remote fuse, and the vertical elevation angle was limited. However, by the end of World War I, in most warring countries, universal cannons were created on the basis of "mine" artillery that could fight aviation. For the ground forces, thumbs were used for anti-aircraft guns, often mounted on a cargo chassis or railway platforms.


Russo-Balt-T armored truck with 76-mm anti-aircraft gun


Although the design of the 57-mm Rosenberg anti-airborne gun was developed before the war, in Russia, the 76-mm gun, known as the 76-mm anti-aircraft gun, became such the first production gun. 1914/15 (3 ″ Lender anti-aircraft gun or 8-K). This is the first in Russia special 76,2-mm caliber gun equipped with a wedge-lock with inertial semi-automatic, designed to fire at air targets with a range of 6500 meters. In addition to the 76-mm guns in the Russian army and in navy there were imported 37-mm Maxim-Nordenfeldt automatic guns and 40-mm Vickers (both guns had automatic equipment according to the Maxim system) with tape power. The guns used in land units were usually mounted on truck platforms. Theoretically, 76-mm anti-aircraft guns and 37-40-mm machine guns could be successfully used to combat the German tanks and armored vehicles, but the author does not have information about their use in this role.


37-mm Maxim-Nordenfeldt automatic gun


However, the century of anti-aircraft guns based on Maxim’s automation in Russia turned out to be short-lived. These guns had a lot of flaws: they were difficult to operate, gave a lot of delays when firing, required water cooling, had a low ballistics. As a result, by the middle of the 30-s in the Red Army there were practically no serviceable 37 and 40-mm anti-aircraft guns. The 76-mm Lender anti-aircraft gun, by contrast, until the middle of the 30-x was the main anti-aircraft gun. In the 1928, the gun was upgraded: the barrel length was increased to 55 gauges, which increased the initial velocity of the projectile to 730 m / s. The height of the target hit reached 8000 m, and the rate of fire was 10-12 rds / min. The gun was produced until 1934 year. As of 22 June 1941, the troops had 539 units 76-mm. anti-aircraft guns arr. 1914 / 15 of the Lender system and 19 pcs. 76-mm. anti-aircraft guns arr. 1915 / 28

Without a doubt, in the initial period of the war, these guns had the opportunity to fire at ground targets. Considering the fact that Lender's anti-aircraft guns were absolutely compatible in terms of ammunition with divisional 76-mm guns, they can be considered quite effective anti-tank weapons. 76-mm armor-piercing projectile 53-BR-350A at ​​a distance of 1000 meters normal pierced 60-mm armor. In the summer of 1941, the thickness of the frontal armor of most German tanks did not exceed 50-mm. In the extreme case, shrapnel could be used with a fuse set to “strike”, while the armor penetration at the 400 meter range was 30-35 mm.

76-mm anti-aircraft guns arr. 1914 / 15 were fairly simple and reliable, they were well mastered in production and in the army, but by the beginning of the 30's, Lender's guns were already outdated. The main disadvantage of these guns was considered to be insufficient reach in range and height. In addition, shrapnel shells at break could hit the enemy aircraft in a relatively narrow sector, which generally reduced the effectiveness of firing at fast moving air targets. In this regard, attempts have been made to create a modern 76-mm anti-aircraft gun. However, at the end of 20-x - the beginning of 30-x, the Soviet design school was still very weak, and the production base of artillery factories was only beginning to be updated due to the supply of imported machine tools. Therefore, the acquisition of technical documentation for the German 75-mm 7,5 cm Flak L / 59 gun from Rheinmetall was fully justified. Original samples made in Germany, in February-April 1932, were tested at the Scientific Research Antiaircraft Range. In the same year, the gun was put into service under the name "76-mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1931 G. (3K) ". Especially for it was developed a new projectile with a bottle-shaped liner, which was used only in anti-aircraft guns.

Anti-aircraft guns against tanks. Part 1

76-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1931


Automatics ensured the extraction of spent cartridges and the closure of the bolt during firing. The loading of shells and shot was made manually. The presence of semiautomatic mechanisms provided high combat rate of fire of the gun - up to 20 shots per minute. The lifting mechanism allowed to fire in the vertical angle range from -3 ° to + 82 °. By the standards of the beginning of 30-ies, anti-aircraft gun arr. The 1931 of the year was quite modern and had good ballistic characteristics. The carriage with four folding beds provided circular fire, and with the weight of the projectile 6,5 kg the maximum height of the destruction of air targets was 9 km. A significant drawback of the gun was that the transfer from the traveling to the combat position took a relatively long time and was a rather laborious operation. In addition, the two-wheeled wagon was unstable when transporting over rough terrain.


76-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1931 in the Finnish Museum


According to the experience of the Lender cannons, several dozen guns were installed on the YG-10 trucks. "Cargo" ZSU received index 29K. To install anti-aircraft guns, the bottom of the car body was strengthened. Swinging part of the 76,2-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1931 g. 3K mounted on a standard cabinet. The car was complemented by four folding "paws" - jacks type jacks. The body in the stowed position was supplemented by protective armor sides, which in the combat position were reclined horizontally, increasing the service area of ​​the gun. In front of the loading platform, there were two charging boxes for each 24 projectile. On the folding sides were places for the four calculation numbers.



The 3-mm anti-aircraft gun model 76 of the year was developed on the basis of the 1938-K gun. In order to shorten the deployment time, the same gun was installed on a new, four-wheeled vehicle. Before the war, the troops managed to get 750 76-mm anti-aircraft guns arr. 1938 g. It was the most numerous medium-caliber anti-aircraft gun in the USSR at the time of the outbreak of war.

Thanks to a bottle-shaped sleeve with an increased charge of gunpowder and a long barrel 76-mm anti-aircraft guns. 1931 g. And arr. 1938 had excellent armor penetration. The BR-361 armor-piercing projectile, released from the 3-K gun at a distance of 1000 meters at the 90 ° meeting angle, pierced 85-mm armor. In the initial period of the war, this was more than enough to destroy any German tank.


ZSU SU-6


In 1936, the ZSU SU-6 was tested, armed with an 76-mm anti-aircraft gun 3-K on the chassis of a T-26 light tank. This machine was intended to accompany motorized columns. She did not arrange the military, since the entire anti-aircraft calculation did not fit in an artillery installation. Failing as an anti-aircraft gunner, the SU-6 could become an excellent anti-tank SPG. For this, the gun had only to cover up with a light splinter cutting. Our anti-tank units on the eve of the war could get an effective anti-tank artillery system for operations from ambushes and prepared fire positions. Moreover, the outdated T-26 tanks in the Red Army were in abundance.

Speaking about 76-mm guns, it is impossible not to mention two more guns of this caliber, formally considered anti-aircraft. In 1916, the troops received 76-mm anti-aircraft guns arr. 1902 g. On the machine Ivanov. Ivanov’s machine was a metal bollard with a circular rail in the upper part, along which the upper frame rotated on 4 rollers. The axis of rotation was an axial bolt, sprung by buffers. The cabinet had four coulters and an inner box, which for stability was filled with earth. The field gun was rolled onto the upper frame by artillery forces and in a combat position possessed a circular horizontal sector of shelling and a maximum angle of elevation 56 °. A special anti-aircraft sight was used for shooting. The system’s drawbacks were the stationarity of the installation, which prevented the defense of the troops on the march and the low rate of fire. In addition, by the middle of the 30-x the height of the defeat of air targets was unsatisfactory. Ivanov's anti-aircraft installations were in service right up to the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, and by that time they were already an obvious anachronism. But in the army there were even more than 3-K anti-aircraft guns, as of the second half of June - 805 pcs.

At the end of the 20-x - the beginning of the 30-s, our military leadership was fascinated by the idea of ​​creating a universal artillery system that combines the functions of an anti-aircraft and divisional weapon. One of the apologists for this trend in the field of artillery weapons was M. N. Tukhachevsky, who from the 1931 year occupied the post of head of the Red Army weapons, and from the 1934 year - the post of Deputy Commissar of Defense for Armaments. Energetic, but without proper education in the field of design and technology of artillery systems (and, consequently, incompetent in this matter), he actively promoted his personal ideas in their practical implementation.

