Five little-known tanks of the Second World War. Part of 1. Heavy tank KV-85

79
World War II showed the world a huge number of different tanks, some of them forever entered history, creating a real historical and cultural code, familiar to almost every person. Tanks such as the Soviet T-34 medium tank, the German Tiger heavy tank, or the American Sherman medium tank are widely known today, often seen in documentaries, films, or read about in books. At the same time, before and during World War II, a huge number of tanks were created, which, as it were, remained behind the scenes, although they also personified examples of the development of tank building in different countries, albeit not always successful.

Let's start our series of articles about little-known tanks of that period with the Soviet heavy tank KV-85, which was released in 1943 in a small series of 148 combat vehicles. We can say that this tank was created in a hurry, as a response to the emergence of new heavy tanks "Tiger" in Germany. Despite the relatively small series, the KV-85 tanks were actively used in combat operations in 1943-1944, up to the complete withdrawal from the Red Army units. All tanks sent to the front were irretrievably lost in battle or written off due to fatal breakdowns and malfunctions. Only one completely authentic KV-85 has survived to this day.



The name of the KV-85 tank is quite informative, we have a version of the heavy Soviet tank "Klim Voroshilov" with a new main armament - an 85-mm tank gun. This heavy tank was created by specialists from the Design Bureau of Experimental Plant No. 100 in May-July 1943. Already on August 8, 1943, the new combat vehicle was adopted by the Red Army, after which the tank was put into mass production at ChKZ - the Chelyabinsk Kirov Plant. The production of this model was carried out in Chelyabinsk until October 1943, when it was replaced on the assembly line by a more advanced heavy tank IS-1, which, by the way, was produced in an even smaller series - only 107 tanks.


The KV-85 was a response to the appearance on the battlefield of the new German tanks "Tiger" and "Panther". By the summer of 1943, the KV-1 and KV-1s were already obsolete, primarily due to their weak armament, the 76-mm tank gun could no longer cope with the new German tanks. She did not pierce the "Tiger" in the forehead, it was possible to confidently hit a German heavy tank only in the sides of the hull or stern and from very short distances - 200 meters, while the "Tiger" could easily shoot KV tanks at all distances of the tank battle of those years . At the same time, one should not assume that the idea to equip Soviet tanks with more powerful guns appeared only in 1943. Even before the start of the war in 1939, the first attempts were made to arm tanks with more powerful guns of 85-95 mm caliber, however, with the outbreak of war, such work was temporarily stopped, and the guns themselves at that time seemed excessively powerful. The fact that the cost of 85-mm guns and shells for them was higher than that of standard 76-mm ones also played a role.

However, by 1943, the issue of re-equipping Soviet armored vehicles was finally overdue, requiring urgent decisions from the designers. The fact that the army's need for new tanks was huge is evidenced by the fact that the KV-85 was adopted by the Red Army on August 8, 1943, even before the end of the full cycle of its tests. Then in August, the tank was put into mass production. The prototype of the tank was built at Pilot Plant No. 100 using the chassis of the KV-1s tank and the turret from the unfinished IS-85, the rest of the tanks were produced by ChKZ. When assembling the first combat vehicles, the accumulated backlog of armored hulls for the KV-1s tank was used, so cutouts were made in the turret box for the extended turret shoulder strap, and the holes for the ball mount of the course machine gun had to be welded. For tanks of subsequent series, all the necessary changes were made to the design of the armored hull.

At the same time, the KV-85 heavy tank was initially considered as a transitional model between the KV-1s tank and the new IS-1 tank. From the first, he borrowed in full the undercarriage and most of the parts of the armored hull, from the second - the turret with the new gun. The changes concerned only the armored parts of the turret box - in the KV-85 tank they were made anew to accommodate a new and larger turret with shoulder straps - 1 mm compared to the heavy KV-1800s tank. The KV-85 had a classic layout, which was typical for all serial Soviet medium and heavy tanks of those years. The hull of the tank was sequentially divided from bow to stern into the control compartment, fighting compartment and engine-transmission compartment (MTO). The tank driver was located in the control compartment, and the other three crew members in the fighting compartment, which combined the turret and the middle part of the armored hull. Here, in the fighting compartment, there was ammunition and a gun, as well as part of the fuel tanks. The transmission and engine - the famous diesel V-2K - were located in the stern of the tank in the MTO.


Being a transitional tank, the KV-85 combines both the advantages of a new, more spacious turret with an 85-mm cannon of the IS-1 tank, and the disadvantages of the undercarriage of the KV-1s tank. In addition, from the last KV-85, it also inherited insufficient hull armor for the second half of 1943 (the largest armor in the forehead - 75 mm, sides - 60 mm), which made it possible to provide acceptable protection only from the fire of German guns caliber up to 75 mm. At the same time, the Pak 40, the most common German anti-tank gun by that time, was quite sufficient to successfully fight the new Soviet tank, although with increasing distance and at certain heading angles, the KV-85 armor was enough to protect against its shells. At the same time, the long-barreled 75-mm Panther gun or any 88-mm gun easily pierced the armor of the KV-85 hull at any distance and at any point. But the turret borrowed from the IS-1 tank, compared to the standard KV-1s turret, provided more reliable protection against artillery shells (gun mantlet - 100 mm, turret sides - 100 mm), also increasing the convenience of the tank crew.

The main advantage of the new KV-85, which distinguished it among all Soviet tanks of that time, was the new 85-mm D-5T gun (before the launch of the IS-1 tank in November 1943). Previously tested on SU-85 self-propelled artillery mounts, the D-5T tank gun was a really effective means of fighting even new German tanks, ensuring their destruction at a distance of up to 1000 meters. For comparison, the 76-mm ZIS-5 cannon, which was installed on the KV-1s tanks, was almost completely useless against the frontal armor of the heavy Tiger tank and hardly hit it on board at distances further than 300 meters. Moreover, increasing the caliber of the gun to 85 mm had a positive effect on the power of high-explosive fragmentation ammunition. This was especially important, since the KV-85 tanks in the Red Army were used as heavy breakthrough tanks. On the other hand, the practice of combat use showed the need for a further increase in the caliber of heavy tanks in order to confidently defeat powerful enemy bunkers and bunkers.

