Military Review

LT-35 and LT-38: two Czech twin tanks

46
Amazing things happen sometimes in the world of military technology. A small country makes a contribution to its development, incomparable with its size. Here is the Czech Republic too ... A country in the center of Europe, but very small. And nevertheless, rifles were created by its designers-gunsmiths, and pistols, and cannons, and which ones ... The entire Austro-Hungarian army and navy were armed with Skoda guns and which ones - up to a caliber of 420-mm, and mortars did up to 500 mm. And in the interval between the two world wars, the Czech Republic not only became a member of the world tank club, but also took a very decent and worthy place in it. So worthy that its products tank factories did not disdain the German Wehrmacht, and she fought until 1945. Well, on the eve of World War II, it was Czechoslovakia that was the most important exporter of tanks in Europe. After all, tanks belonging to the Skoda and CKD firms went to Austria and Bulgaria, were supplied to Hungary, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and even to Iran and Peru. And yes, indeed, these firms were able to organize the release of two samples, which left a noticeable mark among all other machines of the same class and era - that is, the LT-35 and LT-38 tanks. But this is not enough. When Germany occupied Czechoslovakia, these vehicles continued to be produced under the German designations Pz-Kpfw. 35 (t) and Pz-Kpfw. 38 (t), or 35 and 38 (t), where “t” meant “Czech”. A large number of these tanks were also transferred and sold to satellites in Germany, or were used as the basis for completely new vehicles.



Museum in Banska Bystrica, tank LT-38.

Well, the story about these two tanks should be started with a reminder that in Czechoslovakia during the 30-i period two companies were engaged in the release of armored vehicles: ČKD and Skoda. The Škoda company in 1859 was founded by Emil Ritter von Skoda - hence its name. Factories of this company were located in Pilsen, and production weapons It was launched in 1890. The Škoda cannons at the end of World War I were supplied to many countries of the world. Then the company acquired automobile plants "Laurin and Clement" and at "Skoda" they thought not only about the production of cars, but also about armored vehicles. Although the matter was complicated by the fact that a company already existed in the country that produced armored cars - the Tatra. Another reason is the success of competitors from the company ČKD, whose plants were located in Prague. However, the company ČKD Armed never was, although it produced army trucks and even tracked artillery tractors. That is why, when the military began to select a manufacturer for the Cardin-Lloyd wedges purchased in England, their choice fell precisely to CKD, because it had already produced cars on tracks. True, tankettes, issued under the designation vz.33 (Р — 1), did not hold out for long in production. All we did was 70 machines and in 1933 I stopped there.


LT-35 at the Aberdeen Proving Ground of the USA. Noteworthy carefully executed camouflage coloring.

However, it turned out to be a profitable business for the company to produce combat vehicles, and in 1934, CKD, on its own initiative, offered the army a light tank of its own design with weapons from the Skoda 37-mm cannon and two machine guns. The tank was adopted under the designation LT.vz.34 (light tank of the 34 model), and was produced in the number of 50 machines.

Skoda, of course, did not want to give in to the competitor, because it also had some experience in these matters - two self-propelled self-propelled guns built for the needs of anti-tank and anti-aircraft defense. In the same year she proposed the military and the medium tank SU, but they rejected it. By the way, one of the reasons was that CKD immediately displayed an improved sample of LT.vz.34.

Skoda responded with an S-N tank (S is Skoda, II is a light tank, and a cavalry model), and the military liked it more than the CKD tank. At first, both tanks in the form of wooden models of the company were presented to the commission in October 1934, S — II — and received approval, in June 1935, its prototype went to the tests. Well, as soon as the tests were completed, in October 1935, the company was given an order immediately for this type of 160 tanks. So CKD lost its monopoly on the production of tanks in Czechoslovakia. Well, the S — II — a, which was given the designation LT-35, was produced not only for the needs of its own country, but also exported abroad. Then Škoda proposed a model of the S-III medium tank, and a number of successive modifications - T-21, T-22 and T-23.
Interestingly, the competition did not prevent firms from agreeing on joint production of the new LT-35 tank, and the number of machines ordered was distributed almost equally.