In 1931, on the instructions of Tukhachevsky, work began on the creation of a "universal" 76-mm divisional gun, which could conduct anti-aircraft fire. Despite the obvious viciousness of the concept in 1936, a weapon created under the leadership of V. G. Grabin was adopted. "76-mm divisional gun obr. 1936 g. "Or F-22 was originally developed for powerful ammunition with a bottle-shaped liner. But at that time, the Main Artillery Directorate (GAU) did not want to switch to another 76-mm ammunition, since the warehouses had huge stocks of 76-mm shots with a cartridge case. 1900 r, which of course was a mistake. At the same time, the F-22, designed for more powerful ballistics, had a large margin of safety, which was later used by the Germans, who captured a significant number of guns of this type in the initial period of the war. Given the acute shortage of anti-tank guns capable of hitting Soviet tanks with anti-shell armor, the F-22 was converted into anti-tank guns. The modernization of the guns included the bore of the chamber under the larger sleeve, the installation of the muzzle brake and the transfer to one side of the pickup mechanisms. F-22, which received the designation 7,62cm FK 39, became one of the best anti-tank guns of the Wehrmacht, more than just 500 guns were redone. A significant amount of these guns was also used for armament PT SAU Marder II and Marder III.

"Universal" F-22 gun at an elevation angle close to the maximum.

In general, the "universality" worsened the characteristics of the F-22. Constructive solutions aimed at imparting the properties of an anti-aircraft gun had a negative effect on the characteristics of the F-22 as a divisional weapon. F-22 had a very large size. The gun was often used as anti-tank, but never as an anti-aircraft gun. She was deprived of the opportunity to conduct a round-up attack, which is absolutely unacceptable for anti-aircraft guns. Reach height and anti-aircraft firing were low. When shooting at elevation angles greater than 60 °, the automatic shutter function refused to work, which adversely affected the rate of fire. The artillery divisions did not have anti-aircraft fire control devices (PUAZO) and anti-aircraft sights. In terms of firing range and armor penetration capability, the F-22 had no particular advantages over the old divisional gun mod. 1902 / 30 The use of the F-22 as an anti-tank gun was made difficult by the fact that the scope and mechanism of vertical guidance were on opposite sides of the barrel, respectively, the gun could not be guided by the gunner alone.

The growth of speeds and the "ceiling" of aircraft, increasing their survivability demanded an increase in the reach of anti-aircraft guns in height and an increase in projectile power. 76-mm. 3-K anti-aircraft gun had an increased margin of safety. The calculations showed that it is possible to increase its caliber to 85-mm. The main advantage of the 85-mm anti-aircraft gun over its predecessor - 76-mm anti-aircraft gun model 1938 of the year - in the increased power of the projectile, which created a larger radius of destruction in the target area.

In the new 85-mm gun, the barrel was placed on the 76-mm anti-aircraft gun platform. 1938 of the year, in addition, used the design of the bolt and semi-automatic of this instrument. To reduce recoil was installed muzzle brake. 85-mm anti-aircraft gun under the designation "85-mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1939 (52-K) "launched into mass production on a simplified carriage (with a four-wheel vehicle) 76,2-mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1938 g. Thus, with minimal cost and in a short time, a new effective anti-aircraft gun was created. Before the attack of Hitler's Germany on the Soviet Union, industry had managed to put 2630 units into the troops. In all, more than 14000 85-mm anti-aircraft guns were produced during the war years.


85-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1939 (52-K)


In addition to air defense, 85-mm anti-aircraft guns were widely used for firing at ground targets, becoming one of the most effective means of fighting enemy tanks. With an initial speed of 800 m / s, the 53-UBR-365K armor-piercing caliber projectile, which weighed 9,2 kg, pierced 1000 mm armor at a distance of 100 meters along the normal line. At a distance of 500 meters, the armor-piercing shell was completely in front of the “teeth” of the heavy Tiger's frontal armor. The maximum rate of guns reached 20 rds / min.

Already at the end of June 1941, the decision was made to form separate anti-tank artillery regiments of the GDG, armed with twenty 85-mm anti-aircraft guns. In July and August, 1941 formed 35 of such regiments. In August and October, the second wave of formation of anti-tank regiments of the Russian command and control group followed. On the one hand, an important advantage of anti-aircraft guns was also a carriage, providing a circular sector of fire. On the other hand, this very four-wheel carriage, made anti-aircraft gun less mobile. Its transportation over weak soils or deep snow was possible only with powerful tracked tractors, which were few in the Red Army.

Due to the acute shortage of effective anti-tank guns, in 1942, the production of simplified 85-mm guns was launched without interfacing with PUAZO. According to the experience of military operations, to protect the calculations from bullets and splinters, an armored shield was mounted on the guns. These guns were delivered to the anti-tank artillery regiments of the GDG. In 1943, the anti-aircraft gun was upgraded to improve performance and reduce production costs.

The widespread use of 85-mm anti-aircraft guns in VET took place at least until the end of the 1943 year. It is known that 15 anti-tank artillery divisions with twelve 85-mm guns took part in the Kursk battle. At the same time they were forbidden to fire at air targets. By the beginning of the 1944 of the year, as the forces of the anti-tank artillery were fully saturated and the mass production of the SAU SU-85 PTs began, anti-aircraft 85-mm guns were removed from the anti-tank divisions. But armor-piercing shells in ammunition of anti-aircraft batteries deployed in the front line, there were always.

On the basis of 85-mm anti-aircraft guns or using ammunition during the war years, a number of guns were developed that armed T-34-85, KV-85, EC-1 and SAU SU-85 tanks. In 1944, the 85-mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1944 g. (COP-1). It was obtained by imposing a new 85-mm barrel on the carriage of an 85-mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1939. The goal of modernization was to increase the survivability of the barrel and reduce the cost of production. But its massive entry into the troops began after the end of hostilities.

37-mm automatic anti-aircraft gun obr. 1939


In the 1939, the 37-mm anti-aircraft gun 61-K, based on the Swedish 40-mm Bofors anti-aircraft guns, was adopted in the USSR. The 37-mm 1939 automatic anti-aircraft gun of the year is a single-barreled small-caliber automatic anti-aircraft gun on a four-carriage with a non-detachable four-wheel drive. Automatic guns based on the use of recoil force according to the scheme with a short recoil of the barrel. All actions necessary for firing a shot (opening the bolt after the shot with extracting the liner, cocking the hammer, feeding the cartridges into the chamber, closing the bolt and lowering the hammer) are performed automatically. Manually carried out the aiming, pointing guns and feed clips with ammunition in the store.


Calculation 37-mm automatic anti-aircraft gun arr. 1939


According to the leadership of the gun service, his main task was to fight against air targets at distances up to 4 km and at altitudes up to 3 km. If necessary, the gun can be used for firing at ground targets, including tanks and armored vehicles. 37-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1939, even before the war was created as anti-tank and had a spent armor-piercing projectile. By the beginning of the war, the troops had 370 37-mm 61-K anti-aircraft guns, which was about 10% of the minimum required quantity. During the war years, the industry transferred more than 22 000 37-mm anti-aircraft guns to the air defense forces. 1939 d. You should also add more 5000 40-mm Bofors automata set by allies.


40-mm anti-aircraft gun Bofors L60


Since July, 1941, 37-mm automatic anti-aircraft guns 61-K along with 85-mm guns 52-K were included in the composition of anti-tank regiments RGC. These regiments were armed with eight 37-mm and eight 85-mm anti-aircraft guns.

