Stories about weapons. Tank M3A "Stewart" outside and inside

37


Yes, we talked a lot about the “Stewart” in the series “Custom among strangers”, talking about trophy and lend-lease equipment. But to show ... Here, we show.





The tank is interesting when viewed from the inside. But sensations cannot be called pleasant. Many questions like “And who thought so?” If we compare it with the Englishman “Valentine” and our T-26, which are also with an English accent, he loses them.

Actually, and story у tank was peculiar.

Combat activities МХNUMXА started not under the native American, but under the English flag. But this is clearly not the fault of the tank or of the American authorities, who began supplying the British with the principle of "Give to others, God, that it is not good to yourself." The British commanders decided to help Hitler and presented him with more than half of the tanks under Dunkirk.

To compensate for the losses due to own production, the British did not have the opportunity, they had to turn to Uncle Sam.

The British were primarily interested in medium tanks, but in the end they got what was available. And the only tank that was actually available in the US Army in sufficient quantities was the lightweight M3.

Not to fat! And the American M3 became an English citizen and began his combat activities from the Pacific colonies to Africa and Europe.

True, the Americans did business honestly and equipped the tanks with English radio stations, boxes for spare parts and equipment of the English type, smoke grenade launchers.

Fought M3 and in our open spaces.

Stories about weapons. Tank M3A "Stewart" outside and inside


The Red Army became the third army in terms of numbers M3 after the American and British armies. Under Lend-Lease, 1232 units were supplied to the USSR: 977 - in 1942 and 255 - in 1943.

The first 46 Stuarts arrived in the USSR in January 1942, and the last 16 arrived in April 1943. In the Soviet documents of those years it is impossible to meet either the symbols M3 or M3А1, or the name "Stewart". In the Red Army, the tank was called the M3 "light", or briefly M3.



The tank "did not enter" and did not use success. High road performance and seemingly superiority over the sum of characteristics over Soviet light tanks could not level the flaws.

The tank was distinguished by its really large size, poor booking and armament, was difficult, by Soviet standards, to operate. And the new Soviet light tanks T-60 and T-70 were superior in performance characteristics.

But the main "minus" was in the motor. The tank just ate a huge amount of high-octane aviation gasoline (see TTX), with which the USSR was very difficult.

In addition, initially, along with the “Stewarts”, only armor-piercing shells for the 37-mm cannon were supplied, which seriously limited the tank’s ability to fight infantry or anti-tank guns.

M3A entered the service of battalions of light tanks as part of tank brigades and individual tank battalions. The latter could have both a mixed composition - from medium M3 and light M3, as well as homogeneous.

Interestingly, the M3l became the first Soviet tanks that entered the battle against the Germans in the Battle of Kursk - on the night from 4 to 5 in July, the tanks of the 245-th separate tank regiment took over from the German troops, and the 11 of July M3l and M3 from this regiment took part in the battle of Prokhorov

Since May 1943, at the initiative of the Soviet side, the supply of tanks "Stuart" stopped. However, in a number of tank units they continued to be used on the Soviet-German front in 1943, 1944 and even in 1945. So, for example, as of 25 March 1945, the 1 of the cavalry-mechanized group of the 2 of the Ukrainian Front had 20 M3 tanks.

But in general, tankers only crossed themselves when the “Stewart” in the Red Army BTV was gone.


Hatches are quite good. And the review is excellent, and knock out any problems to the mechanic drive out of the car.

Rotation of the tower on the M3 modification tanks was carried out manually, using a shoulder rest, and starting with the M3A1 - using an electric drive. In the early “Stewarts”, the commander and loader were standing on the floor of the fighting compartment and were forced to move in accordance with the rotation of the tower, which was very difficult, considering the drive shaft passing through the fighting compartment.

Therefore, starting with the M3A1 modification, the “Stuart” received the so-called “tower basket” with seats for the commander and loader, which rotated with the tower.


Taken from the site mechvod. The basket is a strange thing. It is also removed along with the tower.





Not very spacious, yes.



On the left is the mechanical drive point, on the right is the machine gunner.