Nevertheless, CKD continued to work on new tanks, which resulted in the wedge AH-IV and light tank TNH. AH-IV was mainly interested in customers abroad, while TNH attracted the Czechoslovak military. Tests of the car went well, July 1 1938, the tank was put into service under the symbol LT-38. In total, 150 ordered such tanks, with the first 20 required by the end of 1938, and all other 130 - in 1939, by the end of May. Moreover, the company also had to master the medium tank V-8-H or ST-39, which should have been released in the number of 300 machines. They didn’t manage to make it, it ended up at the level of the prototype, since Czechoslovakia was annexed. But so far this has not happened LT-35 and LT-38, and besides them, their numerous modifications, and various intermediate samples began to be exported abroad. Immediately, two types of tanks were ordered by Romania: CKD AH-IV * (* Romanian designation R - 1) and Skoda LT-35 - R-2. And the Romanians needed 126 tanks, some of which made the Skoda, and some were made directly in Romania under an acquired license. In 1942, Romania acquired 26 35 (t) tanks, but already from Germany. The following 50 tanks 38 (t) were delivered to them by the Germans in March 1943, because they lost a lot of tanks near Stalingrad. The Romanians converted the 21 tank into self-propelled guns with captured guns F - 22 SPM and ZIS-Z. Until June, 1944 was made around 20 of these installations, called TASAM R-2. At the beginning of 1940, the Romanians wanted to buy X-NUMX T-200 tanks from Skoda, but this contract was never signed.

LT-35 and LT-38: two Czech twin tanks

German PzKpfw.38 (t) Ausf.A in the exposition of the tank museum in Munster.

Then the Czech tanks received ... Slovakia. Prior to the Munich Agreement, the 3 “fast division” of the Czechoslovak army was stationed here, armed with which were 79 LT-35 tanks. Now, on its basis, national Slovak armored units were created. Then Slovakia bought from the Germans an additional 32 tank 38 (t), and the 21 tank LT-40 (lightweight, "export" version, prepared to be sent to Lithuania) to the Slovaks was transferred as military aid.

On 22 June 1941, the army of Slovakia included X-NUMX tanks LT-114, LT-35 and LT-38. The heavy losses in the tanks on the Soviet-German front forced the Slovaks to purchase from the German side still 40 tanks manufactured by CKD, and, of course, the tanks were directly German-made.


German PzKpfw.38 (t) in the museum in Togliatti. As they say, feel the difference. Well ... well, at least something done!

Many tanks were put in very remote and, one might even say, in exotic countries. For example, in 1935, the TNH 50 tanks went to Iran, and at the end of 1938, the 24 LT-38 (one of the LTP modifications) was bought by the Republic of Peru. For Iran, all these tanks were of such significant value that they were in service with his army up to the 1957 year! But Peruvian tanks carried the service much longer: two such tanks participated in certain events of 1988, well, obviously, some kind of regular local pronunciamento. These LTPs differed from the actual Czech tanks in weapons similar to LT-35.

The LTL 21 tank, armed with a 20-mm Oerlikon automatic cannon, was to be exported to Lithuania. They did not reach the Lithuanians, and then they were equipped with 37-mm cannons, and they turned into the very same LT-40 tanks that the Germans then decided to sell to allied Slovakia. And the same tank, but the LTH brand and with the gun "Oerlikon" was delivered to Switzerland (24 machines), where it was designated as Pz.39.

Finally on the 92 tank TNH SV with delivery in 1939 — 40. made an order Sweden. It is clear that with the start of the war the contract was broken, but the Germans did not dare to quarrel with neutral Swedes and the two prototype tanks, together with the license for their release, were nevertheless transferred to Sweden. And the Swedes created on their basis an impressive tank fleet, separate tanks from which they served until ... 1970 of the year!


Tank Museum in Thun, Switzerland. Prototype SAU on LTH chassis arr. 1943

Another country in the East that ordered Czech tanks in 1938 for the year was Afghanistan, which needed 10 Shkodov tanks. It is clear that these tanks did not get there, but they got ... to Bulgaria, which received 26 LT-35 in 1940, and wished to order more. Here she was "Afghan" tanks and gave. These LT-35 were distinguished by the fact that they were equipped with an X-NUMX-mm A-37 cannon, which was armed with LT-8 tanks. And in Bulgaria, they served for so long that in 38, the company Skoda supplied spare parts for them from the old stock.