Armor-piercing tracer 37-mm projectile UBR-167 770 g mass left the barrel at a speed of 865 m / s. At a distance of 500 meters along the normal, he punched 46 mm armor, which made it possible to destroy medium German tanks when firing at the side. However, the use of high-speed anti-aircraft guns in the role of not the most effective anti-tank guns in the conditions of the domination of enemy aircraft was an unaffordable luxury. In this regard, at the end of 1941, 37-mm machine guns from anti-tank artillery were withdrawn. However, during the war years, 37-mm automatic anti-aircraft guns 61-K were often used for firing at ground targets.

Shortly before the war, an 25-mm automatic anti-aircraft gun of the 1940 model of the year (72-K) was created, borrowing a number of design solutions from the 37-mm 61-K submachine gun. But by the beginning of hostilities she did not get to the troops. The 72-K anti-aircraft guns were designed for anti-aircraft defense of a rifle regiment level and in the Red Army occupied an intermediate position between large-bore DShK heavy anti-aircraft machine guns and more powerful 37-K anti-aircraft guns. However, the use of a charger for a small caliber anti-aircraft machine gun greatly reduced the practical rate of fire.

Because of the difficulties in mastering their mass production, a significant number of 25-mm anti-aircraft guns appeared in the Red Army only in the second half of the war. Due to their smaller caliber, their anti-tank capabilities were worse than the 37-mm anti-aircraft guns. At a distance of 500 meters armor-piercing projectile mass 280 gr. With an initial speed of 900 m / s, the normal pierced through 30-mm armor. What allowed to fight with light tanks, armored vehicles and armored personnel carriers. However, the 25-mm projectile had a much lower yield than even an 37-mm projectile, whose effectiveness was considered insufficient.

Most often for firing at ground targets were used guns caliber 76-85-mm, especially in the PTO. Anti-aircraft guns sometimes became the only barrier in the path of German tanks. A very large role in the anti-tank defense anti-aircraft guns, set in direct fire, played in the Battle for Moscow. About 50% anti-aircraft artillery batteries left their positions and took up defensive positions on the approaches to the capital. Back in the course of the Smolensk defensive battle, nomadic groups were set out from the composition of air defense forces and weapons for deployment to tank-dangerous areas. Such groups often made unexpected artillery strikes against the advance columns of the advancing German forces that broke through the front, sowing panic among them and causing serious damage to manpower.

After the Germans launched Operation Typhoon, in connection with the threat of enemy forces rushing through Borovsk to Naro-Fominsk and through Maloyaroslavets to Podolsk, a group of four anti-aircraft artillery batteries and three anti-aircraft guns were allocated to help the troops of the 33 Army machine gun platoons. 12 October in the area of ​​the city of Borovsk, the group entered into battle with an enemy force column up to an infantry regiment, reinforced with tanks. For nine hours, the gunners and machine-gunners held the enemy back, and then the approaching forces of the 33 Army threw the Nazis on 8 km from Borovsk with a counter-attack. In this battle, an anti-aircraft artillery group destroyed 8 tanks, two bombers, and up to the enemy infantry battalion.



The anti-aircraft gunners of the 732 anti-aircraft artillery regiment played a huge role during the defense of Tula. At the southern approaches to Tula were put forward 4 medium-sized batteries. Anti-tank ditches were dug before firing positions, anti-tank barriers and minefields were installed. Searchlight stations have been prepared for night combat. An attempt by the Germans to break through the defense failed. Only in one battle of 30, October, the enemy lost more than 20 tanks, more than 200 infantry. In total, during the two months of Tula’s defense, the anti-aircraft gunners destroyed 49 tanks, 5 armored vehicles, 3 artillery and 12 mortar batteries, 11 aircraft, and before 1850 soldiers and officers of the enemy.

In 1942, near Stalingrad, the Red Army anti-aircraft gunners showed wonders of courage, repelling the attacks of the German tanks that had broken through. Often enemy tanks and aircraft simultaneously attacked positions, and anti-aircraft guns had to fire on both. For example, the 3-th battery of the 1077-th Zenap in just one day 23 August 1942 destroyed 14 tanks, 3 aircraft and, before 100, enemy soldiers. AT history defense of Stalingrad forever entered the feat of anti-aircraft gunners 1077-th anti-aircraft artillery regiment, covering the factory part of Stalingrad from air raids. There were a total of 75 girls in the regiment, 37-mm anti-aircraft guns 61-K and 85-mm anti-aircraft guns 52-K, all 37 guns were in service. It was they who, together with the workers of the Stalingrad Tractor, blocked the way for the broken through German tanks of the 16 Tank Division of Lieutenant General Hube. From 23 to 24 in August 1942, in the area of ​​defense of the 1077 regiment, the 83 tank was destroyed, 15 trucks were destroyed and an infantry battalion was destroyed. But at the same time all the anti-aircraft guns were lost, and most of the anti-aircraft gunners perished. In December, the 1942 anti-aircraft gunners of the 1080 anti-aircraft regiment distinguished themselves. The personnel of the regiment suffered heavy losses, but their 76-mm anti-aircraft guns were firing with fire. 1938 was stopped by German tanks trying to break through the encirclement.

During the Great Patriotic War, anti-aircraft guns were often used to fight the enemy’s armored vehicles, but it must be admitted that this was a necessary measure. The design of anti-aircraft guns at the design stage laid the possibility of firing at ground targets, but it was inexpedient to constantly use expensive and sophisticated tools for firing at ground targets. It was practiced only during the most intense periods of hostilities, when it was required to stop the advance of the enemy at any cost.

To be continued ...

Based on:
http://artilleriya.atwebpages.com/zenitki-protiv-tankov.php
http://eurasian-defence.ru/?q=node/33391
http://www.militaryparitet.com/nomen/russia/arty/barty/zenitnaya/data/ic_nomenrussiaartybartyzenitnaya/4/
Author:
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. alpamys
    alpamys 1 November 2016 15: 04
    +5
    During the Great Patriotic War, anti-aircraft guns were often used to fight the enemy’s armored vehicles, but it must be admitted that this was a necessary measure. The design of anti-aircraft guns at the design stage laid the possibility of firing at ground targets, but it was inexpedient to constantly use expensive and sophisticated tools for firing at ground targets. It was practiced only during the most intense periods of hostilities, when it was required to stop the advance of the enemy at any cost.


    88 precars ground targets
    1. Bongo
      1 November 2016 15: 26
      22
      Quote: alpamys
      88 precars ground targets

      Yes, they only used anti-aircraft guns to fire at ground targets. Like it or not, and anti-aircraft guns are much more expensive than specialized anti-tank and divisional ones. But masking and transporting anti-aircraft guns at the front line is still a pain in the ass.
      1. Proxima
        Proxima 1 November 2016 19: 03
        +7
        [quote = Bongo Like it or not, anti-aircraft guns are much more expensive than specialized anti-tank and divisional ones. And masking and transporting anti-aircraft guns at the front line is still a pain in the neck. [/ Quote]
        Fighting tanks with anti-aircraft guns is tantamount to hammering shoe nails with a sledgehammer. Compared to the anti-aircraft gun, the anti-tank gun has the most important quality - MOBILITY, and it is as needed in the battle against mobile units. But what to do, life will force you to shoot tanks from the catapult.
        1. Alf
          Alf 1 November 2016 19: 30
          +8
          Quote: Proxima
          Compared to the anti-aircraft main gun, the anti-tank gun has MOBILITY,

          The anti-tank gun, in comparison with the anti-aircraft gun, should have another very important characteristic - it should be CHEAP, i.e., consumable.
          1. rjxtufh
            rjxtufh 1 November 2016 21: 23
            +4
            Quote: Alf
            The anti-tank gun, in comparison with the anti-aircraft gun, should have another very important characteristic - it should be CHEAP, i.e., consumable.

            That's about what PaK40 was. Ballistics at the level of anti-aircraft (at least close to the Soviet 76-mm anti-aircraft gun). And the cost is at the level of a cheap division. Not an ersatz wartime, of course. At the level of F-22USV.
          2. Proxima
            Proxima 1 November 2016 21: 34
            +4
            Quote: Alf

            The anti-tank gun, in comparison with the anti-aircraft gun, should have another very important characteristic - it should be CHEAP, i.e., consumable.

