Stories about weapons. SAU SU-76M

73


As soon as they did not call this car, as they did not criticize. Nevertheless, released in quantities second only to the T-34, the SU-76 became a reliable infantry companion both in defense and in the offensive.



SU-76 was created on the basis of the light tank T-70, primarily as a mobile means of infantry escort. That's right, and nothing else. It was the irrational use of self-propelled guns that entailed large and unjustified losses at first and criticism of self-propelled guns.


Light self-propelled gunnery SU-76 (SU-76М).



This vehicle was used as an infantry escort weapon (cavalry), as well as an anti-tank weapon to fight light and medium tanks and enemy self-propelled guns. To combat the heavy machines SU-76M was ineffective due to the weak armor protection of the hull and the lack of power guns. With reservations, really.

The conning tower open at the top caused great criticism. By the way, according to the original plan, the combat compartment was completely covered with armor, but during the modernization work they refused to armor the roof.



Despite the fact that bulletproof booking was a weakness of ACS, this type of machine was widely used in combat operations. Having different types of ammunition in ammunition, SU-76М could hit enemy manpower, artillery and armored targets.

Suffice it to say that the piercing projectile, which appeared in 1943, pierced with armor 500-mm thick from the 100 distance of meters. But at such a distance of the shot to the "Tigers" it was not easy to approach.

During the Great Patriotic War, light self-propelled artillery mounts were built on the basis of the light tanks T-60 and T-70 with the installation of XIS-Z mm-guns ZIS-Z in the armored cabin of the plants:

Plant No.38 (Chief Designer M.N. Schukin)
Plant №40 (chief designer LF Popov)
Gorky Automobile Plant (deputy chief designer N.A. Astrov).

Total was released 14 280 SAU SU-76 and SU-76M.



The commander of the car and the loader were at the starboard side of the armor cabin, the gunner - to the left of the gun.



The workplace of the ACS mechanic was equipped in the center of the control compartment in the forward part of the hull. The driver had his own access hatch located in the upper front hull sheet, in the lid of which a periscopic mirror device was installed. Landing and exit of the crew, as well as loading of ammunition was made through a double-wing armored door, located in the upper aft sheet of the conning tower.



As the main weapons The 76,2-mm ZIS-Z gun of the 1942 model with a wedge gate and semi-automatic mechanical (copier) type was installed on the machine in the fighting compartment.

The horizontal trunnions of the gun were mounted in bearings mounted on the front cutting sheet. Two side struts of the machine gun were connected to the sides of the machine body.

When firing direct fire, a standard ZIS-3 gun was used, when firing from closed firing positions - a panoramic sight. To monitor the battlefield in the cabin of the cabin was installed periscope reconnaissance, which had scales measuring angles to adjust the shooting. In the stowed position, this device fit inside the car.



In addition, an 7,62-mm DT machine gun was installed in the combat cabin sheet to the left of the gun.



The crew’s personal armament consisted of a PPSh or PPS submachine gun and a dozen F-1 grenades.



The power plant consisted of two four-stroke six-cylinder carbureted gas-cooled GAZ-202 engines installed in parallel along the hull sides. The total power of the power plant was 140 HP (103 kW). ACS engines were started using two electric starters or manually using the crank. The inclusion of starters is separate - for each engine. The capacity of the fuel tanks was 320 l, the power reserve of the car on the highway reached 250 km.



The mechanical transmission of the ACS consisted of two four-speed gearboxes. As the turning mechanism used side clutches. The control drives were mechanical. The maximum speed on the highway was 45 km / h.

For external radio communications, the installation of the 9P radio station was envisaged, for the internal - tank intercom TPU-ZR. For communication of the commander with the driver was used light signaling (signal colored lights).

As soon as they did not call this self-propelled gun ... "Bitch", "Kolombina" and "Gol ... m Ferdinand", "mass grave of the crew". SU-76 taken to blame for the weak booking and open the conning tower. However, an objective comparison with the same type of Western samples convinces us that the SU-76 is not inferior in any way to the German “marders”, not to mention the British “Bishops”.

Nevertheless, the presence of this ACS in the first rows in the attack was perceived with a little less enthusiasm than the work of "Katyush", but still. Light and nimble, and the bunker is shut up, and the machine gun is wound onto the tracks. In a word, it is better with columbins than without them.

And the open wheelhouse did not allow the crew to get poisoned with gunpowder gases. Let me remind you that the Su-76 was used precisely as a weapon to support the infantry. The ZIS-5 gun had an 15 fire rate of fires per minute, and one can only imagine in what hell self-propelled guns had to act in firing to suppress.



Marshal of the Soviet Union K. K. Rokossovsky recalled:

"... The SU-76 self-propelled artillery mounts were especially loved by the soldiers. These lightweight mobile vehicles ripen everywhere to support and help the infantry with their fire and tracks, and the infantrymen, in turn, were ready to deflect them from the fire of enemy armor-piercing fighters. .. "

When used correctly, and it didn’t come right away, SU-76М showed itself well both in defense - in repelling infantry attacks and both mobile, well-defended anti-tank reserves, and in offensive - in suppressing machine-gun nests, destruction of pillboxes and bunkers, and in the fight against counterattacking tanks.