The installation of a new, more powerful gun on the tank required a change in the ammunition rack, the tank's ammunition load was reduced to 70 shells. At the same time, instead of a frontal machine gun located in a ball mount to the right of the mechanical driver, a fixed course machine gun was installed on the KV-85 tanks. The mechanical driver himself conducted indirect fire from this machine gun, which made it possible to reduce the tank crew to four people, excluding the gunner-radio operator from the crew. At the same time, the radio moved to a place next to the tank commander.

Five little-known tanks of the Second World War. Part of 1. Heavy tank KV-85

The KV-85 became the first Soviet serial tank that could fight the new German armored vehicles at distances up to one kilometer inclusive. This fact was appreciated by both the Soviet leaders and the tankers themselves. Despite the fact that the muzzle energy of the 85-mm D-5T gun of 300 t•m was superior to that of the Panther KwK 42 gun (205 t•m) and was not so much inferior to the gun of the Tiger tank KwK 36 (368 t •m), the manufacturing quality of Soviet armor-piercing ammunition was lower than that of German shells, therefore, in terms of armor penetration, the D-5T was inferior to both of the above guns. The conclusions of the Soviet command from the combat use of the new 85-mm tank gun were mixed: the effectiveness of the D-5T gun was not in doubt, but along with this, its insufficiency was noted for arming heavy tanks, which were supposed to surpass similar enemy combat vehicles in this indicator. As a result, it was later decided to arm T-85 medium tanks with an 34-mm cannon, and new heavy tanks were to receive more powerful 100-mm or 122-mm guns.

Despite the fact that the KV-85 hull still allowed the placement of more powerful artillery systems, its modernization potential was fully exhausted. The designers of plant No. 100 and ChKZ understood this even in relation to the KV-1s tank. This mainly concerned the impossibility of strengthening the armor of the tank and improving its engine-transmission group. For this reason, in light of the planned early launch of new tanks of the IS family, the heavy tank KV-85 was considered from the very beginning as a temporary solution to problems. Although the production process of the KV-1s tank (and then the KV-85) was well-established at Soviet enterprises, the front needed new tanks with more powerful armor and weapons.

Organizationally, the KV-85 tanks entered service with the OGvTTP - separate guards heavy tank regiments. Tanks went to the front literally from the factory; they began to arrive in units as early as September 1943. Each such regiment had 21 heavy tanks in its composition - 4 companies of 5 combat vehicles each, plus one tank of the regiment commander. In addition to tanks, each regiment had in its composition several unarmored support and support vehicles - trucks, jeeps and motorcycles, the regular strength of the regiment - 214 people. The lack of heavy self-propelled guns SU-152 in the front-line units led to the fact that in some cases the KV-85 tanks could be regularly introduced into separate heavy self-propelled artillery regiments (OTSAP), where they replaced the missing self-propelled guns.


Around the same time, in late 1943 - early 1944 (with some delay necessary to form new units and send them to the front), heavy tanks KV-85 entered the battle with the enemy, they were mainly used in the southern directions of the front. Somewhat inferior in their characteristics and capabilities to the new German heavy tanks, the battles involving the KV-85 went on with varying success, and the result of the confrontation with the enemy was largely determined by the training of tank crews. At the same time, the main purpose of the KV-85 at the front was not tank duels, but a breakthrough in advance prepared enemy defense lines, where the main danger was not the enemy’s armored vehicles, but his anti-tank weapons, engineering and mine-explosive barriers. Despite insufficient armor for the end of 1943, the KV-85 tanks performed their task, albeit at the cost of tangible losses. Intensive use at the front and a small volume of serial production led to the fact that by the autumn of 1944 there were no KV-85 tanks left in combat units. This was caused by deadweight losses and the write-off of faulty machines. No mention of the combat use of the KV-85 tanks later than the autumn of 1944 has survived to this day.

Performance characteristics of the HF-85:
Overall dimensions: body length - 6900 mm, width - 3250 mm, height - 2830 mm.
Combat weight - 46 t.
The power plant is a diesel 12-cylinder B-2K engine with horsepower 600.
The maximum speed is 42 km / h (on the highway), 10-15 km / h over rough terrain.
Power reserve - 330 km (on the highway), 180 km (over rough terrain).
Armament - X-NUMX-mm cannon D-85T and 5x3-mm machine gun DT-7,62.
Ammunition - 70 shells.
Crew - 4 person.

Information sources:
http://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/ussr/kv85.htm
http://tanki-v-boju.ru/tank-kv-85
http://pro-tank.ru/bronetehnika-sssr/tyagelie-tanki/117-kv-85
Open source materials
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +13
    18 May 2018 15: 12
    Not a very good choice of a "little-known" tank. KV-85, quite famous. With the same success, the T-50, KV-2, KV-1C, IS-1, T-80 can be entered into the "unknown". So the choice surprised me a little. I would understand for example the choice of the KV-8


    or KV-8S

    if we take tanks of the KV series.
    1. +6
      18 May 2018 17: 21
      Sergey, we will be fair to the author: this is only the first part of five. It is possible that in the subsequent parts will appear and KV-8 / KV-8S.
    2. +1
      18 May 2018 18: 26
      there simply wasn’t another gun for the KV-2 chassis, and the KV-1 with 76mm, like the T-34-76, was all the more unarmed in caliber and initial speed, on the T-34 there was a gun even smaller in caliber
      Will the German be there? if so, it was necessary from 10 or 15
      1. 0
        19 May 2018 05: 00
        on the T-34 before that there was a gun even smaller in caliber

        What, if not a secret?
        1. +4
          20 May 2018 12: 29
          Apparently, the small-scale version of the T-34 with 57mm PTP ZiS-2 was meant
        2. +5
          20 May 2018 15: 00
          Quote: Grille
          What, if not a secret?