            Who would argue.
      2. Ice
        Ice 10 November 2016 00: 18
        0
        But in view of the great efficiency, 88 used it specifically against tanks. Is not it so?
        There were 88 with shields.

        They also had tactics against tanks, not using tanks, but anti-tank weapons.
    2. Stas57
      Stas57 1 November 2016 16: 28
      +3
      88 Germans plugged embrasures back in France
    3. BISMARCK94
      BISMARCK94 1 November 2016 19: 21
      +5
      oh, not from a good life, the Germans used them as VET
    4. Sergey Kuznetsov
      Sergey Kuznetsov 14 September 2020 13: 15
      0
      I want to tell you about a man who played a huge role in the GREAT VICTORY, the history of the country and the city of Korolyov, and was undeservedly forgotten.
      It's about the creator of ALL! Soviet anti-aircraft guns of the Great Patriotic War, both land and sea and the legendary anti-tank gun "forty-five", the chief designer of the plant N8 named after. Kalinin (now NPO "ENERGIA") Loginov Mikhail Nikolaevich. https://max659.livejournal.com/888.html
    5. Sergey Kuznetsov
      Sergey Kuznetsov 14 September 2020 13: 38
      0
      The first year of the war until the end of 1942, the Red Army used against tanks only PTP 53-K "forty-five" and anti-aircraft guns of the Kalinin plant No. 8, chief designer Loginov M.N. Grabinsky F22 1936 (victims of Tukhachevsky's universalism) were few in number and almost all were captured by the Germans in the first days of the war due to their large mass and the lack of tractors during our retreat. Anti-aircraft guns played a major role against aviation and tanks near Moscow, Leningrad, Stalingrad, Sevastopol ... while Grabin was creating his ZISs. They began to enter the troops only in December 1942 https://max659.livejournal.com/888.html
  2. hagrid
    hagrid 1 November 2016 15: 37
    +4
    Quote: Bongo
    Quote: alpamys
    88 precars ground targets

    Yes, they only used anti-aircraft guns to fire at ground targets. Like it or not, and anti-aircraft guns are much more expensive than specialized anti-tank and divisional ones. But masking and transporting anti-aircraft guns at the front line is still a pain in the ass.

    therefore, 88 began to put on a self-propelled chassis
    1. Bongo
      1 November 2016 16: 01
      12
      Quote: Gagrid
      therefore, 88 began to put on a self-propelled chassis

      It seems to me that you are confusing the appointment of ZSU and PT SAU. In addition to the functionality of these machines are distinguished by security and sights. The use of air defense weapons against ground targets is always a necessary measure. What the publication says in plain text.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 1 November 2016 18: 33
        +6
        Quote: Bongo
        It seems to me that you are confusing the appointment of ZSU and PT SAU.

        The Germans with their 8.8cm Flak 18 even had fun not a mouse, not a frog, but an unknown animal - assault self-propelled guns based on a half-track tractor: 8.8cm Flak 18 Sfl.Auf Zugkraftwagen 12t (Sd.Kfz. 8).

        They made a car from a self-propelled anti-aircraft gun, assigned it to anti-tankers (Panzerjager-Abteilung 8), and the bunkers and bunkers of the Maginot Line were designated as targets. Anti-aircraft anti-tank self-propelled guns. smile
        1. Alf
          Alf 1 November 2016 19: 32
          +7
          Quote: Alexey RA
          Anti-aircraft anti-tank self-propelled guns.

          A dream come true ... Tukhachevsky.
  3. Andrewgross
    Andrewgross 1 November 2016 15: 53
    +6
    85 mm anti-aircraft gun under the designation "85 mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1939 (52-K) ”launched into mass production on a simplified carriage (with a four-wheeled cart) 76,2 mm anti-aircraft gun mod. 1938

    Massively captured by the Germans in the early years of the Second World War, after the exhaustion of the stocks of Soviet 85 mm shells, bored out under the German 88mm projectile, received the designation Flak M39 (r) in the Wehrmacht and the unofficial name "Russian klystyr".
    1. Andrewgross
      Andrewgross 1 November 2016 16: 06
      +3
      76-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1931 did not escape this fate either, in the Wehrmacht it was designated Flak M31 (r) and Flak M38 (r). Subsequently, all 76,2 and 85-mm guns were recalibrated to 88-mm so that the same type of ammunition could be used.
      1. Bongo
        1 November 2016 16: 08
        +6

        Quote: Andrewgross
        76-mm anti-aircraft gun arr. 1931 did not escape this fate either, in the Wehrmacht it was designated Flak M31 (r) and Flak M38 (r). Subsequently, all 76,2 and 85-mm guns were recalibrated to 88-mm so that the same type of ammunition could be used.

        Tomorrow should be the 2-th part about Germany.
    2. Monarchist
      Monarchist 1 November 2016 17: 45
      +3
      I read about the use of F22 by the Germans, but about the fact that they used 85mm not zn al.
  4. Amurets
    Amurets 1 November 2016 16: 04
    +5
    Sergei! Okay! I found a lot of new things for myself, but I want to add that in 1932, based on information about the American universal guns of the series and in particular the T-4 gun, a technical assignment was issued for the design of a fully universal A-52 gun to the Krasny Putilovets plant. And the creation of the semi-universal gun GKB-38. It was from this project that the F-92 pshka appeared at Plant No. 22. Sergey, sorry for the clarification, I remembered about this epic only now, when I read your article.
  5. Potter
    Potter 1 November 2016 16: 07
    +1
    For the production of 3-K guns, data are inaccurate. 750 pieces, which are mentioned in the article, are a modification of 1938 on a 4-wheel carriage. In total, more than 6000 3-K guns were made (there is no exact figure at hand now).
    1. rjxtufh
      rjxtufh 1 November 2016 18: 01
      0
      Quote: Potter
      In total, more than 6000 3-K guns were made (there is no exact figure at hand now).

      3821 piece.
  6. hagrid
    hagrid 1 November 2016 16: 08
    +2
    Quote: Bongo
    Quote: Gagrid
    therefore, 88 began to put on a self-propelled chassis

    It seems to me that you are confusing the appointment of ZSU and PT SAU. In addition to the functionality of these machines are distinguished by security and sights. The use of air defense weapons against ground targets is always a necessary measure. What the publication says in plain text.
    my thought was a little about something else - it’s inconvenient to drag anti-aircraft guns along the front lines — so there are sau ptos on the chassis
  7. Ustrushan
    Ustrushan 1 November 2016 16: 13
    +3
    The production of anti-aircraft guns is quite complex and more expensive compared to conventional artillery. Any explosion nearby and the anti-aircraft gun is not suitable for further use. Throwing anti-aircraft guns at tank breakthroughs is equal to cadets of holes at the front by cadets. And perhaps it was only in critical situations.
  8. cannabis
    cannabis 1 November 2016 16: 14
    +1
    Post-war calculations showed that up to 1 shots were spent on the destruction of 11000 aircraft. It would be interesting to compare the cost of an intermediate-range anti-aircraft missile with the cost of 10 shells of various calibers.
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 1 November 2016 16: 27
      +5
      After a shot from a 3-K cannon they said that a pair of leather boots flew away, after a shot from an S-75 air defense system, two missiles - two Volga GAZ M-21 vehicles.
  9. Stas57
    Stas57 1 November 2016 16: 19
    +1
    Despite the apparent viciousness of the concept in 1936,

    at this time depravity was not so obvious.

    since in the warehouses there were huge stocks of 76-mm rounds with the sleeve arr. Xnumx r, which of course was a mistake.

    this is not a mistake, this is poverty

    7,62cm FK 39, became one of the best anti-tank guns of the Wehrmacht, everything was redone over 500 guns. A significant number of these guns were also used to arm the Marder II and Marder III tank destroyers.

    are these exact numbers?
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 1 November 2016 16: 58
      +4
      Quote: Stas57
      this is not a mistake, this is poverty

      That's for sure! When the F-22USV was tested in 1938, according to Grabin’s recollections, shells manufactured in 1916 manufactured in France filed, which had poor-quality shells and jammed shells in the chamber and fused the shutter parts. To extract these sleeves, special wringes were placed in the details of the ejector, which excluded the loading of the gun with a throw.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 1 November 2016 18: 37
        +5
        Quote: Amurets
        That's for sure! When the F-22USV was tested in 1938, according to Grabin’s recollections, shells manufactured in 1916 manufactured in France filed, which had poor-quality shells and jammed shells in the chamber and fused the shutter parts. To extract these sleeves, special wringes were placed in the details of the ejector, which excluded the loading of the gun with a throw.