SU-76 was sometimes used to fire from closed positions. The angle of elevation of its guns was the highest among all Soviet serial self-propelled guns, and the firing range could reach the limits of the ZIS-3 gun mounted on it, that is, 13 km.

The low ground pressure allowed the self-propelled gun to move normally in the marshland, where other types of tanks and self-propelled guns would inevitably be stuck. This circumstance played a large positive role in the battles of 1944 in Belarus, where the swamps played the role of natural barriers for the advancing Soviet troops.



SU-76M could pass along the hastily erected gatim with the infantry and attack the enemy where he least expected the attacks of the Soviet self-propelled guns.

Not bad, SU-76M also showed in city battles - its open wheelhouse, despite the possibility of hitting the crew with small arms fire, provided a better overview and allowed us to work very closely with the soldiers of the infantry assault detachments.



Finally, the SU-76M could hit with its fire all light and medium tanks and the Wehrmacht self-propelled guns equivalent to it.

With the end of the Second World War, the service SU-76M did not end. In the Soviet Army, they were exploited until the beginning of the 50s, 130 machines transferred to the Polish Army during the war were also written off by the middle of the 50s, a few dozen of the DPRK inherited took an active part in the Korean War, but most of them were not survived.



What is the result? And the result is as simple as an armor-piercing projectile. Created around the excellent ZIS-3 cannon based on a decent lightweight T-70 tank, produced in large series, the SU-76 made the Red Army self-propelled artillery really massive.

SU-76 has become a reliable means of infantry fire support and the same symbol of victory, though not as explicit as the Thirty-Four and the hunters. But the mass of SU-76 was inferior only to T-34.


Sources:
Museum of the military stories with. Padikovo Moscow region
Igor Shmelev. "Self-propelled artillery"
G.L. Holyavsky "The Complete Encyclopedia of World Tanks 1915 - 2000"
http://pro-tank.ru/bronetehnika-sssr/samohodnie-ustanovki/101-su-76m
73 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avt
    +11
    5 July 2017 15: 47
    Great wartime production machine! good With no less wonderful divisional gun! good True, with a firing range, the problems were in the part of the same armor-piercing ones. Well, this is not a flaw in the designers of the machine and guns, but a misfortune of another department. Well, those who hated it were not trained to fight and whom, again, untrained commanders threw instead of tanks. Here the Germans competently approached their self-propelled guns and led them through artillery, and not tankers.
    1. +3
      5 July 2017 15: 59
      This is the first self-propelled guns from the Germans were separated from the tank troops! And in the end, the tankers had to get into such vehicles as Panzer IV / 70 (V) and Panzer IV / 70 (A) fighter tanks. JagdPz IV and "HETZERS" here their opinion about these machines for some reason is not given anywhere! Yes, and about the "MARders" keep quiet.
    2. +6
      5 July 2017 17: 18
      "Great wartime production machine!" ////

      The gas tank is in front, and bulletproof armor. More disgrace
      and on purpose it was impossible to come up. The crew burned instantly and guaranteed.
      1. +6
        5 July 2017 18: 21
        Quote: voyaka uh
        and on purpose it was impossible to come up. The crew burned instantly and guaranteed.

        No, the overwhelming majority of the mechanics suffered, the rest had great chances to escape.
      2. +4
        5 July 2017 18: 34
        Well, your designers created Merkava. Further, the "promised land" will not pass. And ours will get.
      3. +4
        5 July 2017 22: 33

        SAU booking scheme Marder III Ausf.M.
        And the SU-76 -
        Forehead of the body (top), mm / city.
        25 / 60 °
        The forehead of the body (bottom), mm / city.
        35 / 30 °
        Board of the case, mm / city.
        15 / 0 °
        Housing feed (top), mm / city.
        10 / 20 °
        Housing feed (middle), mm / city.
        15 / 0 °
        Housing feed (bottom), mm / city.
        15 / 30 °
        Bottom mm
        7 / 81—90 °
        Housing roof, mm
        7
        Cutting forehead, mm / city.
        35 / 25 °
        Cutting board, mm / city.
        10 / 25 °
        Cutting feed, mm / city.
        10 / 20 °
        And which of the cars has the ANTIPULOUS frontal armor?
      4. 0
        31 July 2018 09: 13
        the crew oh very rarely burned, unlike classic tanks (except for the mechanical drive) ... my grandfather’s uncle went to such a war (2 burned at him)
        He said - that when the bosses fought for the mind, then there were losses less tank, which were afraid of more air explosions and German roof planes, then no. I really didn’t like winter and rainfall, the tarpaulin got wet. After the hospital I got into ordinary self-propelled guns - I ran away back to my unit at the first opportunity - I said: it’s impossible to shoot, the fan seems to be there, but after 10 shots there’s no more horseradish and nothing to breathe. ..
        And the Allies also had self-propelled guns without roofs — the same Amer’s “Volverin”
    3. +1
      5 July 2017 18: 27
      Yeah ... I would not want to fight on it ... benz for 10 mm-consider that you are going to the Panthers in the Lada ...
    4. 0
      5 July 2017 18: 31
      Totally agree with you. All question in competent use.
    5. +12
      5 July 2017 19: 34
      Quote: avt
      those who hated it were not trained to hate and who, again, untrained commanders threw instead of tanks, hated it.