Tanks "Bulgarian supply". Photos of the war years.

Yugoslavia ordered a prototype of the T-12-S-II-A tank, but only with a diesel engine and a 47-mm caliber cannon. The Yugoslavs counted on 120 such tanks, but the war destroyed this plan.

To be continued ...
Author:
46 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mikado
    Mikado 21 December 2016 15: 13
    +2
    the Hungarians also made their main tank "Turan" on the basis of some Czech vehicle. They also had their own entertaining line of equipment.
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 21 December 2016 16: 25
      +2
      They took the prototype LT-35.
      1. Mikado
        Mikado 21 December 2016 16: 29
        +1
        they then began to produce self-propelled guns there, they were aiming at a heavy tank. In general, a distinctive technique, but by the standards of the second half of the war, in which the Tigers, T-34-85 and IS are fighting, which appeared too late and is already outdated. Also an interesting topic for an article.
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 21 December 2016 16: 51
          +2
          The swing was on the RUBLE - but a blow for a penny! Light "TOLDI" armed with 20 mm gun "ZOLOTURN", "medium" "TURANS" at first 47 mm, then short-barreled 75 mm (when everyone was already switching to long barrels)! And the number of cars produced was not large:
          43M "Zrinyi II" - 66 units in total.
          40M "Turan I" - 285 tanks
          41 M "Turan II" - 139 tanks
          38M Toldi - 199 tanks
          BA 39M Csaba - the basic model of 105 units.
          BA 40M Csaba is a commander’s version equipped with three radio stations and a loop antenna. Armament consisted of one 8-mm machine gun. 30 units issued.
  2. hohol95
    hohol95 21 December 2016 16: 28
    +5
    In February 1934, Skoda presented the military leadership of the country with a mock-up of a light SU tank, and in the spring made its prototype. A tank with a crew of 3 people had a mass of 7,5 tons and armor protection from 8 to 15 mm. Its armament consisted of a 47-mm cannon and two 7,92-mm machine guns. The tank could reach speeds of up to 30 km / h, and the range was 150 km. At the end of the tests, it was decided not to produce the SU tank in series, especially since by this time Skoda had developed an improved S-II-a model (S - Skoda, II - a light tank designed for cavalry). Compared to SU, the new combat vehicle had a thickness up to 25 mm of the frontal armor of the hull and turret.
    In turn, the CKD plant, not wanting to stay away from the race for the military order, proposed a competitive project - R-II-a and in October 1934 presented the military with its layout. The latter, in essence, was a modernized tank LT vz.34, already adopted by the Czechoslovak army and put into serial production (50 vehicles manufactured).
    However, the military preferred the S-II-a and issued an order to Skoda for 160 tanks. And then a scandal broke out! The ČKD firm accused the Pilsen concern of rigging the test results in order to push its structure. In order to resolve this dispute (and at the same time remove the charges from itself - after all, someone “turned a blind eye” to the fraud), the Czechoslovak Ministry of Defense decided that the S-11-a tank, which had already received by that time the army designation LT vz.35 (LT - lehky tank, light tank; vz. 35 - model 1935) will be produced at the factories of both firms. This truly “Solomon decision” really resolved the dispute. However, the military did not suspect that the scandal was nothing more than a staging, because between the two firms there was a secret agreement on mutual assistance in the production of weapons. In terms of tanks, this meant that their production volumes at both firms should be equal. Therefore, the first order was divided in a ratio of 80 + 80. The next series of 35 vehicles was not evenly divided, so 17 tanks were manufactured by CKD and 18 Skoda.
  3. svp67
    svp67 21 December 2016 16: 44
    +4
    I do not agree with the author
    LT-35 and LT-38: two Czech twin tanks

    Brothers - YES, but twins - DO NOT THINK ...
    LT-35

    LT-38
    1. hohol95
      hohol95 21 December 2016 16: 55
      +2
      They have the same bolts and nuts! Czech!
      1. svp67
        svp67 21 December 2016 16: 58
        0
        Quote: hohol95
        They have the same bolts and nuts! Czech!