        Comrade Grabin simplifies. smile
        The shells were not "made in France", but "of the French model" - that is, made according to a simplified wartime technology. That is, they tried to feed the F-22 with the same shells that were lying in large quantities in warehouses and which the industry would most likely start producing again after the start of the war. The result is known - the F-22 failed tests, and Grabin had to completely redo the cartridge case extraction unit in the USV.
  10. potapych
    potapych 1 November 2016 16: 29
    0
    I wonder what will happen next
  11. igordok
    igordok 1 November 2016 16: 39
    +7
    Barrels of anti-aircraft guns as part of the monument to the Unknown Soldier in Pskov.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 1 November 2016 19: 27
      +6
      Perverts.
      Vanguard ... it should be in moderation.
  12. Caretaker
    Caretaker 1 November 2016 17: 31
    +5
    Issued with a shield.
    http://www.dishmodels.ru/picture/wlk/00/00
    611 / w00611_9936030.jpg
    1. Sergey Kuznetsov
      Sergey Kuznetsov 14 September 2020 13: 39
      0
      https://max659.livejournal.com/888.html
  13. Monarchist
    Monarchist 1 November 2016 17: 50
    +5
    My cousin F.I. Degtev told me that near Sevastopol, for 37 days, for several days alone, the Germans did not let the Germans enter the trenches.
  14. rjxtufh
    rjxtufh 1 November 2016 17: 58
    +4
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    and the rate of piston-lock guns was not too high

    Well, who is to blame?
    When the 75 mm French field gun mod. 1897 converted into a Russian three-inch model. 1900 (ie three-inch unit 1), then it was previously "improved". Those. incl. the eccentric valve was replaced with a piston one. From this, the gun became "technological". But nerdy.
    Therefore, I always write, we must be wary of "technological" weapons.
    Piston locks in the USSR on "divisional" three-inches were abandoned only in 1936. on the F-22 cannon. Only 25 years later than the French.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    but the author does not have information about their use in this role

    Near Sevastopol, a battery of such 76-mm anti-aircraft guns was used to fight tanks. This is at least. Because before the Second World War 8-K guns were relatively many, more than 500 pieces.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    and 19 pcs. 76 mm. anti-aircraft guns arr. 1915/28 g

    Yet 18 - 12x55 gauge and 6x50 gauge. These guns were called 9-K.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    A 76-mm armor-piercing projectile 53-BR-350A at a range of 1000 meters normally pierced 60-mm armor.

    The anti-aircraft batteries on the divisional patrons were not equipped with armor-piercing shells. So, only "shrapnel for a blow". And this is already noticeably worse than an armor-piercing shell. Something like an armor-piercing regiment. Those. "zilch".
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    Therefore, it was quite justified to purchase technical documentation for the German 75-mm gun 7,5 cm Flak L / 59 from Rheinmetall

    This gun was never purchased by the USSR, it’s a runet tale. In fact, the German 88-mm FlaK 18 cannon was purchased with a shortened barrel drilled to a caliber of 76,2 mm.
    Then, already in the course of the war, the Germans deployed Soviet 76 and 85-mm anti-aircraft guns in their 88-mm caliber. And used it.
    Of course, with the Rheinmetall 7,5 cm Flak L / 59 cannon they would not have succeeded in such a "trick".
    Actually, the fact that the gun was not actually 76 mm in the USSR was recognized back in 1938. After which Tagunov sharply became an enemy of the people and was shot. But the preparation of the barrel in 1939. for some reason, they drilled it into an 85-mm caliber (assumptions why, mass). That's how the 85-mm caliber appeared in the USSR.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    moreover, with a projectile weight of 6,5 kg

    Shells from field and tank guns weighed 6,5 kg. The anti-aircraft guns weighed 6,61 kg.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    Our anti-tank units on the eve of the war could get an effective anti-tank artillery for ambush operations and pre-prepared firing positions.

    In the initial period of the war, the German tanks were quite satisfied with the "divisional" guns. Provided they have armor-piercing cartridges. But this was not easy.
    76-mm anti-aircraft guns were discontinued in 1939. And the capacities for their production (the plant in Podlipki) were redesigned for the production of 52-K. Since other facilities in the USSR until 1943. was not, then the conversations are empty, there was nowhere to produce them.
    By the way, appreciate the irony of fate. Germany in 1930 sold the USSR factory for the production of long barrels. And until 1943. it was one of 2 similar plants available in the USSR (the second was of a slightly different specialization). Those. if they hadn’t sold, the medium-caliber artillery in the USSR would have been virtually absent.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    F-22 was originally developed for a powerful munition with a bottle-shaped shell

    Hell no. This is so in the USSR "specialists" were able to count the strength of materials. Tagunov (see above) got burnt on exactly the same. Those. on the fact that he could not calculate the trunk. What the Germans gave, he accepted. But it turned out that they didn’t give the one ordered.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    since the warehouses had huge stocks of 76-mm rounds with an arr. 1900 g

    There were no "huge reserves". It is enough to look at the summary of the RKKA shells.
    F-22 was initially made under the NEW divisional STRENGTHENED shot (1,08 kg of gunpowder). And no options. And all that Grabin spun in his memoirs is empty. And everything that is written on this topic in RuNet, too.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    At the same time, designed for a more powerful ballistic F-22 had a large margin of safety, which was later used by the Germans

    It doesn't work that way. Even if a decision is made to use a less powerful cartridge, the design of the product is facilitated. These are just tales of Grabin, who could not calculate the design of the cannon (there is nothing to be done, high professionals + Stakhanov's methods of work). And his gun mod. 1939, by the way, was also not calculated and was squandered by the Germans. Was it also "designed for more powerful ballistics"? But here such an excuse is clearly not rolling.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    F-22, designated 7,62cm FK 39

    That was the name of the UNCONFIGURED gun arr. 1939 The converted guns were called PaK36 (r) and PaK39 (r).
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    In total, more than 500 guns were redone

    560 PaK36 (r) + 310 PaK39 (r) + 201 PaK36 (r) on Marder II + 383 PaK36 (r) on Marder III
    1144 only reworked F-22s. But there were still not redone. But there were still F-22s of the German allies.
    In total, before the war in the Red Army there were 2868 F-22 guns. Due to imperfect equipment, they cost the Soviet people very expensive. And they were actually like gold.
    Quote: Sergey Linnik
    37-mm 61-K anti-aircraft machine, based on the Swedish 40-mm anti-aircraft gun Bofors

    Actually based on a 45 mm 49-K. And now 49-K was made on the basis of Bofors.
    As a result, the 61-K was the same HS as the land Bofors.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 1 November 2016 18: 43
      +3
      Quote: rjxtufh
      There were no "huge reserves". It is enough to look at the summary of the RKKA shells.

      Ammunition stockpiles in the troops and in stocks, including full sets of elements of artillery shots, at the end of 1921 were (pieces):
      - rifle cartridges - 293400000;
      - 76 mm rounds - 5249000;
      - 107 mm rounds - 185000;
      - 122 mm rounds - 221000;
      - 152 mm rounds - 348000.