      Absolutely accurate definition!
      Unfortunately, in our time, "some civilians" argue that they say the MRAP Typhoon-K is better than, for example, the BTR-82, and, they say, light BMP-2 should be put down to metal, they do not "hold" the RPG grenade speaking of ATGM. request
      At the same time, they completely forget that each type of equipment, including the BTT, was created for its own tasks: somewhere there is a “tachanka” with a KPVT or DShKM, and in another case, a 45-60 ton tank, heavy armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle are needed.
    6. +7
      5 July 2017 21: 37
      An excellent retrospective of photos about the SU-76 .... For those interested, I propose to learn more about the combat capabilities of the installation from the first hand. On the site "Military Literature" under the heading "memoirs" the book of S. Gorsky "Notes of gunner SU-76. Liberators of Poland" is uploaded .... I sincerely recommend ...
  2. +6
    5 July 2017 15: 51
    Just how hard it was for the “OGRANKA” SU-76!
    1. SU-76 (SU-12) - the end of 1942.
    2. SU-76M (SU-12M) - the summer of 1943.
    3. SU-76 (SU-15) - the end of 1943.
    “In May 1943, JV Stalin asked the People’s Commissar of the Tank Industry what had already been done to eliminate the defects of the SU-76 and how to fill up their shortages. And when he learned that the work of the People’s Commissar was limited to punishments, he brought down his anger on the heads of the People’s Commissar and his deputies set out in two letters and a telegram, where "... a similar punishment for a talented designer and tank builder of the USSR, comrade Ginzburg ..." was called "... a heinous crime!", and "... the actual inaction of the people's commissar’s leadership ...", in his opinion, "... left the Red Army without any self-propelled artillery. ”S. Ginzburg was recalled from the front by order of the Headquarters, but it was too late, since the recall, according to the memoirs of L. Gorlitsky, came only a day after his tragic death."
  3. +8
    5 July 2017 15: 53
    Mikhail Svirin
    Self-propelled guns Stalin
    HISTORY OF THE SOVIET SPG 1919-1945
    “Be that as it may, by the summer of 1943 the SU-76M (SU-12M) went to the troops and training units. Their mass combat use took place on the Kursk Bulge, and it was here that persistent rumors about the unreliability of the mechanisms of the SU-76 were born, lasting the whole war, as well as the first derogatory nicknames addressed to this combat vehicle, in particular the “mass grave of four tankers”, “”, “gas chamber.” This was partly due to the fact that the self-propelled guns were subordinated to the tank troops, and this was fraught with the fact that most of them were now used mainly as tanks without a tower, and therefore the tactics worked out at the very beginning of the year often changed exactly the opposite - comparatively thick-armored tanks or infantry were hiding behind the SU-76, whose armor protection was very weak, but there were other reasons.
    The summer was hot and the SU-76, which had practically no normal ventilation in the fighting compartment, was called a "gas chamber", as was the case with the SU-76 (I), which had similar problems at that time. Already in early July, the People’s Commissariat recommended dismantling the roof of the conning tower “right down to the apron of the periscope sight” or installing an exhaust fan on the roof of the SU-76M.
    The car with the roof removed was liked by the troops despite the fact that it was raining on the crew’s heads, and it was not easy to fix the tarp.
    The drivers did not like the SU-12M, since sitting in the middle between the engines was very unpleasant, how inconvenient it was to operate two automatic transmissions to control the self-propelled guns, which made a lot of extraneous noise due to unsynchronous operation. The breakdowns of mechanisms that occurred did not add love to the drivers of these cars.
    And although their reliability did not differ much from medium-sized self-propelled guns, they still had to be repaired with more blood, since the repair almost always came down to replacing the gearbox, main shaft or main gears. "
    1. +4
      5 July 2017 16: 55
      Quote: hohol95
      This was partly due to the fact that the self-propelled guns were subordinated to the tank troops, and this was fraught with the fact that most of them were now used mostly just like tanks without a tower. And therefore, the tactics worked out at the very beginning of the year often changed exactly the opposite - comparatively thick-armored tanks or infantry marched behind the SU-76, whose armor protection was very weak.

      Have you come to this thought yourself, or have you voiced nonsense?
      Well, but the tankers understood the difference and the combat capabilities of the tank and self-propelled guns better than anyone, and sending self-propelled guns in front of tanks is possible only in special combat conditions that directly require this. For example, when there is a need to suppress or destroy a well-protected target that a tank gun does not take.
      Recall, for example, the film "At War as at War", what task the brigade commander Deev set to the battalion commander self-propelled guns, where to move and at what speed.
      1. +1
        5 July 2017 17: 00
        You forgot that this is not about SU-152! SU-76 and T-34, KV-1 (1s) had the same fragmentation shells!
        1. +2
          5 July 2017 17: 26
          Quote: hohol95
          You forgot that this is not about SU-152! SU-76 and T-34, KV-1 (1s) had the same fragmentation shells!
          The projectile is one, but the SU-76, because of the longer barrel and large angles of vertical aiming, it flew further
          1. +1
            5 July 2017 22: 58
            Quote: svp67
            The projectile is one, but the SU-76, because of the longer barrel and large angles of vertical aiming, it flew further