          Well, actually, the A-32, during the initial design, was supposed to have a 45-mm cannon. It was under her that the entire layout of the tank was made, which later, by inheritance, passed to the T-34. As a result, after installing a 76,2 mm cannon in the turret, there was VERY little room for the crew in the turret. And from the very beginning, the tankers demanded a reworking of this constructive solution, in order to create a more spacious tower for three people, with the provision of a separate workplace for the commander, on a wider, at least 200 mm in a circle, pursuit of the tower. But, for various reasons, this proposal was not then implemented on serial machines. By the way, the issue of returning the 45-mm TP to the T-34 was also considered, moreover, it was proposed to produce tanks in a ratio of 2 to 1. Two T-34/45 to one T-34/76. According to this principle, it was proposed to complete tank battalions
          1. 0
            20 May 2018 16: 32
            Read my comments. And after speak out.
            1. +1
              20 May 2018 17: 55
              Quote: Grille
              Read my comments. And after speak out.

              Sori, but somehow I didn’t look into the basement.
        3. +1
          22 May 2018 15: 07
          Well, he probably means the barrel length in calibers was less. And still there was a short series of 57mm, set, but I doubt that he is about it.
      2. +1
        19 May 2018 18: 36
        what is the confusion written here? KV1 and KV2 have one chassis, what other guns?
        1. 0
          19 May 2018 21: 37
          sealed with IS-2
      3. 0
        21 May 2018 21: 31
        "Sam" Koshkin, originally planned a 57mm cannon for his tank (obviously ZIS-4), but Kulik was CATEGORICALLY against it (because in the early 30s there was no armor-piercing 57mm projectile and it would have to be created and produced by "his" department). At the end of 41, a tank company of 10 T-34-57 tanks operated in Moscow against enemy tanks, they were forced to fire ordinary shells without fuses, but they also pierced BOTH sides and flew out or got stuck in the engine compartment. And since the production of the ZIS-4 was much more difficult and much more expensive, then they refused to continue using it. They remembered only in 43, but already as a VET.
        1. +3
          22 May 2018 15: 10
          The armor penetration and rate of fire at 57mm is better than that of 76mm, as a 57mm tank destroyer was better suited, but it was negligible against infantry.
    3. +9
      18 May 2018 19: 05
      Even the KV-85 designer for children and collectors in stores sold ...
      1. +5
        18 May 2018 22: 49
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Even the KV-85 designer for children and collectors in stores sold ...

        Glued it myself! smile And I remembered about it when I considered the drawing in the article. So, maybe it wasn’t released for long, but it was not well-known.
    4. +3
      18 May 2018 19: 16
      Quote: svp67
      With the same success, the T-50, KV-2, KV-1C, IS-1, T-80 can be entered into the "unknown".

      Or KV-220, who fought in 124 battles. smile
      1. +8
        18 May 2018 23: 22
        Quote: Alexey RA
        KV-220, who fought in 124 battles.

        By the way, initially the KV-220 had the same 85 mm (F-30), but it was sent to fight with 76 mm, installing a tower from the KV-1. Coincidence: a week ago I collected the same. (1:72 PST)Yes "Basic" version:
        And he fought in this form:
        1. +5
          19 May 2018 15: 01
          Quote: Paranoid50
          By the way, initially the KV-220 had the same 85 mm (F-30), but it was sent to fight with 76 mm, installing a tower from the KV-1.

          Judging by the data of uv. Yuri Pasholok, the F-30 did not pass the test deadlines: the first breech cracked at the first gun, and the second turned out to be unbalanced. And then the development of the TT with the 85-mm cannon was covered, moving to a caliber of 107 mm.
          When in the autumn of 1941 T-220 (aka KV-220) decided to send into battle, it turned out that in Leningrad there are 2 tower with 1 untried guns in XNUMX buildings. So I had to put towers KV.
          It was then that the T-220 was again remembered. Since they were never fire tested, and the second tower remained in Gorky at factory No. 92, the following decision was made. From the first experimental T-220, its standard turret was removed and the turret of the serial KV-1 with the F-32 gun was installed. The same tower was installed on the second car. On October 5, 1941, the T-220 tank with the serial number M-220-1 was sent to the 124th tank brigade. On October 16, the second car with the serial number M-220-2 also went there.

          Moreover, the M-220-2 tank, having died in November 1941, managed to rise from the ashes in 1943:
          On February 8, 1943, Order No. 012 was issued for the 12th Separate Tank Training Regiment for the enrollment of crews. The eighth vehicle on the list is a tank ... "For Homeland", serial number 220–2, the commander of which was appointed Lieutenant V.V. Strukov.

          ICH, repair of this tank even managed to get into the newsreel of 1942.
          As for the tower that was left without a tank, then it found an application:
          The tower that was left without a tank was found worthy of use. It was installed on a concrete base in the defense zone of the 22nd Karelian fortified area. The armored firing point was called Arth. BOT (KV) with a 85 mm gun "Victory". In this form, the tower lived throughout the war.
          © Y. Pashlok. Experienced tank with a combat biography.
          https://warspot.ru/4884-opytnyy-tank-s-boevoy-bio
          graffey
          1. +4
            19 May 2018 17: 33
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And then the development of the TT with the 85-mm cannon was covered, moving to a caliber of 107 mm.