MTHNUMHA ТТХ "Stuart"

Years of production - 1941-1944
Number issued, pcs. - 23 685 [1]

dimensions
Body length, mm - 4531
Width, mm - 2235
Height, mm - 2640
Clearance, mm - 420

Reservation
Type of armor: steel surface hardened
The forehead of the body (top), mm / deg. - 38 / 17 °
The forehead of the body (middle), mm / deg. - 16 / 69 °
Board of the case, mm / hail. - 25 / 0 °
Body feed (top), mm / deg. - 25 / 59 °
Bottom, mm - 10-13
Housing roof, mm - 13
Front of the tower, mm / deg. - 38 / 10 °
Mask guns, mm / hail. - 38 / 0-14 °

weaponry
Caliber and brand of gun - 37 mm M6
Gun ammunition - 103
HV angles, deg. - −10 ... + 20 °

Machine Guns - 5 × 7,62-mm Browning M1919A4

Mobility
Engine Type - Torx 7-cylinder carburetor air cooling
Engine power, l. with. - 250
Highway speed, km / h - 61
Cruising on the highway, km - 113
Cruising over rough terrain, km - 72

Overcoming rise, hail. - 35 °
Breakable wall, m - 0,6
Overcoming ditch, m - 1,8
Overcoming ford, m - 0,9

In addition to the cannon, the M3 modification tank armament was made up of five 7,62-mm machine guns “Browning” M1919A4.

One of them was located in a unit attached to a cannon and controlled by the commander, the other was located in a ball mount in the front hull plate and was served by the shooter.

Two more were placed in the airborne sponsons, the fire from them was conducted remotely by a mechanic-driver with the help of trigger ropes. Somewhere there ... The aiming angle of the ball mounts of these machine guns was limited, and their aiming at the target was usually carried out by turning the whole machine.



The fifth, anti-aircraft machine gun was placed on the turret on the roof of the tower. Starting with the M3A1 modification, they abandoned the installation of on-board machine guns and replaced the machine gun paired with the gun with the M1919A5 version that was more suitable for installation in tanks.

Ammunition of machine guns, depending on the modification, ranged from 6250 to 8470 ammunition, mostly located in the fencing niches.

For self crew tanks equipped submachine gun Thompson mm caliber 11,43, 350-540 (depending on the tank modification) thereto and cartridges 14 hand grenades (4 defensive MkII, 2 offensive MkIIIA2, 4 flue M15 and 2 incendiary).
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    28 June 2018 15: 36
    Am I surprised by the quality of the conservation of the Amerov tank in comparison with Soviet technology? Everything is clean and decent, unlike native equipment. some Armageddon pancake. Or not our museum?
    1. +3
      28 June 2018 15: 49
      This is our museum. Cuban. Quality American ...
    2. +7
      28 June 2018 15: 50
      Take a trip to the UVZ museum - you can get inside there at 72 and 34-76 - everything is clean inside too. And if the exhibit is on the street, then youngsters usually litter it. In addition, if the exhibit "works" only in appearance, then they clog it up to the interior and do not serve it so intently.
    3. +3
      29 June 2018 05: 29
      I see, you saw a lot of museum tanks from the inside?
      The quality of cleanliness inside the tank depends on the attitude of the museum staff to the specific museum specimen.
  2. +13
    28 June 2018 16: 23
    In fact, armor and 38 mm for a light tank are very good.
    But Stuart’s lower frontal plate is larger - 44 mm,
    and gun mask - 51 mm
    For comparison:
    The Soviet light tank T-60 had armor of 20 mm
    The forehead of the hull of the T-34 medium tank was 45 mm
    Stuart's main problem in the USSR was high-quality automobile
    gasoline that was in short supply.
    1. 0
      28 June 2018 16: 32
      On the M3 were Continental W670-9A gasoline engines with a capacity of 250 hp.
      And they liked to “eat” gasolines of the first grade of brands B-70 or KB-70!
      In 1942, due to a shortage of standard Continental W670-9A gasoline aircraft engines with a capacity of 250 hp. some of the tanks were released with a Guiberson T-1020-4 diesel engine with a power of 265 hp. It should be noted that diesel tanks did not take root in the American army, they were used mainly for training purposes and exported. Aviation gasoline with an octane rating of at least 92 was used as fuel for tanks with gasoline engines. In case of emergency, gasoline with a lower octane rating, but not lower than 82, could be used.