            The barrel length of the F-34 (T-34), ZIS-5 (KV-1C) and ZIS-3 (SU-76) is the same, and is equal to 40 calibers.
            For example, when there is a need to suppress or destroy a well-protected target that a tank gun does not take

            I do not catch the relationship between "firing range" and "well-protected target" :)))
          2. +1
            5 July 2017 23: 15
            Quote: svp67
            Quote: hohol95
            You forgot that this is not about SU-152! SU-76 and T-34, KV-1 (1s) had the same fragmentation shells!
            The projectile is one, but the SU-76, because of the longer barrel and large angles of vertical aiming, it flew further

            The vertical pickup angles are the same and equal to + 25 ° therefore the ballistics are identical.
      2. 0
        5 July 2017 17: 04
        With the author of these lines, YOU alas, will no longer debate because of his death!
        Mikhail Nikolaevich Svirin "Self-propelled guns of Stalin. History of the Soviet self-propelled guns 1919 - 1945"
        If you have confirmation that the above events did not happen in life - present ...
        1. +4
          5 July 2017 17: 33
          Quote: hohol95
          If you have confirmation that the above events did not happen in life - present ...

          You know, it’s useless to argue in such a tone. That the infantry could use the SU, in the absence of tank support in the role of "NPP tanks" I believe that one of the tankers could be "especially gifted" - the same thing, but that it was everywhere - no.
      3. +3
        5 July 2017 17: 14
        And you will remember in what year events unfolded in the work "IN WAR, AS IN WAR" -
        "The twenty-fourth of December, one thousand nine hundred and forty-three. The first Ukrainian front went on the offensive. On the Radomyshl - Brusilov section, the 3rd Guards Tank Army broke through the German defenses. The first three days, the self-propelled regiment of Colonel Basov was in the reserve of the chief of artillery of the 6th Guards Tank Corps.
        Self-propelled guns buried in the forest, where they arrived two days before the start of the offensive. This junior lieutenant Maleshkin, the commander of SU-85, considered the forest to be incomparable wretchedness. "The German pilots with the gunners handled it so that it could be seen through - both from the sides and from above."
        By the end of 1943, they were already trying to use the regiments of self-propelled guns more competently! And do not equal the SU-76 with the SU-85.
        1. +1
          5 July 2017 17: 27
          Quote: hohol95
          And do not equal the SU-76 with the SU-85.

          I assure you that give Deev not Su-85, but Su-76 he would use them the same way.
          1. +1
            5 July 2017 18: 16
            Quote: svp67
            Su-76 he would use them in the same way.

            If not more carefully, since the Su-85 was armored much more seriously.
            Quote: svp67
            give to Deev

            Deyu.
          2. 0
            5 July 2017 22: 35
            And the charter required a distance between attacking tanks and self-propelled guns supporting them from 300 to 600 meters!
        2. +3
          5 July 2017 18: 59
          Quote: hohol95
          By the end of 1943, they were already trying to use the regiments of self-propelled guns more competently! .

          If only ...
          Unlike tanks, the LVSA was given to the commanders of the rifle divisions, who did not really know how to use these weapons. So, in order No. 03 (dated January 6, 1944) on BT and MV of the Belarusian Front on the use of self-propelled artillery in battles, there is a link to the following example. On November 21, 1943, the commander of the 397th regiment, Colonel Adonyev ordered the commander of the 1901th infantry regiment to accompany the infantry attack, but did not set a specific task. The commander of the 1901th salar, Major Detchenko, in violation of all the charters and instructions of the spacecraft, ordered the self-propelled guns to get ahead of the infantry, and then the first to break into the village. As a result of the battle, 5 SU-76 was shot down and the Soviet troops with shame retreated. The same order indicated the place of self-propelled units (in attack and defense) - behind the battle formation of infantry and tanks (at 300-600 m), and also determined different requirements for escorting self-propelled guns and sappers.
          1. 0
            31 July 2018 09: 18
            Quote: svp67
            Commander 1901 Lsap Major Detchenko, in violation of all the charters and instructions of the AC,
            -and where does the infantry ??? !!!!!
            1. 0
              31 July 2018 09: 23
              Quote: your1970
              -and where does the infantry ??? !!!!!

              And she always gets the infantry.
              1. 0
                31 July 2018 19: 03
                Quote: svp67
                Quote: your1970
                -and where does the infantry ??? !!!!!

                And she always gets the infantry.

                first you write
                Quote: svp67
                In contrast to tanks, the LVSA was given to the commanders of the rifle divisions, which plainly did not know how to use this weapon

                write right there
                Quote: svp67
                Commander 1901 Lsap Major Detchenko, in violation of all charters and charters

                What relation did Major Detchenko have to do with the type of "inept" infantry?
      4. +2
        5 July 2017 17: 32
        Svp, I read the memoirs of Marshal Voronov and he said that the tankers did not take care of the self-propelled guns: "treated them like bad tanks."
        1. +1
          5 July 2017 18: 28
          Quote: Monarchist
          Svp, I read the memoirs of Marshal Voronov and he said that the tankers did not take care of the self-propelled guns: "treated them like bad tanks."