      In addition, there was a significant number of incomplete elements of shots.

      By the end of the recovery period of the economy (by 1927), the total number of serviceable weapons and ammunition in the army was:
      76 mm shots YES:
      01.10.1924/4852904/XNUMX - XNUMX
      01.04.1927/9286892/XNUMX - XNUMX
      01.01.1929/12399553/XNUMX - XNUMX
      1. rjxtufh
        rjxtufh 1 November 2016 21: 11
        0
        In fact, gun shots are not considered in pieces, but in ammunition.
        To do this, it is enough to know the number of these guns. And the number of shots in the ammunition. And then draw conclusions.
        In addition, the dynamics of growth in stocks of 76-mm ammunition for DA clearly indicates that "the huge stocks left behind after tsarism" is clearly not to do with it.
        At the same time, the data are interesting precisely from the moment the USSR was formed until 1929, because it was then that the Bolsheviks, instead of sending the division into a sludge, began to muddle with its modernization.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 2 November 2016 10: 36
          +1
          Quote: rjxtufh
          In fact, gun shots are not considered in pieces, but in ammunition.

          No problem.
          At the end of 1921: with a BC of 140 shots per barrel, we get that 37492,9 BC were stored in warehouses. Or 13,7 BC per barrel for the 2741 field, mountain, and 76 mm guns in the army.
          On 01.01.1929/88568,2/18,2: we have 4876 BK for divisional guns. Or 76 BC per barrel for the XNUMX XNUMX mm division guns in the army.
          With such ammunition equipment, the choice of the type of shot for the new division is as if obvious. wink
          Quote: rjxtufh
          In addition, the dynamics of growth in stocks of 76-mm ammunition for DA clearly indicates that "the huge stocks left behind after tsarism" is clearly not to do with it.

          Just what. Such a rapid growth of stocks in a country not yet industrialized could occur in only one way - by mastering the old backlog. Of the same a significant number of incomplete elements of shotsinherited by the USSR from the Empire.
          1. rjxtufh
            rjxtufh 2 November 2016 12: 40
            0
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Such a rapid growth of stocks in a country not yet industrialized could occur in only one way - by mastering the old backlog.

            I want to upset you, but there is no "old groundwork" in the USSR in 1924. did not have.
            Actually, as there was no real industrialization in the 30s. This is nothing more than the fables of the Bolsheviks, who have no number.
            Real industrialization in the USSR began only in 1943. And smoothly, on captured technologies, it lasted right there, in the 50s, and even the beginning of the 60s.
            And the purchase of obsolete iron by world standards and its installation in the shops is not industrialization. This is just an increase in machine stock. Outdated machinery. The thing may be interesting, but completely ineffective.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 3 November 2016 11: 58
              +2
              "And buying outdated iron by world standards and installing it in workshops is not industrialization"

              In 1924 there was no industrialization. It was produced in the years 1-2 five-year plans.
              The equipment was bought by the latest in the world from America.
              And in gigantic quantities.
              1. rjxtufh
                rjxtufh 3 November 2016 16: 19
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                In 1924 there was no industrialization.

                The stump is clear.
                Quote: voyaka uh
                It was produced in the years 1-2 five-year plans.

                No, the stump is clear.
                Quote: voyaka uh
                The equipment was bought by the latest

                New (not used) and newest, these are two big differences.
                Quote: voyaka uh
                And in gigantic quantities.

                That is yes. Only a little sense.
  15. Panikovsky
    Panikovsky 1 November 2016 18: 02
    +2
    Dear friends, The Ballad about anti-aircraft gunners Robert Rozhdestvensky, from school, is one of my favorite poems about the Second World War. I recommend reading to everyone.
  16. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 1 November 2016 18: 21
    +5
    Failed as an anti-aircraft, SU-6 could become an excellent anti-tank SPG. For this, the gun needed only to be covered with a light anti-fragmentation cabin. Our anti-tank units on the eve of the war could get an effective anti-tank artillery for ambush operations and pre-prepared firing positions. Moreover, obsolete T-26 tanks in the Red Army were in abundance.

    Why don’t you like anti-tankers ...
    Sea trials for 750 km lasted from June 25 to September 14, 1936 with intervals for engine and chassis repairs, which were heavily overloaded due to the increased mass of the combat vehicle. Testing of the car was also complicated by severe weather conditions, which led to frequent breakdowns of the chassis and the motor-transmission group. So, after a march of 15-25 km at a speed of 25 km / h, a stop was required, since the oil temperature was approaching 105 ° C. In addition, in the process of testing revealed insufficient engine power T-26, which poorly "kept" the weight of the heavy self-propelled guns, low strength rollers of the chassis and suspension springs.
    The system also had poor ground stability. When fired, the SU-6 jumped up to 170 mm when firing with an elevation angle of 0 °, and also rolled back up to 210 mm. With each shot, it was noted that the aiming was up to 15 'at an elevation angle of + 85 °. In addition, the calculation of the SU-6 in the stowed position did not fit completely on the ACS, and the installers of the remote tubes had to go in an escort vehicle.

    And now we are also chopping up on this overloaded chassis ... smile

    Well, the chassis of the Vickers-6 tons does not hold anything larger than the "regiment". Even with the 122-mm howitzer there were already problems.
    1. faiver
      faiver 1 November 2016 19: 38
      +1
      I agree completely, sculpting from t-26 and 3-to sau pto is a meaningless lesson ...
    2. pimen
      pimen 1 November 2016 21: 43
      +2
      Quote: Alexey RA
      And now we are also chopping up on this overloaded chassis ...
      Well, the chassis of the Vickers-6 tons does not hold anything larger than the "regiment". Even with the 122-mm howitzer there were already problems.

      in SU-6 the gun was clearly set too high. The reason, I think, is the layout of the diversity of the engine-transmission compartment (driveshaft). Other problems were resolved.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 2 November 2016 10: 57
        0
        Quote: pimen
        in SU-6 the gun was clearly set too high. The reason, I think, is the layout of the diversity of the engine-transmission compartment (driveshaft).

        The reason is that it is an anti-aircraft gun. If you do not put the barrel with recoil on the pedestal, then with anti-aircraft guns there simply will not be room for a rollback. Yes, and there will be problems with charging.
        Quote: pimen
        Other problems were resolved.

        How? The SU-6 already had a reinforced suspension - elongated by 1 rink. And still she could not stand the march.
        And the most ambush is the engine and transmission. For even a theoretical replacement for the T-26 engine will appear only in 1941. The original Armstrong-Siddle engine is practically the ultimate design. For all the work on forcing it gave an increase in power only by 7 hp.
        Exactly with the same problems as on the self-propelled guns, our engineers encountered an attempt to modernize the conventional T-26s in 1938:
        According to the T-26 modernization program, scheduled for 1937-1938, the engineers had to equip the tank with an engine capacity of 105-107 hp, reinforced suspension, more powerful armor with a thickness of front sheets of 20-22 mm and increased ammunition up to 204 shells and 58 machine gun discs. It was easy to do this only on paper.
        First of all, there were big problems with forcing the T-26 gasoline engine, whose power was clearly insufficient. The considered options for equipping the tank with engines of other types of support were not found, since some of them were not suitable for installation in the T-26, while others had not yet been tested. Work on the modernization of the power plant was completed only in 1938. The second weak point was the suspension of the tank, which passed from the Vickers with minimal changes. At the time of the start of production, it fully withstood the mass of T-26s of the first production series, but after a series of improvements the suspension was clearly overloaded. A new industry could not offer something then and it was necessary to get out of this situation with the help of an interim measure. Having retained the previous suspension design, thicker leaf springs were used in it. This slightly increased the mass, but created a margin of safety.
        1. pimen
          pimen 2 November 2016 12: 21
          0
          Quote: Alexey RA
          The reason is that it is an anti-aircraft gun. If you do not put the barrel with recoil on the pedestal, then with anti-aircraft guns there simply will not be room for a rollback. Yes, and there will be problems with charging.

          quite rightly, the 3-K anti-aircraft gun did not fit this chassis in any way. As an anti-aircraft gun, you could try 61-K. It would not be good either, but in any case, it would be better than t26.
          The problem of a weak chassis (when swinging from a shot) would be solved by a bulldozer blade (two for an anti-aircraft gun). Hydraulics, of course, is unlikely, but a cable drive with fixation of positions on the ground and on the march would help.
          The engine is certainly weak, but the first 3 gears would be enough (at the same time, the load on the suspension would decrease), and the volume of the cooling system and the oil system should be increased
  17. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 1 November 2016 18: 22
    +3
    In the late 20s and early 30s, our military leadership was carried away by the idea of ​​creating a universal artillery system that combines the functions of an anti-aircraft and divisional weapon.