        And the rivets ...
        1. hohol95
          hohol95 21 December 2016 17: 08
          +1
          And rivets! drinks
          1. svp67
            svp67 21 December 2016 17: 13
            0
            Quote: hohol95
            And rivets! drinks

            The boom is sound ... drinks
  4. iouris
    iouris 21 December 2016 16: 57
    +5
    What does "small country" mean? It all depends on the concentration of intelligence, qualifications and culture of people. Former Czechoslovakia is the largest industrial center of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire, one of the most developed states in Europe before the start of the First World War. Without the annexation of Czechoslovakia, Hitler would not have had time to prepare for the capture of Europe in 1939-1940.
    1. Mikado
      Mikado 21 December 2016 17: 05
      +3
      moreover, before Nuremberg, one of the German leaders said the phrase that if Czechoslovakia had decided to defend itself in 38, the Germans would not have had enough strength to fight it. That is, the Munich Agreement is "more than a crime. It is a mistake."
      1. Talgat
        Talgat 21 December 2016 17: 28
        +5
        I completely agree. that the Czech Republic it was almost Germany - a powerful industrial cluster, etc.

        And if not for Munich, then the Czech Republic could have fought with Germany

        about the error - I do not know. I don’t think there were mistakes. I think there was a purposeful plan against Eurasia - to unite Europe and the same Czechs under the leadership of Germany (and does the European Union really look like this?) And throw all of Europe at us in 1941

        Just like in 1812 or 1612 or under Nevsky or like Rome and Attila, etc., etc.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 21 December 2016 18: 06
          +1
          Quote: Talgat
          about the error - I do not know. I don’t think there were mistakes. I think there was a purposeful plan against Eurasia - to unite Europe and the same Czechs under the leadership of Germany (and does the European Union really look like this?) And throw all of Europe at us in 1941

          Rather, the plan was different - to weaken the economy of Europe and break up the British colonial empire by unleashing another war in Europe. And according to its results - to crush both the defeated, and the winners (who have collected loans) and the markets of the former colonies for themselves. smile
          The purposeful cultivation of the Reich against the USSR is unlikely - for the same French were well aware that they would become the first serious goal of German revanchism: Germany would traditionally come for Alsace and Lorraine.
          In short, everything happened just like that (and just then), as predicted by the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces in France. smile
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 21 December 2016 17: 32
        +2
        Quote: Mikado
        moreover, before Nuremberg, one of the German leaders said the phrase that if Czechoslovakia had decided to defend itself in 38, the Germans would not have had enough strength to fight it. That is, the Munich Agreement is "more than a crime. It is a mistake."

        Hehehehe ... these figures said the same thing about earlier episodes - about the same remilitarization of the Rhine region: if the French and the British then at least indicated their readiness to defend the inviolability of the provisions of the Treaty of Versailles by military means, the Reich would go to backward.
        1. Mikado
          Mikado 21 December 2016 17: 47
          +2
          Anglo-French leaders directly paved the path for Hitler - "Please, go through!"
          Dear Talgat: I don’t know about a united Europe against the USSR. I somehow dislike conspiracy theories, sorry hi . Everything can be explained by a cunning plan, but real simplicity, spinelessness and idiocy of politicians can sometimes be worse.
          1. kalibr
            21 December 2016 19: 13
            +1
            What a war of a united Europe against the USSR - people are already obsessed with conspiracy theories. Hitler specially sent a number of sociological professors, disguised as refugees, to find out which of the European countries is ready for war (psychologically). In France, it turned out that the country is MORALLY NOT READY to fight! Will be easily broken! The soldier and ... (a bad word) are synonyms in society, officers are losers. All hope for the "Maginot Line". Information came from England that it would be very difficult to defeat the British, they would desperately defend their island. A very interesting answer came from the United States that they are not as mercantile as they are pushing. The spirit of the pioneers is alive and they approach everything scientifically. As a result, they will lose all battles, and they will win the war! Hitler did not send anyone to the USSR - they say I know everything! So everything happened just not according to plan, contrary to all plans. Moreover, Hitler lost the war in the 39th only did not know about it ...!
            1. Mikado
              Mikado 22 December 2016 09: 35
              +1
              to your words about the spirit of the French army. As far as I remember, in France after WWI there were trends in philosophy, something like "depressive pacifism" (as the name is, I don’t remember, they read it to me at school) - like, they were full of WWI. Sartre, drafted into the army, which the Germans corrupted on the other side with leaflets, radio, and even by scattering soccer balls over the French positions, wrote something like: "How can you fight against such wonderful people!"
              Isaev did in some book an analysis of the capture of Eben-Emael - half of the soldiers from the reserve (and half of the personnel are missing), morale is low, trained somehow, the service rushes through the fifth point, cartridges in zinc. The same "June 22" (or Pearl Harbor), only with a Belgian flavor, and with a lower fighting spirit. History has no subjunctive mood, but if they had prepared for the war in a different way, the German arrogance might not have passed.
      3. Anatole Klim
        Anatole Klim 21 December 2016 19: 30
        +2
        Quote: Mikado
        if Czechoslovakia in the 38th decided to defend itself, the Germans would not have had the strength to war with it