          Where have you taken to Voronov’s account? Didn’t find it?
          Our fear was fully justified, the further development of Soviet self-propelled artillery took the only direction - to accompany the tanks. Tankers did not change their attitude to self-propelled guns; they still called them “bad tanks”. And our infantry was left without self-propelled guns that it needed very much.

          And reading these memoirs, there was an opinion about the insult of the marshal that the self-propelled guns were withdrawn from his subordination and reassigned to combined arms commanders.

          Order of the NPO of the USSR No. 020 of January 10, 1943
          “On strengthening the firepower of tank and mechanized parts and formations of spacecraft”
          Order
          People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR
          № 020
          January 10, 1943
          mountains Moscow

          Summary: On enhancing the firepower of tank and mechanized parts and formations of spacecraft

          In order to enhance the firepower of tank and mechanized units and formations of the Red Army I ORDER:

          1. From January 15, 1943, the following shall be additionally introduced into the states of units:

          a) In the guards tank regiment of the breakthrough - a platoon of machine gunners, numbering 33 people and 32 PPSh.

          b) To the tank brigade - a company of anti-tank rifles according to state No. 010/375, numbering 61 people and 18 PTR.

          c) In the tank and mechanized corps - the mortar regiment of the RGK according to state No. 08/106 and the self-propelled artillery regiment of the RGK, according to state No. 08/158.

          2. From January 1, 1943, increase the salaries of personnel of units, subunits, and individual groups of soldiers armed with anti-tank rifles: to ordinary and junior command personnel by 100%, and to middle and higher commanding personnel by an average of 25%.

          The salary for each position should be established by order of the head of the financial department at NPOs in agreement with the commander of the armored and mechanized troops of the Red Army.

          People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR
          J. Stalin

          And how do you explain this:
          In the memorandum of the chief of staff of the artillery of the Red Army to the GKO member V.M. Molotov of April 6, 1943 was informed: “Experience has shown that self-propelled guns are needed, since no other type of artillery has given such an effect in the continuous tracking of infantry and tank attacks and interaction with them in close combat. "Material damage caused to the enemy by self-propelled guns, and the results of the battle pay for losses."



      5. +2
        5 July 2017 18: 30
        In the film SU-100 IMHO
        1. +3
          5 July 2017 18: 56
          Quote: Torkvat Torkvat
          In the film SU-100 IMHO

          And summer, instead of winter, so what?
      6. +2
        5 July 2017 19: 32
        And also according to the actions of brigade commander Dey -
        "- Remember, self-propelled guns must move after my tanks a hundred meters.
        “This is not according to the charter, Comrade Colonel,” said Bezzubtsev.
        Dey's huge squirrels swept over, but he restrained himself and, as it were, incidentally remarked:
        “I also once read a charter, Comrade Lieutenant.” A hundred meters, and not a centimeter further. Clear?

        Toothless reached out:
        “That's right, Comrade Colonel!”
        - All. With God!
        Day sharply raised his hand, turned sharply and went along the column easily and quickly. The adjutant ran after him, holding the tablet dangling from the side.
        Sanya was not offended by the Colonel’s rudeness and not by a cruel order, but by the fact that he paid no attention to the commanders of the vehicles, as if they were not there. “But it’s not for the battalion commander to follow the tanks a hundred meters away and not for him to burn, but for the commander of the car, and he did not even look at us. But what does he care about Junior Lieutenant Maleshkina ... "thought Sanya, returning to his self-propelled gun. Pashka Telenkov, Chegnichka, and the commander of the car, Vasya Zimin, thought the same way. "
        1. +2
          6 July 2017 05: 37
          And Maleshkin died from a stray fragment flew through an open hatch ....
      7. +2
        6 July 2017 01: 14
        Quote: svp67
        what task the brigade commander Deev set the battalion commander self-propelled guns, where to move and at what speed.

        Duc, it was 1944, Ukraine. By that time, we had already figured out how to use the self-propelled guns, and prescribed in the charter. But at first there were losses precisely due to inappropriate use. In the same way, the SU-122 (based on the T-34) was lost, for the same reason - they took the infantry into the attack ... severely, but who knew - the type of weapons was new.
  4. +1
    5 July 2017 16: 00

    SU-76. "Mass grave" or weapon of Victory?
    Alexander Chubachin
  5. +4
    5 July 2017 17: 14
    With bulletproof armor and a driver sitting
    on the gas tank ... sad

    Of course, you can praise everything that was released during the Second World War, but ...
    should there be any reasonable limits? recourse
    1. +3
      5 July 2017 17: 25
      And what are the options? Mass, light self-propelled guns, mobilization equipment.
      Deficiencies were compensated for by mass, in the confrontation with the technically superior Wehrmacht there are no other options.
      1. +3
        5 July 2017 17: 53
        Options?
        Do not design military equipment where the crew
        immediately and guaranteed to burn from the first hit.
        Interestingly, the engineer who created such a shame agreed
        I would hardly go to battle on it myself ...