            EMNIP, it was KV-2 with a gun ZiS-6 (107 mm).
            Quote: Alexey RA
            tank M-220-2, having died in November 1941, managed to rise from the ashes in 1943

            Yes, I came across this moment. "Our answer is to the white Tiger.
    5. 0
      18 May 2018 20: 22
      Kv-13 seems to me more interesting as a model.
    6. +4
      18 May 2018 21: 56

      Not so rare in the Red Army were flamethrower (chemical) tanks!
      1. +1
        23 May 2018 16: 13
        OT-34 in Simferopol
        http://serkoff.narod.ru/ot-34-003.jpg

        One of 2 preserved.
    7. +3
      18 May 2018 22: 07
      Quote: svp67
      For example, I would better understand the choice of the KV-8 or KV-8C tank, if we take the KV series tanks.
      So yes, but both are no longer quite tanks in the classical sense, but rather armored self-propelled flamethrowers. Let's just say, KV-85 is the most famous of the little-known.laughing It seems that the next part will be devoted to IS-1.
    8. +1
      20 May 2018 14: 25
      Not a very good choice of a "little-known" tank. KV-85 is well known.

      There is more that there is a wonderful article on the Site. smile
      https://topwar.ru/15907-tyazhelyy-tank-kv-85.html
  2. +16
    18 May 2018 16: 38
    The KV-85 tank (object 239) was developed by a group of designers led by Zh.Ya. Kotin as a personal initiative. The situation on the fronts was terrible: the T-34-76 with the Tigers was not a fighter, it was necessary to urgently prepare an adequate response. So they created a temporary solution - KV-85. So the tank is very well known as a transitional version to the IS series, and the development deadlines were fantastic in terms of speed, manufacturability and quality. When I came to ChTZ, the old designers told the following story: there were problems with the leakage of track rollers. In the evening, the director of the plant, Zaltsman, invited the leading designers to a meeting and inquired about the time frame for preparing a decision on this issue. - "If you try, then two weeks are needed for the calculations," the designers answered. Zaltsman thoughtfully pulled a pistol out of the desk drawer, put it on the drawings, got up and said: "I'll come tomorrow." Then he left the office, closing the door with a key. During the night, by the beginning of the first shift, the solution was found, calculated and sketched. “Until now, rollers are made in this way,” the old designer concluded his story. It was 1985 outside. "Would Saltzman really shoot everyone?" I asked. “I don’t know, because the task was completed,” the veteran chuckled, “Here, they awarded and rewarded everyone with orders - this is a fact.”
    1. +6
      18 May 2018 17: 54
      Well, no one would shoot anyone. Just a man hinted. Either work or shoot. Logical results oriented results.
    2. +11
      18 May 2018 19: 12
      Quote: DARK
      The KV-85 tank (object 239) was developed by a group of designers led by J.Ya. Kotin as a personal initiative. The situation at the fronts was awful: the T-34-76 was not a fighter with the Tigers, it was urgent to prepare an adequate response. So they created a temporary solution - KV-85.

      Judging by the book of uv. M. Svirin, the history of the creation of the KV-85, which we know, was quite interesting.
      In July 1943, work was carried out in parallel on two types of experimental tanks: at ChKZ they made the KV-1S with an 85-mm cannon ("object 238" - 2 pcs.), And at the pilot plant No. 100 - IS ("object 237" - 3 pcs. .). But there was a problem with the guns: only 1 pieces of 85-mm S-31 guns that fit into the regular KV-2S turret were made, and one of them was put on the IS. The second KV-1S was left without a gun. And the deadlines were pressed.
      Then ChKZ received 3 85-mm D-5T cannons - by the way, also initiative items. There were 5 cannons. But I didn’t get up in the standard KV D-5T turret. But she got up in the IP tower. And there were 100 of these towers at factory No. 3 with only 2 IS buildings. As a result, the plan for the production of experimental tanks was already thwarted by 40% - one IS was missing (there was no hull and filling) and one KV (there was not enough guns). But there was one extra IS tower.
      And then they decided to make a hybrid at ChKZ, putting the IP tower on the modified KV-1C building. The result was “Object 239,” and the production plan for the experimental tanks was already 80% complete.
      Well, then everything was decided by His Majesty the plan and timing of the production of the series.
      Despite the fact that the KV-85 tank lost the competition to the IS tank on almost all points (average speed, mobility on rough terrain, maneuverability on muddy ground), it was almost completely (except for the turret) ready for mass production, while the IS required some finishing work And on August 8, 1943, even before the completion of the tests, the GKO adopts Decree N ° 3891ss on the start of mass production of the KB-85 tank (“Object 239”) at ChKZ, up to the development of the IS tank (“Object 237”) in the series.
      © M.Svirin
      1. +2
        18 May 2018 20: 10
        Tank Plant No. 100 was part of the Chelyabinsk Kirov Plant as a structural unit. It was a pilot production of ChKZ. Therefore, I did not dive so deeply, confining myself to the phrase about the transitional version to the IP series. I think your text once again proves the wrong message of the author of the article, recklessly recording the KV-85 in the category of little-known tanks.
    3. +2
      19 May 2018 00: 30
      Quote: DARK
      Zaltsman thoughtfully pulled a pistol from a drawer, put it on the drawings, stood up and said: “I'll come tomorrow.”