      Diesel M3 was not supplied to the USSR.
      1. +3
        28 June 2018 18: 06
        He could not love B-70 or KB-70. They "ate" them in disgust and hunger.
        "Aviation gasoline with an octane rating of at least 92 was used as fuel for tanks with gasoline engines."
        Of Soviet gasolines at that time, only 4B-74 (92), 2B-78 (92), 3B-78 (93), 4B-78 (95) were suitable for this requirement. Everything else is an extreme case. The B-70 had an octane rating of 80 to 88.
        1. +5
          28 June 2018 20: 18
          In the Soviet Union, imported aviation gasoline and light gasoline fractions were used almost exclusively for mixing with Soviet aviation gasoline in order to increase their octane number, since Soviet aircraft engines could use gasoline with a much lower octane number than in the West. Suffice it to say that more than 97% of imported gasoline had an octane rating of 99 and higher, while in the USSR there was even a huge shortage of B-78 gasoline and the most common were B-70 and KB-70 gasolines.

          With good gasoline, we still have problems ...
      2. +5
        28 June 2018 18: 47
        Quote: hohol95
        On the M3 were Continental W670-9A gasoline engines with a capacity of 250 hp.
        And they liked to “eat” gasolines of the first grade of brands B-70 or KB-70!

        As well as domestic light tanks. smile
        The pre-war T-26 and BT demanded the B-70 or KB-70 "no worse than Baku or Grozny." T-60, 70 and SU-76 - too. Car gasoline was allowed to be used only in extreme cases.
      3. 0
        28 June 2018 20: 08
        Diesel M3 was not supplied to the USSR.

        I don’t know how it really was, but judging by the photograph, the Stuart diesel M3A1 was supplied. smile
        http://military-photo.com/usa/afv4/tank4/light4/m
        3l / 8266-photo.html
    2. 0
      28 June 2018 20: 14
      The forehead of the body (middle), mm / deg. - 16 / 69 °
      Board of the case, mm / hail. - 25 / 0 °
      Body feed (top), mm / deg. - 25 / 59 °

      Something not really and even the armor of the T-34 at the slopes and not 45 mm anymore
    3. 0
      29 June 2018 13: 32
      Quote: voyaka uh
      In fact, armor and 38 mm for a light tank are very good.

      But not in the case when there are so many cutouts and hatches
  3. +3
    28 June 2018 16: 29
    Stuart was called the Cadillac Tank smile due to automobile
    motor and high speed that he could develop.
    He is one of the longest running tanks.
    in the world. The Brazilian army wrote off the latter in the 90s.
    1. +3
      28 June 2018 17: 06
      American tanks installed Aviation gasoline engines!

      Indicate in the diagram the CAR ENGINE and even with a power of 250 hp!
      1. +5
        28 June 2018 18: 54
        Quote: hohol95
        Stuart was called the “Cadillac Tank” smile because of the car
        motor and high speed that he could develop.

        Quote: hohol95
        American tanks installed Aviation gasoline engines!

        Do not quarrel - you are both right. smile
        In the spring of 1942, a new Stuart was launched into production with a pair of Cadillac car engines - 2 × 110 hp. But it was no longer the M3 Stuart, but the M5 Stuart.
    2. +4
      28 June 2018 17: 24

      The book is good! Only the artist made a mistake - the M5 was never supplied to the USSR in quantities that could be used in battles!
      You confused the STUART M-3 and the STUART M-5 -
      M5 - a power plant of two carbureted 8-cylinder Cadillac Series 42 V8 engines with a total capacity of 220 liters. with. and the Cadillac Hydra-Matic automatic transmission. New fully welded body with frontal armor 63 mm thick. Tower and chassis - like M3A1. Manufactured 2074 units.