        Not all Soviet light armored vehicles were like that. For example, light
        The T-70 tank was excellent. He was loved by tankers, loved more than the t-34.
        1. +3
          5 July 2017 18: 00
          And the drying base, isn’t the T70 accidental?
          The Soviet engineering school was still being formed, and the army did not always clearly formulate its requirements.
          And drying is not intended to receive direct hits, the second tier.
          1. +4
            5 July 2017 18: 08
            From the T-70, but look how the tank is assembled -
            with a gas tank at the back - and how is this thing ...
            With a 76 mm gun, the Su-76 self-propelled gun supported the infantry in the offensive
            and, therefore, inevitably missed shells.
            Even the T-34-76 tank, which was a good support tank
            infantry, made his way with his 45 mm forehead of the body from almost everything
            was a German. But at least not everyone died ... What can I say
            about the Su-76. sad Letting her into battle was a crime on the part of the command.
        2. avt
          +5
          5 July 2017 18: 18
          Quote: voyaka uh
          For example, light
          The T-70 tank was excellent. He was loved by tankers, loved more than the t-34.

          bully Azochenway! This is still strong! bully Especially after
          Quote: voyaka uh
          The gas tank is in front, and bulletproof armor. More disgrace
          and on purpose it was impossible to come up. The crew burned instantly and guaranteed.

          bully Even a wikipedist, notorious, couldn’t write this, so as not to
          Quote: apro
          And the drying base, isn’t the T70 accidental?

          Everything else yours clearly fits into
          Quote: avt
          .Well, those who hated it were not trained to fight and whom, again, untrained commanders threw instead of tanks

          Since even the same to understand the difference between the Su-122/85/100 still not given. But this is your misfortune, not our problems. Actually, as is the comparison of the T-60/70 with the 34th mass produced at a time when the Red Army simply lacked tanks, the same T-34-76. On which, by the way, again, from the lack of diesel production, aviation gasoline engines in Gorky were also installed. So far, the plants have not fully earned. P.S Here, according to the memoirs of a late relative of distant Kuzma Filippovich, a mechvod, he spoke very well about Valentina Aglitsky.
          That if it weren’t for the gun weaker than 34 matches, then they say no comparison - Valentine’s better for the crew. It’s understandable that the 34-ke mechwater driver on the move is constant ... arm wrestling bully
          Quote: apro
          The Soviet engineering school was still being formed, and the army did not always clearly formulate its requirements.
          No.
          Well, I categorically disagree with this! And the school already had personnel, but production capacities in connection with the evacuation, yes. Not enough, as well as the machine park, which was adjusted by Lend-Lease. And the school was no worse than the Germans - 3 panzerwagens were famously converted to self-propelled guns. Yes, and the experimental model range was quite rich from before the war and the military too. Misha Svirin is very sensible and most importantly intelligibly with references in his work on tanks and self-propelled guns painted. Highly recommend
          1. +3
            5 July 2017 23: 16
            The same chassis does not mean the same layout. smile
            The frontal armor of the T-70 light tank is 45 mm, the same as the T-34 medium tank.
            And the self-propelled gun Su-76 on the same chassis - 25 mm.
            The gas tanks of the T-70 are at the rear, and the Su-76 is at the front, immediately behind the cardboard armor. And the mechanic
            self-propelled guns sits between the engines and the gas tank.
            1. +1
              5 July 2017 23: 31
              No, I understand that in Israel everyone is so smart and cunning. But to compare the armor of the T-70 and T-34 ... This is beyond reason. Do the T-34 and T-70 have the same tower armor? What about side armor? Moreover, the T-70 frontal armor 45 mm only NLD. VLD is only 35 mm. Now I am not surprised why the Arabs have been killing you all the time, and ALL European nations used to kill you.
            2. +6
              6 July 2017 09: 19
              Quote: voyaka uh
              The same chassis does not mean

              But the controversy in the assessment of this self-propelled guns just means that "some civilians", and not only the "sons of the house of Israel", have not yet cut into what the Su-76M is and why it was created. fool
              This self-propelled gun is a ZiS-3 cannon, which, instead of horse-drawn or automobile traction (and, often, “perdilny soldier's” with direct accompaniment of infantry) was put on a light tracked chassis, figuratively speaking with the same bulletproof shield, although more developed. At the technical level of those years.
              What are the tanks, armor?
              A light mass gun that should quickly creep from cover to cover and support the infantry. And the BC for this self-propelled guns can easily bring a rifle platoon with his hands. And, if necessary, tow a little with a car or even six horses using l / s.
              For more "evil cases" - other, more complex tasks, more powerful and protected, but incomparably more complex and expensive, requiring much more voluminous rear and technical support for self-propelled guns were produced: Su-85, 100, 122, 152.
            3. avt
              +3
              6 July 2017 09: 54
              Quote: voyaka uh
              The frontal armor of the T-70 light tank is 45 mm, the same as the T-34 medium tank.
              And the self-propelled gun Su-76 on the same chassis - 25 mm.