    The alternative was to leave the army with practically no medium-caliber air defense. For the main anti-aircraft weapon of the field troops was ... "a three-inch gun on Ivanov's machine." There were clearly not enough "Lenders" for everyone, and the new 76-mm SZA were produced in homeopathic quantities.

    So they decided to replace this composite ersatz anti-aircraft gun with a new gun.

    F-22 should be compared with this mass field gun on an anti-aircraft machine gun. And not with specialized anti-aircraft guns, the release of which was small.
    1. rjxtufh
      rjxtufh 1 November 2016 21: 42
      +1
      Quote: Alexey RA
      So they decided to replace this composite ersatz anti-aircraft gun with a new gun.

      Incidentally, I consider the idea more than sound. Only a tool for the universal is selected incorrectly. It would be much more correct for these purposes to make the new 122-mm howitzers on a new carriage. With a wedge shutter. During the war they would have been great at helping out front-line troops, who had suffered from German aviation, having absolutely no means to fight back. And so, universal divisional howitzers would be just right. The accuracy of the fire is small, but the charge is powerful.
  18. moskowit
    moskowit 1 November 2016 19: 07
    10
    In the early 60s, the film At Your Threshold was released on the screens of the USSR. The film tells about one of the episodes of the defense of Moscow. The main character of the film is the calculation of the 85 mm anti-aircraft gun. anti-aircraft gun placed in the anti-tank defense. I recommend watching. A worthy movie!
    1. Stas57
      Stas57 1 November 2016 19: 31
      +4
      This is one of the best and most honest films about the war, (with real German tanks by the way)
      alas, no "folk 28" now hold a candle.
    2. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 1 November 2016 23: 10
      +3
      I saw this movie in my childhood. There were strong impressions. By the way, back in the 70-ies in the Orenburg anti-aircraft missile school (before the 60-x it was anti-aircraft artillery) when training cadets they were widely practiced in tank rolling - the cadet had to throw a grenade (training) when approaching the tank, pass it over the trench then throw a second at his MTO
    3. samoletil18
      samoletil18 5 November 2016 23: 46
      0
      Thank. I already forgot about this film. And in childhood I was very impressed.
  19. Comrade Stalin
    Comrade Stalin 1 November 2016 21: 45
    0
    For 1941, the ballistics of the USV was enough to penetrate the armor of German tanks and self-propelled guns. Therefore, I believe that the fact that the 85-mm and 37-mm anti-aircraft guns were used as anti-aircraft guns was, if not sabotage, then at least a mistake. It was not for nothing that in the fall of 1941 the anti-aircraft guns were recalled from the anti-aircraft defense units and transferred back to the air defense. It would be interesting to know what kind of "bright" head came up with the idea to send anti-aircraft guns to the front line as anti-tank guns, while the troops and rear suffered severely from the lack of anti-aircraft artillery as a result of attacks by the Luftwaffe.
    1. Niccola Mack
      Niccola Mack 2 November 2016 08: 13
      +4
      The "forty-five" was enough, bright ideas appeared after the catastrophic losses of boilers 41.
      The Germans also had to engage in "sabotage" and "bright ideas" at the beginning of the war. A weapon from another branch of the army - the Luftwaffe - under the now common name "eight-eight" has become de facto the main means of fighting the T-34 and KV.
      And at the end of the war, the Germans "sabotage" used PaK36 in the defense of Berlin. Soviet tank crews often recorded their hits in the Berlin operation - with almost zero effect.
      In all cases, life made.
      1. rjxtufh
        rjxtufh 2 November 2016 09: 47
        0
        Quote: Nikkola Mac
        A weapon from a different branch of the army - the Luftwaffe - under the now common name "eight-eight" became de facto the main means of fighting the T-34 and KV.

        This has never happened before. And the Germans use of 88-mm anti-aircraft guns on tanks in 1941. was episodic in nature.
        And the main means of combating the T-34 in 1941. were PaK36 and PaK38.
        As for HF, there is only PaK38.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 2 November 2016 11: 01
          +1
          Quote: rjxtufh
          And the main means of combating the T-34 in 1941. were PaK36 and PaK38.
          As for HF, there is only PaK38.

          From the "non-core", the Germans still liked to use 10,5-cm guns in the anti-tank defense system, which were attached to the Kampfgroups. However, when we had such a weapon, it was also quickly focused on fighting tanks.
          1. Niccola Mack
            Niccola Mack 3 November 2016 08: 13
            0
            We should also recall the whole "kaleidoscope" of urgent German alterations of other guns (ours, French, etc.).
            And then finally adequate appeared - PaK40 - which received almost the highest priority in the Reich industry until the end of the war (to the detriment of howitzers and divisional artillery).
            But still the thought did not stop - PaK 43.
            Further 9 ton Pak 44 (10,5 cm hull Cann.18 resting - "only" 5,6 tons)
            And all the same, thoughts periodically appeared throughout the war, otherwise you cannot call a gesture of despair:
            Supersized projectile for Pak 36 (real range 100 m):

            Assault pistol (based on the signal pistol) - "official range" -50-100 m:



            Why would it be so perverted (in the presence of normal anti-tank artillery) - life was forcing.
          2. Niccola Mack
            Niccola Mack 3 November 2016 09: 03
            0
            We should also recall the whole "kaleidoscope" of urgent German alterations of other guns (ours, French, etc.).
            And then finally adequate appeared - PaK40 - which received almost the highest priority in the Reich industry until the end of the war (to the detriment of howitzers and divisional artillery).
            But still the thought did not stop - PaK 43.
            Further 9 ton Pak 44 (10,5 cm hull Cann.18 resting - "only" 5,6 tons)
            And still, the whole war periodically brought up thoughts that you would call a gesture of despair:
            Supersized projectile for Pak 36 (real range 100 m):

            Assault pistol (based on the signal pistol) - "official range" -50-100 m:


            Why would it be so perverted (in the presence of normal anti-tank artillery) - life was forcing.
    2. Stas57
      Stas57 2 November 2016 10: 51
      +1
      No wonder since the fall of 1941, anti-aircraft guns were recalled from anti-aircraft defense units and transferred back to air defense.

      come on!
      Decree of the State Defense Committee No. 735ss of October 5 of October 1941 of the Year On the Formation of 24 VET Regiments armed with 85 mm and 37 mm anti-aircraft guns - to strengthen the anti-tank defense of the army of the Western Front, it was prescribed to form the 4 artillery regiment of the anti-terrorist operation due to the 1 air defense corps, which covered the capital from the air. Each regiment consisted of 8 - 85-mm and 8 - 37-mm anti-aircraft guns, the deadline was set on October 6. In addition, But the 20 artillery regiments of the NTO of the same composition, but with the possibility of replacing the 37-mm anti-tank guns with 45-mm anti-tank guns, were formed in the Moscow Military District by the same decree. The deadline for the first six regiments was set by 8. the next four on the 10 and the remaining ten by the 15 of October.
      To strengthen and support the ground forces in the Leningrad Direction, the 2th Air Defense Corps of the 5 of July 1941 allocated 100 anti-aircraft guns with the best calculations and sent them to anti-tank defense.