      This modification had a car engine!
      1. 0
        28 June 2018 20: 28
        Thank you for clarifying. smile
    3. +2
      28 June 2018 17: 54
      The Cadillac Tank was called a modification with two Cadillac Series 42 eight-cylinder engines and an automatic transmission. These are the versions of the M5. These tanks had the lowest power density, so they did not have any outstanding speed data.
    4. +4
      28 June 2018 18: 07
      And in the army of Paraguay in 2014, 10 pieces still traveled.
  4. +3
    28 June 2018 17: 43
    "1232 units were delivered under Lend-Lease in the USSR"
    According to the materials of the selection committee of the Main Bureau of the Engineering Corps of the US Red Army 1776 (104 lost during transportation) Stuart light tanks.
    According to RP Hunnicutt. Stuart. A history of the American Light Tank delivered 1681 tanks.
    Finance Office, War Department (1946), "Section III-A Ordnance-General Supplies", Quantities of Lend-Lease Shipments 1 766 tanks of the M3 and 5 M5 series.
  5. +1
    28 June 2018 20: 22
    A very solid tank of direct infantry support. smile Thanks to the author for high-quality "live" photos.
    http://military-photo.com/usa/afv4/tank4/light4/m
    3l / 5849-photo.html
    http://military-photo.com/usa/afv4/tank4/light4/m
    3l / 1119-photo.html

    Who wants to can read about a wonderful tank M3 Stuart following the link:
    https://www.drive2.ru/c/2823889/
    1. Alf
      +2
      28 June 2018 22: 30
      Quote: VictorZhivilov
      A very solid tank of direct infantry support

      Calling Stuart an NPP tank is something ... Allied NPP tank can be called Valentine, but this is not a miracle. A stewart is a reconnaissance tank; it is not suitable for more.
      1. 0
        28 June 2018 22: 59
        Quote: Alf
        A Stuart is a reconnaissance tank; it is not suitable for more.

        Normal machine TO TVD.
        1. +1
          29 June 2018 00: 05
          But how strong were the opposing Japanese tanks and anti-tank artillery of the Japanese army at that time? They also write about the insignificant use of anti-tank mines by the Japanese!
          1. +4
            29 June 2018 08: 04
            Quote: hohol95
            How strong were the opposing Japanese tanks and anti-tank artillery of the Japanese army at that time?

            Not too much. Therefore, Stuart was until the end of the war a normal machine of secondary directions.
      2. +1
        28 June 2018 23: 05
        I do not argue that Valentine A wonderful tank of direct infantry support. Especially with a 75 mm gun. smile
        http://military-photo.com/greatbritain/afv5/tank5
        /valentine/7629-photo.html
        But, in the war with Japan M3 Stuart He showed himself well. Mainly due to the peculiarities of warfare on the islands. smile
        http://military-photo.com/usa/afv4/tank4/light4/m
        3l / 14384-photo.html
        1. Alf
          +1
          28 June 2018 23: 07
          But the article is more about the Eastern Front.
          1. +1
            29 June 2018 08: 21
            Quote: Alf
            But the article is more about the Eastern Front.

            In the East, Stuart was adequate to light German cars. Two, 38t. From the Soviet T-60 and T-70.
            Let me remind you that in the 42nd year, 40% of the production of Soviet armored vehicles were T-60 and other ersatz. Against their background, Stuart stood out sharply in quality, but created an unacceptable, for a machine of this class, load on logistics.
          2. 0
            29 June 2018 09: 38
            But the article is more about the Eastern Front.