        They had everything, and tanks, and airplanes, and artillery, such as Captain Pavlik was alone, and even that was betrayed, he lasted with his company for half an hour, ordered - surrendered.
        1. Mikado
          Mikado 22 December 2016 09: 23
          +1
          truly a good man was. Even the Germans respected him — precisely the regiment whose soldiers he had put in this battle.
      4. Warrior Hamilton
        Warrior Hamilton 4 July 2017 06: 26
        +1
        Former Chief of Staff of the Hitler Armed Forces, Field Marshal Keitel said in this process: “During the period of Munich, Germany was not prepared for the armed conflict. If in March 1938 the Allies allowed the Czechoslovak Republic to carry out mobilization, Hitler could not even occupy Austria ... ”The Czech-Slovaks had 2 million reservists and a perfect mobilization system. Having 23% ethnic Germans as part of its population, being "real Europeans" they pragmatically decided to feed Hitler. So: "we did without victims" ......
        1. Warrior Hamilton
          Warrior Hamilton 4 July 2017 06: 42
          +1
          In 1938, Czechoslovakia had 45 divisions; she had 2 million trained soldiers. All the armed forces of Nazi Germany at that time consisted of 35 infantry, 5 tank, 4 motorized, 4 light, 3 mountain infantry divisions and 1 cavalry brigade. The total number of the fascist Wehrmacht was 2 million 200 thousand people.
          1. Warrior Hamilton
            Warrior Hamilton 4 July 2017 06: 44
            +1
            The share of Czechoslovakia in the world market for the sale of weapons and ammunition at that time was 40 percent. 10 large defense plants could monthly supply 1600 easel and 3000 machine guns, 130 thousand rifles, 7000 grenade launchers, 200 guns and hundreds of tanks and aircraft. In September 1938, Czechoslovakia had weapons and equipment for 50 divisions.
            1. Mikado
              Mikado 4 July 2017 08: 42
              +1
              that is, paradoxical stupidity. Anyone who thinks of avoiding war will receive both shame and war. The Czechs had enough machine guns to understaff the Germans. Even now, in our new films, no, no, and you can see the Czech machine gun in the hands of the "Germans".
  5. hohol95
    hohol95 21 December 2016 16: 58
    +2
    Romanian R-1.
  6. alatanas
    alatanas 21 December 2016 18: 17
    +4

    With Bulgarian Tsar Boris III in the tower hatch - 1941 maneuvers
    1. alatanas
      alatanas 21 December 2016 18: 22
      +1

      Bulgarian - maneuvers w 1942
      1. hohol95
        hohol95 21 December 2016 19: 47
        +2
        You did not use them in partisans in Yugoslavia?
        1. alatanas
          alatanas 22 December 2016 00: 59
          +2
          No, there was an occupation building on the Bulgarian lands (under the San Stefan Treaty).
          The so-called Western outskirts, where there is an internationally recognized Bulgarian population (Bosilegrad, Tsaribrod), Nis region. Pomoravie, and Macedonia, which was then "Southern Serbia). Part of these territories the Germans consider their own, but placed under the Bulgarian administration. Tanks were in the German division" Prince Eugen ", later (after 1944), defeated by the Bulgarian troops in the composition of 3- XNUMXst front of General Tolbukhin.
          1. alatanas
            alatanas 22 December 2016 01: 10
            +1
            Against the partisans used, according to my information, captured German Renault tanks (about 10 pieces), stationed in the area of ​​Vranya
        2. alatanas
          alatanas 22 December 2016 01: 34
          +1