      Quote: Comrade_Stalin
      It would be interesting to know which "bright" head came up with the idea to send anti-aircraft guns to the front line as anti-tank guns, while the troops and rear suffered severely from the lack of anti-aircraft artillery as a result of attacks by the Luftwaffe

      Stalin, he was still smarter than his cosplay
      1. Comrade Stalin
        Comrade Stalin 3 November 2016 08: 25
        0
        Read my answer below Alexey RA
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 2 November 2016 11: 09
      +2
      Quote: Comrade_Stalin
      For 1941, the SPM ballistics were enough to penetrate the armor of German tanks and self-propelled guns.

      There was enough ballistics. There was nothing to pierce - the release of the BR-350A NKBP flunked twice. Neither the original plan nor the supplementary one was implemented. As a result, in the documents of the same mechanized corps at the beginning of the war, the BR-350A was not found at all. And the role of BBS was played by USh - "shrapnel for a blow".
      Moreover, the situation with the BR-350A did not improve even in 1942. For example, the report "The defeat of the armor of German tanks" (July 1942, NII-48) begins with the phrase:
      In view of the lack of the required number of kamor armor-piercing shells in artillery units, the shooting of German tanks from 76,2-mm divisional guns with projectiles of other types is common ...

      Quote: Comrade_Stalin
      It would be interesting to know what kind of "bright" head came up with the idea to send anti-aircraft guns to the front line as anti-tank guns, while the troops and rear suffered severely from the lack of anti-aircraft artillery as a result of attacks by the Luftwaffe.

      That bright head, who understood that in the air defense of SZA without standard anti-aircraft fire control devices, it was a pile of metal, suitable only to frighten a raven.
      As the uv. M. Svirin, those anti-aircraft guns for which there was no POISO were transferred to the VET. For the release of guns blocked the release of instruments.
      1. Comrade Stalin
        Comrade Stalin 3 November 2016 08: 24
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        That bright head, who understood that in the air defense of SZA without standard anti-aircraft fire control devices, it was a pile of metal, suitable only to frighten a raven.
        As the uv. M. Svirin, those anti-aircraft guns for which there was no POISO were transferred to the VET. For the release of guns blocked the release of instruments.

        Have you tried to compare the cost of a 45 mm gun weighing 560 kg and the cost of a 37 mm gun with a much more complex automatic loading mechanism and a weight of 2100? And compare the mobility of a 560-kg gun and a gun weighing 2100 kg. If for a 45-ki a half and a half or even a GAZ-67 was enough, then for a 61-K at least a three-ton was needed. And then try to roll this bandura with a weight of more than two tons when changing positions, if even for the 76 mm division the weight limit was set to 1500 kg, because with more weight, the calculation could no longer manually change the position for the gun. And then, with a 37-mm gun, the fragmentation shell weighed three times lighter than the 45-mm fragmentation shell with approximately equal armor penetration by the armor-piercing projectile in both guns. Wouldn't it be smarter, since there were no sights, to send these anti-aircraft guns to the reserve, as they sent 203 mm howitzers, 152 mm guns and 280 mm mortars, which were simply not needed in the conditions of a constant retreat. But since 1943 they were returned to the front and began to be used in the destruction of the enemy fortified areas during the offensive. It was also necessary to send the 37-mm anti-aircraft guns to the reserve, to issue sights and, as far as equipping them with POISO, to send to the air defense units.
  20. Kostya Andreev
    Kostya Andreev 1 November 2016 23: 12
    +4
    Quote: Comrade_Stalin
    It would be interesting to know which "bright" head came up with the idea to send anti-aircraft guns to the front line as anti-tank guns, while the troops and rear suffered severely from the lack of anti-aircraft artillery as a result of attacks by the Luftwaffe


    Maybe your namesake?
  21. BAI
    BAI 2 November 2016 15: 32
    +1
    The most famous example of the use of anti-aircraft guns against a tank (our 85 mm anti-aircraft gun against the "Tiger") is the epic "Liberation".
  22. tundra
    tundra 2 November 2016 18: 41
    +1
    37 mm In my opinion, in the mid-70s they were in service,
    we have partisans called for retraining.
    In the square in front of the stadium, several
    we ran away from lessons and when they had a smoke break we were allowed
    these guns, twist, twirl, I remember everything on the windows of the English cab pointed for a deuce.
  23. tundra
    tundra 2 November 2016 18: 46
    +1
    [/ quote] And during class, we sat next to and listened,
    the partisans were always drunk, and we easily memorized and answered all the technical characteristics.
    The officers set us as an example,
    and the older guys from the 10th grade somehow faster than the partisans deployed it from marching to a fighting position laughing
    1. Niccola Mack
      Niccola Mack 3 November 2016 08: 26
      +2
      We did not call them "partisans".
      From someone's light hand the name "Maputo" or "Maputovtsy" stuck.
      And I must say for good reason - often the level corresponded to the African natives.
  24. Gorjelin
    Gorjelin 4 November 2016 19: 54
    0
    My grandfather was an anti-aircraft art commander. calculation at the Battle of Kursk, he said that they shot at tanks, and anti-aircraft guns from the advancing tanks were delayed by trucks, stopped firing, and again delayed.
    1. Sergey Kuznetsov
      Sergey Kuznetsov 14 September 2020 13: 40
      0
      https://max659.livejournal.com/888.html
  25. zombirusrev
    zombirusrev 29 November 2016 00: 03
    +1
    Does a citizen have arithmetic or memory? "At an initial speed of 800 m / s, the 53-UBR-365K armor-piercing projectile, which weighed 9,2 kg, penetrated 1000 mm armor along the normal at a distance of 100 meters. At a distance of 500 meters, the armor-piercing projectile was quite in the" teeth "of the frontal armor . The maximum rate of fire of the gun reached 20 rds / min. "(C) Did the tiger have a frontal armor of 100mm, or were the devices that create a protective field like George Lucas mounted in the tiger?
    1. The comment was deleted.
  26. Sergey Kuznetsov
    Sergey Kuznetsov 14 September 2020 13: 14
    0
    I want to tell you about a man who played a huge role in the GREAT VICTORY, the history of the country and the city of Korolyov, and was undeservedly forgotten.
    It's about the creator of ALL! Soviet anti-aircraft guns of the Great Patriotic War, both land and sea and the legendary anti-tank gun "forty-five", the chief designer of the plant N8 named after. Kalinin (now NPO "ENERGIA") Loginov Mikhail Nikolaevich. https://max659.livejournal.com/888.html
  27. Sergey Kuznetsov
    Sergey Kuznetsov 14 September 2020 13: 43
    0
    On the day of the 75th anniversary of the end of World War II, 03.09.2020 at 11.00, at the Federal Military Memorial Cemetery of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, with the participation of the Preobrazhensky Regiment, the reburial ceremony of Mikhail Nikolayevich Loginov, a designer of artillery and anti-aircraft weapons, took place. Under the leadership of M.N. Loginov All the anti-aircraft artillery that participated in the Great Patriotic War and the legendary 45-mm anti-tank gun "forty-five" were created. Among his developments are the first Soviet anti-aircraft machine gun 37-mm cannon, 85-mm anti-aircraft cannon, as well as a series of anti-aircraft artillery for ground forces, sea cannons and turrets for ships of various classes.
    Loginov M.N. was one of the initiators of giving the village Kalininsky the status of a city and giving it the name of M.I. Kalinina - Kaliningrad.
    The ceremony was held with the participation of representatives of the Ministry of Defense, the Department of Culture, district administrations, representatives of the country's central historical museums and the media.
    http://redstar.ru/pamyat-o-velikom-cheloveke/
    https://tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/202094032-26pPC.html
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yn_A-L8rkuc
    https://yadi.sk/i/xJyUjWGxbF7W9Q
    https://max659.livejournal.com/888.html