      Kharkiv citizens tell me that Koshkin was walking around with a wand, with whom he could immediately carry out "educational work" with a careless employee, in his opinion ... So, the T-34 appeared for sure "from under the stick"
  3. +1
    18 May 2018 19: 16
    And I personally really like the apartment, although I didn’t read how much, the army didn’t really like the apartment - and the gun is rubbish and will drive such a bridge, and the T-34 system was respected more for its briskness. Mechvody wound something in the diesel engine and the tank tore ... the truth and the diesel did not live long, but when it was necessary it could give dust
    1. +2
      22 May 2018 15: 17
      the engine speed limiter was removed; at high speeds it is clearly more powerful, but wear is higher. This was not only done by tankers, there were pilots, for example, “aerocobra”, they carefully removed the seal, tightened the revolutions and into the battle, and when the engine “died” they put everything back, and the seal. And it’s not us, it’s Mr. Allies’s slipped it.
      1. 0
        22 May 2018 18: 59
        Yes, yes, and there are also three dvigla modes, immediately to extreme and forward
        1. +2
          23 May 2018 09: 22
          Before you grimace, you would read history, and memoirs of tankers, and then you would realize how absurd your comment looks.
  4. +1
    18 May 2018 20: 34
    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
    on the T-34 before that there was a gun even smaller in caliber
    - what?
    1. 0
      18 May 2018 21: 02
      Quote from Gnus
      Quote: YELLOWSTONE
      on the T-34 before that there was a gun even smaller in caliber
      - what?

      Just not before, but after they put the ZIS-2 caliber 57mm.
      1. +1
        19 May 2018 00: 45
        After the Finnish, several tanks with a 57 mm gun and not ZIS-2 but ZIS-4 were released
        1. +4
          19 May 2018 02: 17
          Quote: Nehist
          After the Finnish, several tanks with an 57 mm gun were released.

          During World War II ... sometimes this happened ... awkward! There were such “moments that there wasn’t" at hand "the necessary materials, weapons, units, and the" plan "was demanded to be urgently executed" under the threat of execution "... So sometimes they released the T-34 with 45-mm guns, with a gasoline engine, with "armor" almost from the "boiler iron" ...
          1. +6
            19 May 2018 05: 26
            So sometimes produced T-34 with 45-mm guns

            Where did the information come from?
            45mm was on the A-32, but the A-32 prototype. The serial car was quite seriously different from it.
            On the T-34 serial were guns:
            - L-11 first series until spring 1941
            - F-34
            - ZIS-4
            - ZIS-4M
            - D-5T
            - S-53.
            What experienced they just did not try to put. But here is a 45-ku definitely not.
            with a gasoline aircraft engine,

            But it was. And not only from the lack of B-2. M-17T was significantly more reliable and had a greater engine life than the V-2 of the first years of production.
            with "armor" almost from the "boiler iron"

            Well, not really like that. But the problems in the lack of alloying elements, especially manganese, after the loss of Ukraine were in full growth. Until we built a ferroalloy plant in 1942 and began to mine manganese ore near Tashtagol.
            1. +7
              19 May 2018 09: 53
              Quote: Grille
              What experienced they just did not try to put. But 45-ku definitely not

              “At the end of April I graduated from the courses and with the rank of“ junior lieutenant ”I left with a group of commanders in the city of Gorky to get tanks. We were stuck there. The thirty-four intended for us were assembled, but there were not enough 76-mm guns and sights.
              These guns were not produced in Gorky, but 45-mm anti-tank guns were made. Moscow was strictly asked for the plan, and these 34-mm guns were put on some T-45s. Of course, less powerful than the prescribed three-inch ones. In addition, there were no sights for them Many guys refused such tanks, although we were convinced that the guns were good, and we would get sights "on the spot."
              The Germans were advancing. There was no time to sit back and wait for sights or tanks with 76-mm guns. In addition, I was branded with a family member of the “enemy of the people.” I’m surprised how I got to the Leningrad courses! I’ll go on and accuse me of cowardice. In general, we got 15 tanks, part with the "forty", part with the statewide "three-inch" and the front.

              Actually, for the first time I read about 45 on T-34 in another article ... But where to look for that article, especially since a lot of time has passed ...? request There was also such infa: in 1942, during a major German offensive, from a certain factory (alas, I don’t remember which one!) They urgently demanded tanks ... There were tanks (T-34), but there were no 76-mm tank guns. Then they decided to put (in the form of an "exception") 45 matches: they received permission, and issued an order ... But whether these 45 matches were delivered is unknown! Maybe they didn’t have time: the “three-inchers” arrived in time ...
              1. 0
                19 May 2018 10: 13
                the very minimum was 37mm
              2. +7
                19 May 2018 10: 48
                Something extremely dubious quote.
                Especially:
                They asked Moscow strictly for the plan, and some 34-mm guns were put on some T-45s. Of course, they were less powerful than the required three-inch guns. In addition, there were no sights to them. Many guys refused such tanks, although we were convinced that the guns were good , and the sights we get "in place".

                Question number 1. Where is the military representative? Of course, they asked for a plan, but for such insanity, they would primarily lean against the military envoy.
                Question number 2. And who persuaded and who refused? Factory? If yes, then see question No. 1. The one who wrote this does not seem to imagine the procedure for obtaining technology.
                The Germans were advancing. There was no time to sit back and wait for sights or tanks with 76 mm guns.

                Well, yes, but it turns out that you can fight in a tank without a sight.
                His leader, for his “courage”, would have shot this leader.
                1. +2
                  20 May 2018 17: 52
                  Quote: Grille
                  Something extremely dubious quote.

                  What surprises you? There was a period when an aircraft engine, skating rinks with internal depreciation, and all possible other “entangled” components and assemblies were placed on the tank. Tanks were needed, and sometimes they “turned a blind eye” to many things. Unfortunately
                  1. +1
                    20 May 2018 17: 57
                    What surprises you?

                    Me, if you at least let yourself take the trouble to read my comment, de Belizeme is written.
                    1. +2
                      20 May 2018 18: 00
                      Quote: Grille
                      Surprise de belle written.