          http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=bg
          & tl = en & u = http% 3A% 2F% 2Fmilitero.wordpress.com% 2F
  7. Comrade Stalin
    Comrade Stalin 21 December 2016 20: 28
    +3
    The Czechs were slaves to the Germans for a thousand years. What resistance do you write about Czechoslovakia Germany? This is ridiculous.
    1. unknown
      unknown 22 December 2016 10: 06
      +1
      Good joke.
      But even the so-called Koenigsberg was founded by the Czech king as Krolevets.
      The question is, where at that time were the so-called Germans and Poles?
      In addition, Prague is one of the few cities in Europe that bears the features of a capital city. The capitals of the empire. Empire.
      1. Comrade Stalin
        Comrade Stalin 22 December 2016 15: 51
        0
        Yeah, the Czech king. Therefore, probably the name is purely from the Czech words "kening" and "berg" fellow .
        Prague is the capital of the empire? !!! You apparently decided to become the second Nosovsky or Fomenko?
        1. acrshooter
          acrshooter 23 December 2016 05: 08
          +3
          “Königsberg was founded on a hill on the high right bank in the lower reaches of the Pregel River on the site of the Prussian settlement Twangste (Twangste) in January 1255 as a castle by the knights of the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order Poppo von Ostern and the Czech king Przemysl Otakar II, whose troops came to the aid of the defeated from the local population to knights, who, in turn, were invited to Prussia by the Polish king to fight the pagans.
          Initially, the castle was wooden, but in 1257 construction began on a stone, or rather, a brick castle. ”
          “The core of the city was the castle, which, when founded in 1255, was called the Royal Mountain (in Latin Regiomontium, later Regiomonti, in German Königsberg). According to the most common version, it is named after the King of the Czech Republic Przemysl Otakar II (with the decisive help of which it was founded). However, there are other interpretations of the toponym, for example, from the Prussian toponym of Gothic origin Konungaberg, where kuniggs is the head of the clan (prince), berg is Breg, shore.
          From the moment the castle was founded, neighboring peoples usually called it in their own languages: lit. Karaliaučius, Polish Królewiec (Krulevec) (Old Polish Kralowgród - Royal Castle), Czech. Královec (Kralovec). Under the name Korolevts (Korolevts) or Korolevits the castle and the area around it for a long time, starting from the 1946th century, is also mentioned in various Russian sources: chronicles, books, atlases. In Russia, this name was widely used before Peter I and, occasionally, in a later period, up to the beginning of the XNUMXth century, including in fiction, for example, in the texts of M. Saltykov-Shchedrin. However, after Peter I and before renaming in XNUMX, Russians more often used the German version.
          Until 1721, only the castle officially had the name Königsberg, although long before that, in everyday life, the population had united three adjacent cities under this name. ”
          Source: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Königsberg
        2. unknown
          unknown 23 December 2016 08: 57
          0
          Nosovsky and Fomenko are still flowers.
          Unfortunately, traditional history is completely crumbling.
          For example, where did silver come from in the Ancient World, if mines are only in Spain, and their development began no earlier than the 16th century?
  8. Barakuda
    Barakuda 21 December 2016 22: 33
    +1
    Feel the difference yourself - BT-7. Although it was probably hit. but inspires confidence. Not "hung" with archaic rivets. I also drove around the Japanese in the 45th.
    1. Roma 1977
      Roma 1977 22 December 2016 00: 13
      +3
      Not so simple. Despite the apparent "advancedness" of the BT-7 in real battles in 1941, it was seriously inferior to the LT38. The LT38 did better with observation instruments and radio communications. In addition, the Soviet 45-mm tank cannon did not actually penetrate the frontal armor of this tank (with the exception of point-blank shooting), but the LT-38 cannon penetrated the BT from any angle right through.
      1. Timeout
        Timeout 23 December 2016 16: 04
        0
        Quote: Roma-1977
        Soviet tank 45 mm cannon did not actually penetrate the frontal armor of this tank