            This article is about M3 Stuart. smile
        2. +3
          28 June 2018 23: 58
          In 1945, Major General of the Tank Engineering Doctor of Technical Sciences Professor N. I. Gruzdev in the article "Analysis of the development of foreign tank equipment during the war years and the prospects for further improvement of tanks":
          "In the years 1940-1941. The USA had two tanks worked out: the MZL and MZs, or, as the Americans classified them, cavalry tank and artillery tank. If a cavalry tank was really required in terms of mobility, then the Americans created a full-fledged tank. The mobility of the MZL tank and its performance are truly amazing. In the war zone, both when driving on roads and in terrain, the MZL tank is the fastest of all known wheeled and tracked vehicles. But since the tank should harmoniously combine armor, speed and weapons, in this sense the MZL tank is inferior. The 37 mm caliber cannon - the main weapon of the MLW - is undoubtedly a weak weapon, and this is the main reason why the tank could not hold out on the battlefield for a long time. ”
        3. +1
          29 June 2018 00: 01
          The American and British tankers were lucky in terms of the small number and weaknesses of the main means of fighting tanks in the Japanese army!
          1. +1
            29 June 2018 08: 24
            Quote: hohol95
            The American and British tankers were lucky in terms of the small number and weaknesses of the main means of fighting tanks in the Japanese army!

            American and British tankers fought in Europe. They got the technique that seemed adequate (not always was adequate)
            1. +2
              29 June 2018 08: 39
              European and African theater of war were very significantly different from the Pacific or Southeast Asian countries in terms of quality and quantity of warring armored vehicles and artillery!
              The first tank battle between the Americans and Germans during World War II took place on November 26, 1942. On the eve of the 1st battalion of Lieutenant Colonel Waters from the 1st American Tank Regiment, moving east, went to the German airfield Jedid, which was covered only by a battery of light anti-aircraft guns. "Stuarts" brought down a hail of 37-mm shells on German aircraft standing on the runway. The airfield turned into one giant bonfire.
              The day after the successful airdrome attack, Waters’s tanks collided with a company of the 190th German tank battalion, moving along the highway from Matira to Taburba. As part of this unit there were tanks Pz.IVF2 and Pz.IIIJ. First, the Germans were fired upon by three M3 half-tracked armored personnel carriers with 75mm howitzers, without causing particular harm to them. The return fire of German tanks made the Americans hastily retreat. Then a company of "Stuarts" went on the attack, six of which were shot down in the first moments of the battle. But the second company under the cover of an olive grove was able to get around the Germans and hit them on the flank and rear. From these angles, the fire of 37 mm cannons was more effective. The Germans lost six Pz.IV and one Pz.III. True, the damage to combat vehicles was reduced to broken tracks and broken blinds of the engine compartments. Not a single American shell could penetrate the main armor of German tanks.

              Available in November 1942, Japanese tanks would definitely be burned in a similar situation.
              During the capture of the Roy Namur Islands by the Americans in February 1944, only ten M4A2 and three light M5A1 from the 4th tank battalion of the marine corps. The opposing Japanese forces looked accordingly: 5 tankettes and 2 Ka-mi amphibious tanks.
  6. 0
    28 June 2018 21: 04
    The United States was absolutely not ready for WWII. In 1940, they had in their army 400 obsolete tanks.
    1. 0
      28 June 2018 23: 03
      Quote: Aron Zaavi
      The United States was absolutely not ready for WWII.

      1. You forgot about the fleet.
      2. On tanks you are absolutely right. In the 40th, the USSR, for example, had the KV-1 and T-34 series, and the Americans had the M2 light tank (37 mm cannon, 5 rifle machine guns) and several M2 Medium Tank (the same thing, 7 rifle machine guns caliber) (yes, the names of the Americans had trouble). So what?
    2. +6
      29 June 2018 10: 13
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      The United States was absolutely not ready for WWII. In 1940, they had in their army 400 obsolete tanks.

      The United States, with its anti-tank ditches in the form of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, preparedness for war is determined not by the availability of equipment, but by the strength of the fleet and the capabilities of industry. smile
      1. +1
        29 June 2018 15: 36
        Quote: Alexey RA
        readiness for war is determined not by the availability of equipment, but by the strength of the fleet and the capabilities of industry.

        Americans thought so too.
        But it turned out that releasing 70 Sherman a day, you can get 16 tank battalions in a week.
        But a tank division cannot be received in a week. Not a year. Not for two.