                      These are your problems, the history of tank building, what have you got to do with it?
                      1. +1
                        20 May 2018 18: 15
                        It's your problems

                        These are not my problems, these are problems of understanding the structure of any state bureaucratic system, among individuals who have never come into contact with it.
                        That quote has nothing to do with tank standing.
                  2. +1
                    20 May 2018 20: 15
                    For example, there was such a period when they put a large heavy hinged hatch more than half the roof that could be opened from the inside with only two hands, because of which almost all the wounded burned in the T-34, not only some military leaders but also many engineers liked to have fun so much it has nothing to do with the state system, rather, the NKVD did not work well Yes
                  3. +3
                    21 May 2018 10: 34
                    Quote: svp67
                    What surprises you? There was a period when the aircraft was equipped with an aircraft engine, rollers with internal damping, and all other possible “hardened” components and assemblies.

                    The problem is that all these changes were officially agreed upon - a whole tail of drawings, sheets of changes, letters and other bureaucracy stretched behind them. You can’t just take and change the design of the tank. smile
                    For example, the question of installing tank and aircraft engines M-17T and M-17F on T-34 and KV tanks instead of the V-2 diesel engine was heard already at a GKO meeting.
                    If a 34-mm cannon were placed on the T-45, there would be at least drawings of a new reservation for the gun’s mask, adapters for trunnions, ammunition, etc.
                    1. +1
                      21 May 2018 11: 05
                      Quote: Alexey RA
                      If a 34-mm cannon were placed on the T-45, there would be at least drawings of a new reservation for the gun’s mask, adapters for trunnions, ammunition, etc.

                      If initially it was planned to install exactly 45 mm TP on its prototype, then there were drawings. I believe that a small batch of such tanks, at the most difficult moment of the Battle of Stalingrad, could appear.
                      1. +2
                        21 May 2018 20: 17
                        Quote: svp67
                        If initially it was planned to install exactly 45 mm TP on its prototype, then there were drawings.

                        Yeah ... that's only if they were - then only at the KhPZ. Already at the second plant for the production of T-34 - STZ - documentation was transmitted exclusively for the serial product.
                        And in order to get such drawings of an experimental experiment, the Sormovites had to make an official request. According to the experience of the same STZ, blueprint acquisition saga overgrown with documents thicker than the drawings themselves. smile
              3. +3
                20 May 2018 21: 57
                There is only one photo of the T-34 TOWER tank armed with a 45mm gun

                But this tower was not on the tank, but on the BRONZEZOZDENA -
                BEPO No. 1 of the 66th separate division of armored trains, 1942
                Armored train No. 1 consisted of an armored locomotive Ov No. 1441 (hardened armor 25 mm, driver's booth 32 mm, commander's cabin 20 mm) and two 4-axle armored platforms (hardened armor outside 15 mm, inside ordinary steel 12 mm with concrete pouring) - the first had armed with a 76-mm F-34 cannon in the turret of the T-34 tank, a 76-mm cannon of the 1902/30 model, 4 Maxim machine guns and 2 diesel engines, the second - the 152-mm M-10 howitzer in the turret of the KV-2 tank, the 76-mm cannon of the 1902/30 model, the 45-mm tank cannon in the turret of the T-34,6 tank of Maxim machine guns and 2 DTs. In addition, there was an air defense platform with two air defense systems.
          2. +3
            19 May 2018 15: 19
            Quote: Nikolaevich I
            There were such "moments that there was" not at hand "the necessary materials, weapons, units, and the" plan "was demanded to be executed urgently" under the threat of execution "...

            Just with the F-34 there were no such problems. We must pay tribute to Grabin - he made a very technologically advanced tool for his factory, which had no problems with its production.
            Problems were with the production of another Hrabin gun - F-32, which was placed on the HF. The fact is that this gun was made under the "Hrabin" plant number 92, and had to produce it at LKZ. Moreover, the F-32 actually buried all its own development LKZ - which also did not add zeal to the factory workers.
            The experience of the war in Finland, where the L-11 as a tank system had no failures, as well as the results of a comparison of the design of the F-32 and L-11 ... made it necessary for the Kirov Plant and the People's Commissariat of Heavy Engineering to raise the issue of appointing a special commission to check the shortcomings and advantages of F -32 before L-11. Based on the act of the commission, we can assume that the F-32 and L-11 are practically equivalent ...
            In addition, it should be noted that the L-11 system at the Kirov plant was fully mastered in production with the actual performance of 110-130 units per month, while the F-32 was not mastered by the plant (there is only a prototype of plant No. 92). Bearing in mind the mastered production of L-11 ... I consider it inappropriate to master the new F-32 system.
            In this regard, I ask that the Kirov plant maintain the production of L-11

            The answer was simple:
            Tests of L-11 revealed that it is not reliable, does not allow firing at lower angles of less than 10 degrees, is very capricious and difficult to operate.
            Until the readiness of F-32 systems, I consider it possible to install in L-11 tanks with their subsequent replacement with F-32

            Nevertheless, the production of the F-32 went at such a pace that it turned out to be easier to make a new gun for the HF.
      2. +1
        19 May 2018 05: 06
        and after they put the ZIS-2 caliber 57mm.

        That's just as an experiment. About two dozen cars in total. The experiment was not recognized as very successful.
        1. +1
          20 May 2018 17: 54
          Quote: Grille
          That's just as an experiment. About two dozen cars in total. The experiment was not recognized as very successful.

          Do not make me laugh. Continued serial production of the 57-mm gun and these tanks would have been serial buried by the lack of guns.
          1. +2
            20 May 2018 18: 04
            Do not make me laugh.

            Yes. Laughed.
            Continued serial production of the 57-mm gun and these tanks would be serial

            Well, the serial production of 57-mm guns did have to be adjusted. That's just T-34-57 armed ZIS-4M built only 4 pieces ... Why?
            57 mm is a very good hole punch, but no longer suitable. But the tank’s tasks are somewhat broader than simply digging a hole in the enemy’s tank.
            1. 0
              20 May 2018 18: 07
              Quote: Grille
              Well, the serial production of 57-mm guns did have to be adjusted. That's just T-34-57 armed ZIS-4M built only 4 pieces ... Why?