              bully Oh, Wei! And the armored personnel carrier? And why only compare the tank with self-propelled guns, let's immediately with ..... armored train! ,, And in the parrots I’m mountain-a-azdo longer! " bully
        3. +4
          5 July 2017 19: 27
          Is Marder much more armored? About the glorious Hitzer, you need to watch a BIBs movie as it’s convenient for the gunner to work and where the commander was.
          So there is approximately one level in all light self-propelled guns, in all countries.
          1. +1
            5 July 2017 22: 51
            Marder is the same bad craft as the Su-76. It is necessary to scold both that and another, but not to praise.
            1. +2
              6 July 2017 01: 22
              The warrior is good to reason now, and then he had his own vision of the problem, and was solved by methods available at that time. The Soviet army received the drying of infantry escort, it played its role, the task was completed.
              1. +1
                6 July 2017 11: 17
                Let’s then praise everything in a row with both Russians and Germans, and
                Americans. Fig tank (any country)? - no, "then there was such a vision of the problem ..."
                Beautiful phrase, but meaningless.
                1. +1
                  6 July 2017 11: 51
                  You forgot one significant point - the self-propelled guns of the SU-76 family were not built on the CHASSIS of the T-70 tank, but using the units and mechanisms used to make the T-70 tank! And initially for these purposes it was supposed to use units and parts of the T-60!

                  The prototype 76,2 mm assault self-propelled guns plant number 37. 1942
            2. 0
              6 July 2017 15: 02
              Well, what am I talking about? War, come on come on, everyone and everyone.
              Marder is that. Looking at Hitser, I realized that the marder and the drying are hell with him, and the hitser is the finish. The gunner bending like an acrobat firing from a cannon, the commander didn’t understand where at all, but they fought on them (where to go). And the options for the commander of the great panther to leave the burning tank, too, are not encouraging! So the thick armor of the tank didn’t greatly increase the chances of some crew members to survive. Yes, and almost everything was flashed into the panther. So the main thing is the correct use of the machine.
              1. 0
                6 July 2017 15: 20
                "and hitser is the finish. The gunner bending like an acrobat firing from a cannon, the commander don’t understand where"

                Marder was terrible.
                Hatzer had a specific task: to shoot a tank from an ambush a couple of times — hit, hit, and must escape. They did not interact with anyone - the "killer" tanks from a disguised ambush.

                And the poor Su-76s were tied to the infantry, although they could not effectively support it because of their low survivability on the battlefield. T-34-76 performed their role much better. But the T-34 was often used to fight tanks (for which it was rather weak)
                and therefore, in support of dandruff was replaced by a cheap substitute - Su-76.
                1. +1
                  6 July 2017 16: 22
                  Again, you are missing an important point - the years of appearance and the tasks for which these machines were created -
                  SU-76 - artillery support for infantry and tanks
                  "Marders", "Hetzer" and other "Yagdpanzer" - the fight against the hordes of Soviet tanks! ShtuGs re-equipped with 43-caliber 75 mm guns and armored in the frontal projection of 80 mm turned into anti-tank self-propelled guns! They supported the infantry in the battles of the final period of the war, not in anti-tank divisions, but in replenishment in tank and motorized units!
                2. 0
                  6 July 2017 16: 30
                  In general, the survival of the Su76 crew with the support of the infantry is still higher than that of the ZIS-3 or air defense crew. The 10 mm armor splinter holds and MG lines.
                  If you do not hammer in nails with a glass hammer, then everything will be fine.
                  Everyone had cheap surrogates
                  1. +1
                    8 July 2017 17: 40
                    Actually 25-35mm. Yes, and at a decent angle laughing
                3. 0
                  8 July 2017 17: 49
                  If you could read there, you could read that the main advantage of the SU-76M is the ability to interact with the infantry online, and the ability of the commander to observe the battlefield!
                  If only you respected the country (which created you from ... what was laughing), they would be able to read the memoirs of Soviet tankers who write that the commanders of German armor up to 300m were hanging in combine harvesters, watching the battlefield with binoculars.
                  So did the commanders of the SU-76M, and it was precisely this that was deprived of t34 \ 76 \ 57!
    2. 0
      5 July 2017 18: 32
      Most likely from our poverty ..
    3. +1
      8 July 2017 17: 39
      Israel by this time could not release anything better, in order to show the goyim how to wet the fascists laughing
      Western "real" Jews at that time were driving Nazi money in Dossland, Switzerland and the USA.
      And the Soviet "fake" Jews created the SU-76M, slammed the Nazi reptile in Berlin, and created Israel in 1949 (which was successfully sold by the USA already in 1952. laughing )
  6. 0
    5 July 2017 17: 42
    At Drabkin met negative ratings "". Once, a former front-line soldier said that these SU76 were mildly expressed avnom
    1. avt
      +5
      5 July 2017 18: 26
      Quote: Monarchist
      At Drabkin met negative ratings "". Once, a former front-line soldier said that these SU76 were mildly expressed avnom

      ,, But the Germans are all with ,, Schmeissers, "they don’t raise their heads, and we all of them from the same three-line ..." also heard from real veterans.
    2. Alf
      +6
      5 July 2017 20: 50
      Quote: Monarchist
      At Drabkin met negative ratings "". Once, a former front-line soldier said that these SU76 were mildly expressed avnom

      And other war veterans have burned Ferdinand since the summer of the 41st ...
      Once, a former front-line soldier said that these SU76 were mildly expressed avnom

      And some considered SVT rubbish, but it was just necessary to clean it and switch the regulator in time.
      1. +2
        5 July 2017 21: 34
        Quote: Alf
        And other war veterans have burned Ferdinand since the summer of the 41st ...