        Dear, the Soviet 20K installed on all tanks of those years, had a BR-240SP shell which pierced 35 mm thick armor normally. from a distance of 1000 meters.
        The maximum thickness of the Czech armor is 25 mm. Of course, the Germans increased the thickness of the armor to 50 mm, but against the sub-caliber it still did not save.
        1. Roma 1977
          Roma 1977 29 December 2016 22: 29
          0
          As far as I know, the 45 mm Soviet-fired caliber projectile shells showed relative inefficiency in 1941 due to a massive violation of production technology. And the sub-caliber ones were a terrible shortage.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 22 December 2016 10: 26
      +4
      Quote: Barracuda
      Although it was probably hit. but inspires confidence. Not "hung" with archaic rivets. I also drove around the Japanese in the 45th.

      BT case is really beautiful. The main thing is not to look inside. smile For there stands, for example, a simplified three-speed gearbox - the plant could not make a reliable four-speed for a new engine. As a result, despite the superiority in maximum speed, the BT technical speed was even inferior to the T-26. sad
      And BT-7 also has a "thing in itself" - a wheel drive, which is, but you cannot use it.
      The teachings of the summer-autumn of 1936 showed that the chassis of this wheeled-caterpillar tank was overloaded, and therefore the rubber bandages of the track rollers often failed when driving on wheels. But it was not so bad. It also turned out that after a run of 300-400 kilometers in almost all BT-7 tanks, due to the excess of the torque of the M-17 engine compared to the M-5 by a quarter, gearboxes began to fail.

      As for the "Czech", the Sh-2 (LT-35) tank was considered by our GABTU as one of the possible founders of the new LT family to replace the T-26.
  9. Sasha75
    Sasha75 22 December 2016 03: 37
    +1
    There is a book, I fought on the Tigris; they describe the moment about these tanks; an interesting look from users; even the two who praised and argued that without these tanks they wouldn’t get to Moscow; I advise you to read and, as always, divide everything by 4, or even at 10. They lie like eyewitnesses))). Here is a small passage.
    In the Czech tank, only two types of shells were used: armor-piercing and high-explosive fragmentation. We usually had 50 to 50. Each crew decided for itself how many shells to take. It mostly depended on the commander.
    - How good was the Pz-38 (t) for the war in Russia?
    “Not at all.” The crew of this tank consisted of four people. The commander must lead, shoot and observe. For one commander, this is too much. And if he is also a platoon or company commander, this is almost impossible, because everyone has only one head. The Czech tank is only good for marches. The lower part, to the waist, he is very successful. Semi-automatic planetary gears, strong chassis. Wonderful! But just to ride!
    Steel was also bad. The 3,7 cm gun against the T-34 is too weak.
    If then the Russians were not at the stage of rearmament, and the T-34 would have appeared a little earlier and if they had been correctly managed, the war would have ended in 1941, and at the latest - in the winter.
    - Do you remember the first battle with the T-34? Did you examine him after the fight, climbed in?
    “We were not the front line.” The advanced units fought with the T-34, but we only heard about it. They listened and were horrified. It was inexplicable for us why this came as a surprise to the German leadership. And this despite the fact that the Germans developed tanks with the Russians in Kazan. We knew nothing about the T-34.
    1. Roma 1977
      Roma 1977 29 December 2016 22: 34
      0
      That's right. In a collision with a T-34 or KV, the Pz-38 (t) had almost no chance. But not a single German tanker remembers that the tanks of the T-26 and BT families (and this is more than 80% of the USSR tank fleet) were some kind of problem.
  10. perevozthikov
    perevozthikov 22 December 2016 09: 57
    0
    Some confused article - the thirties, the forties, then the thirties again. I tried to follow the production of LT-38, but I did not understand anything. Everything is piled up in one tangled pile.
  11. Zulu_S
    Zulu_S 27 December 2016 22: 09
    +1
    And all this wealth, together with the capacities for the production of tanks, artillery, Chamberlain vehicles, were leaked to Hitler in the hope that he would quickly "Drang nach Osten"! Instead - World War 2, the culprit of which on the blue eye is declared the USSR! And now they are trying to step on the same rake! The height of shamelessness.
  12. captain
    captain 14 February 2017 12: 00
    0
    Shpakovsky's articles are very interesting and instructive. The article put a plus.