              And from what was recognized as NOT NECESSARY. It was recognized that it was more progressive to create not a fighter tank, but a "master of all trades" tank. And they decided to build a "fighter" on its base, but with a more powerful gun as a self-propelled weapon. The 57-mm OFS guns are much weaker than 76,2 mm, and even consume the limited resource of a 57-mm pipe ... there’s not enough power here.
              Quote: Grille
              But the tank’s tasks are somewhat broader than simply digging a hole in the enemy’s tank.
              I agree. And I’m very glad that the Germans, and now the Americans don’t think so ...
              1. 0
                20 May 2018 18: 10
                from the fact that they recognized NOT NEEDED. It was recognized that it was more progressive to create not a fighter tank, but a master of all trades tank.

                What ...
                Well, it's a genius...
                Just copy the rest of the post arm tired?
  5. +5
    18 May 2018 22: 02

    Dear author, why didn’t you find a place in the article to describe the military operations of the KV-85 described?
    Apparently the only case of a collision of KV-85 tanks with "tigers" was documented. Here is what is said about this in the report on the combat operations of the 7th Separate Guards Heavy Tank Regiment of the 38th Army of the 4th Ukrainian Front from January 24 to 31, 1944: “According to the combat order of the headquarters of the 17-10th corps, the remaining 5 tanks and (3 tanks KV-85 and 2 SU-122) by 7.00 on 28.01.44 took up all-round defense at the state farm. Telman in readiness to repel enemy tank attacks in the direction of Rososhe, the Kommunar state farm, and the Bolshevik state farm. 50 infantrymen and 2 anti-tank guns took up defense near the tanks. The enemy had a concentration of tanks south of Rososhe. At 11.30 the enemy, with a force of up to 15 T-6 tanks and 13 medium and small tanks in the direction of Rososhe and infantry from the south, launched an attack on the state farm. Telman.
    Occupying advantageous positions, from behind the shelters of buildings and haystacks, having let the enemy tanks into the distance of a direct shot, our tanks and self-propelled guns opened fire and upset the enemy’s battle formations, knocking out 6 tanks (including three Tigers) and destroying up to an infantry platoon . To eliminate the German infantry that had broken through, the KV-85 st. Lieutenant Kuleshov, who completed his task with fire and caterpillars. Telman and completed the encirclement of the Soviet group.
    The battle of our tanks in the environment against superior enemy forces is characterized by the extraordinary skill and heroism of our tankers. Tank group (3 KV-85 and 2 SU-122) under the command of the commander of the guard company st. Lieutenant Podust, defending the Telman state farm, at the same time prevented the German troops from transferring troops to other battle areas. The tanks often changed their firing positions and fired accurately at the German tanks, and the SU-122, going into open positions, shot the infantry, planted on transporters and moving along the road to Ilintsy, which blocked the freedom of maneuver for German tanks and infantry, and most importantly, contributed to the exit from the environment of parts of the 17th Rifle Corps. Until 19.30, the tanks continued to fight in the encirclement, although the infantry was no longer in the state farm.
    The maneuver and intense fire, as well as the use of shelters for firing, allowed almost no losses (except for 2 wounded), inflicting tangible damage to the enemy in manpower and equipment. On 28.01.44, the Tiger tanks were destroyed and destroyed - 5 pcs., T-4 - 5 pcs., T-3 - 2 pcs., Armored personnel carriers - 7 pcs., Anti-tank guns - 6 pcs., Machine gun points - 4, a cart with horses - 28, infantry - up to 3 platoons.
    At 20.00 p.m., the tank group made a breakthrough from the encirclement and by 22.00 p.m. after the firing battle it reached the Soviet troops having lost 1 SU-122 (burned down). "
  6. +2
    19 May 2018 14: 51
    Any mention of the combat use of KV-85 tanks later than the fall of 1944 has not survived to this day.
    According to Polish data, in 1945 5 KV-85s were transferred to the People’s Army of Poland, which used them in the first post-war years as training.
  7. +2
    19 May 2018 20: 28
    ,, a little war chronicles ,,
    1. +2
      20 May 2018 01: 01

      German soldiers visiting the wrecked Soviet heavy tank KV-85, Kirovograd, December 1943.
      1. +1
        20 May 2018 07: 56
        And, these are already "riding" on the KV-85. smile
        http://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/photo/ussr/kv-85/kv8
        5_ger_1.jpg
        1. 0
          20 May 2018 11: 58
          Sorry ned photos descriptions!
  8. 0
    19 May 2018 20: 41
    My proposal for a little-known tank of World War II.

    cruiser mk. VIII Centaur smile
    http://www.aviarmor.net/tww2/tanks/gb/cruiser_a27
    _centaur.htm
    http://war-arms.info/bronetechnika/tanki/srednie-
    tanki / srednie-tanki-perioda-vtoroy-mirovoy-voyni /
    kreyserskiy-tank-centaur-a27l-velikobritaniya.htm
    l
    http://tanki-v-boju.ru/tank-kentaur-mk-viii-centa
    ur /
    1. +1
      20 May 2018 00: 56

      The British have created a lot of little-known technology!
      Yes, and we had enough tanks produced in small series -
      At the same time, at the No. 2 BATO plant under the direction of N.N. Kozyrev, a small amphibious T-1932 tank was designed, manufactured, and submitted for testing in July 41. Taking into account the test results in the first half of 1933, 12 such tanks were made, but with a modified hull design.
      1. 0
        20 May 2018 08: 04
        Yes, and we had enough tanks produced in small series

        Formally, the Second World War began on September 1, 1939. So the T-41 pre-war demolition i.e. does not fit into the concept of the article: "Five little-known tanks of the period of the Second World War." smile
        1. 0
          20 May 2018 11: 57
          I brought the T-41 just as an example! And the T-80, T-30 (land variant of the floating T-40 with the TNSh gun) are suitable for the concept of the article, the German small series of reconnaissance tanks -
  9. +1
    20 May 2018 12: 22
    Quote: YELLOWSTONE
    the very minimum was 37mm

    will you still be scattering a teaspoon per hour, or will you puff on the source of these revelations?
    1. 0
      20 May 2018 16: 34
      you will be scattering a teaspoon per hour