        Maybe the 43rd?
        wassat
        1. +2
          5 July 2017 22: 44
          From 1943 to May 9, 1945 with a release quantity of 90 pieces!
          When at the end of 1944 we met with the YagdPANTNRAM, then messages from the troops about the “TRADED FERDINANDA on the Panther’s chassis” were sent from the troops
          “Also in the autumn of 1944, numerous signals began to come from the fronts about the Germans using heavy self-propelled guns“ Ferdinand. ”Moreover, the brief descriptions accompanying the credentials about the wrecked vehicles after being inspected by trophy teams, it would seem, leave no doubt that the fields an old acquaintance came out, only lightened to 45 tons by reducing frontal armor to 100 mm, and airborne to 50 mm.On the sidelines of the NKTP, this car was sometimes called sometimes “ferdinand-2,” but only a few “trophies” emphasized that The self-propelled guns were mounted on the chassis of the Panther tank. But in fact, the domestic tank builders were right. This self-propelled guns, called the jagdpanther, was called to replace the Ferdinands, which proved their effectiveness during the 1943 battles. "
  7. +1
    5 July 2017 19: 40
    The workhorse of war.
    1. +1
      5 July 2017 23: 30
      The old warrior (Lieutenant Colonel Arefyev) had long been telling me how they put a bucket on the barrel of a SU-76 gun and the Germans from far away mistook them for St. John’s Wort and quickly disappeared.
  8. +3
    5 July 2017 22: 04
    Thanks to the author for a competent presentation, and a small amendment to the description of the machine.
    Su-76m (Su-15) had one GAZ-202 engine, and not two. But the GAZ-202 engine itself consisted of two GAZ-11 six-cylinder engines, combined into one unit.
    1. 0
      5 July 2017 22: 45
      Initially, this engine was abandoned ...
    2. 0
      16 February 2018 13: 39
      Quote: Potter
      Su-76m (Su-15) had one GAZ-202 engine, and not two. But the GAZ-202 engine itself consisted of two GAZ-11 six-cylinder engines, combined into one unit.

      Your amendment is not entirely accurate. GAZ-202 is up to 70 hp. GAZ-11 engine (85 hp). And two GAZ-202 in tandem were called GAZ-203.
  9. +3
    5 July 2017 23: 51
    Apparently, the task was set to design a light tank, and then self-propelled guns based on automobile units in order to be able to mass production. If they were designed to achieve maximum performance characteristics, mass production would not work, and the infantry would be left without mobile artillery support. Losses among self-propelled guns would decrease, but among infantrymen they would increase. And it is unlikely that they could have advanced at such a high pace in the 44th. A low offensive rate is an additional opportunity for the enemy to gain a foothold, and again this is an additional loss among the advancing. Unlike a light tank, this thing, in some cases, had the ability to hit fortifications from a greater distance, and this was more of a chance to survive for its crew. By the way, no one saw in the newsreel how, even in street battles, the three-inch towed infantry provides direct fire support to the infantry? Now imagine how the soldiers roll this fool in their arms and unfold under enemy fire. I think that in such a situation, the SU-76 is much preferable. At least she’ll come up quicker and immediately open fire. And at least armor will cover from small arms. It was not necessary to throw them on tanks and to throw anti-tank guns buried in the ground, then the losses would not be large. And further. Do you know from what, first of all, artillery suffers heavy losses? From the fact that in time does not change position. The main rule - shot - changed position. And with what is better to change position: with a towed gun or self-propelled guns? Now the advanced powers produce towed guns, mainly for export, but for themselves self-propelled guns, although their armor is no match for tanks. Today, by the way, no one would even think of throwing self-propelled guns in battle formations of the advancing infantry to storm the enemy’s positions, but then they could - hence the losses.
  10. +4
    5 July 2017 23: 58
    During the offensive, part of the artillery is allocated to directly support the infantry with fire and wheels. At the same time, the calculations of these guns fall under machine-gun sniper and mortar fire. This problem Su-76 and solved very successfully. Plus, a high-raised barrel made it possible to successfully fight machine gunners, snipers, and other targets on the upper floors of the Edani.
  11. 0
    11 July 2017 10: 40
    My uncle Ivan Nikiforovich died in V. Prussia in Jan. 45. In the buried it is written that the SU-76m mechvod burned down in battle. I don’t remember which city.
    1. +1
      1 December 2017 18: 04
      Quote: Grishka the Cat
      My uncle Ivan Nikiforovich died in V. Prussia in Jan. 45. In the buried it is written that the SU-76m mechvod burned down in battle. I don’t remember which city.

      My uncle died there, at the same time. He was a gunner at the SU-76m