      Yong will be.
      And what else to expect from the Canadian crest?
      1. 0
        20 May 2018 20: 32
        probably when he explains to you even about railguns lol
        the coordinates of the landfill in Germany will also indicate how correctly the mortar is called in German
    2. 0
      20 May 2018 20: 31
      they tried to make an anti-aircraft tank, and even installed hotchkiss when there is nothing more
      bugs in google
  10. +2
    20 May 2018 19: 09
    Quote: Grille
    These are not my problems, these are problems of understanding the structure of any state bureaucratic system, among individuals who have never come into contact with it.
    How self-critical it is, you harshly said to yourself ...
    Your mistake is that you apply your life experience of the late 20th century to that time, and there was a lot wrong there, especially during the war. At least remember how Grabin SAM, without permission, drove the ZiS-3 to the front, a cannon that not only did not pass the state test, it was GENERALLY not in the plans, in any decisions of the State Defense Committee, but it was thanks to her that his plant sharply increased production of divisional guns, the plant WAS BETTER this way. The front demanded guns and a lot, the factory gave them. And those or others, understood later.
    Do you admit such a "fortel" in our bureaucratic system at the end of the 20th century?
    1. 0
      20 May 2018 23: 29
      in that he believes that the most intelligent, confusing the mortar with a mortar
    2. 0
      21 May 2018 10: 53
      Quote: svp67
      At least remember how Grabin SAM, without permission, drove to the front of the ZiS-3, a gun which, moreover, did not pass the state test, it was NOT at all in the plans, nor in any decisions of the State Committee for Defense, but it was thanks to her that his plant sharply increased production of divisional guns, the factory was BETTER so.

      The story of the unauthorized release of Grabin ZIS-3 is based on his memoirs. SW M.N.Svirin wrote that in 1941 Kulik twice signed a document on the manufacture of a batch of ZIS-3 for military tests. And only after successfully passing the tests the gun went into series.
      The increase in the production of 76-mm divisional guns in 1941 was due to simplification of the USV design - the modernized guns were named ZIS-22-USV (plant No. 92) and F-22-USV-Br (plant No. 221).
      As for the "unauthorized release" of the ZIS-3, one small question arises - who and how signed into production and agreed on the acceptance of the new carriage so that it passes by the attention of the military representative and organs? After all, the ZIS-3 differs from the SPM not only in the presence of a muzzle brake.
      1. +2
        21 May 2018 11: 14
        Quote: Alexey RA
        As for the “unauthorized release” of the ZIS-3, one small question arises - who and how signed up for production and agreed on the acceptance of the new carriage so that it passes by the attention of the military representative and the authorities? After all, the ZIS-3 differs from the SPM not only in the presence of a muzzle brake.

        Well, then everything is simpler. The carriage is identical to the ZIS-2 and how he "circumvented", or rather, "broke, through the knee" he described. By the way, there is an episode when the senior military representative called somewhere and after that gave "Welcome" to accept the products. I would not be surprised if I called Kulik. Whatever they say about this Kulik, he was a good gunner.
        But I don’t even imagine how the “organs” were circumvented. They certainly knew the whole picture both at the factory and in the design bureau. Then I had the pleasure to get acquainted with a couple of materials on the Kharkov Tank Design Bureau, the end of the 30s. I'm shocked. Perhaps played what Stalin Grabina appreciated and patronized ...
    3. 0
      22 May 2018 15: 26
      How self-critical it is, you harshly said to yourself ...

      What exactly?
      What PERSONALY have you never accepted a mat of values? Well duck is a fact.
      Where is the self-criticism here?
      1. 0
        22 May 2018 21: 48
        and then they returned as weapons? Yes
        where here in three comments in a row at least something sane? fool

        0
        Grille (Vyacheslav) Today, 14:39 | Large sniper family: SVD and its modifications
        Another baby ...
        Grid
        0
        Grille (Vyacheslav) Today, 14:37 | Large sniper family: SVD and its modifications
        another pearl

        INNA ... Baby.
        Grid
        0
        Grille (Vyacheslav) Today, 14:34 | Mortars. The deadly family of aunt Nona and Uncle Vasily
        my, then what?

        Well, you mean just a baby.
        So zheltokamushkin, INNA ..
      2. 0
        22 May 2018 23: 28
        Quote: Grille
        What exactly?

        You signed in ignorance of history ...
        Quote: Grille
        What PERSONALY have you never accepted a mat of values? Well duck is a fact.

        This is the fact of your utterance of NEXT stupidity, because of self-conceit. By the way, about the reception and delivery of mat.values. Do you know that when transferring the People’s Commissariat of Defense from Voroshilov to Tymoshenko, about a thousand tanks and armored vehicles were missing? And this is in PEACE time, and what happened in the first years of the Second World War?
        Quote: Grille
        Where is the self-criticism here?

        Here? Here it is not, there is a HUGE SELF. You didn’t have to work in an “emergency” when mat.values ​​are issued simply “on parole”, and are written off only later, by order of the senior boss.
        1. 0
          23 May 2018 15: 12
          You signed in ignorance of history ...

          No, it’s just YOU PERSONALLY confirmed their innocence.
          This is the fact of your utterance of NEXT stupidity, because of self-conceit.

          Yeah. Twice. Not very respected, did you serve in the army?

          Go ahead and play WoT and you will be happy ...
  11. 0
    3 July 2018 11: 46
    KV 85 is a pretty well-known car. Here is t 70. t 60 less. or monsters. like t 35

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"