Stories about weapons. Wedge t-xnumx

50
Why was this strange thing invented at all? Something like that between a fully formed by then a tank and an armored car that has been in service with the armies for more than a dozen years. Three if so.





It's simple. Military thought did not stand still, and the experience of the First World War showed that ordinary cavalry reconnaissance is, of course, a classic, but ... Sometimes it is not bad when reconnaissance can be carried out under conditions of certain protection of intelligence officers.

Aviation? Yes. When it is at hand and weather conditions allow. Cavalry? Yes. If there is no opposition. Armored car? Yes, it’s warmer, but the car, all the more so, weighed down by armor, will go far from everywhere.

So a portrait of a light armored vehicle on a track was drawn, armed at least with a machine gun and with anti-bullet reservation.

In short, the wedge in 20-30 of the last century was considered quite a logical means of conducting intelligence.



The command of the Red Army did not remain aloof from world currents, and also decided to adopt such a little thing. Useful, as it was believed in theory.

The basis was, as was fashionable at the time, the English wedge "Cardin-Loyd" Mk VI. In 1929, the state commission under the leadership of I. A. Khalepsky purchased a sample of wedge shoes and documentation.

Stories about weapons. Wedge t-xnumx


English wedge, let's say, did not shine. This was obvious even from the point of view of the un spoiled Soviet military. Therefore, if the two-strike machine gun tank T-26 was almost a complete copy of the Vickers six-ton, the T-27 was quite different from the English prototype.



In general, "Carden-Loyd" was pretty reworked and in 1931, as the wedge T-27, was adopted by the Red Army.



The T-27 had a box-shaped body assembled from rolled armor plates on rivets. Ford's engine from GAZ-AA, HP 40 power. Soviet engineers were able to push between the places of the driver and machine-gunner. Thanks to this, it was possible to drastically reduce the length of the hull, which affected maneuverability and terrain.

In general, in the construction units and mechanisms of mass-produced Soviet cars were used to the maximum, which made the wedge shoes very inexpensive to manufacture.

They released T-27 not for long, about two years. But considering all of the above, 3342 machines have been released over these two years. T-27 were used in reconnaissance units of combined arms and tank units, were in service with the airborne brigades, where they carried out large-scale experiments on paratroop and parachute landing.

The wedge was armed with a 7,62-mm machine gun DT, ammunition which was 2520 cartridges in 40 disks.



The disks were placed in the side case boxes. For shooting, a simple mechanical sight was used. On tankettes of the first year of release, the machine gun was mounted on a special gun carriage, which provided vertical guidance of the machine gun and was connected with the lift pedal and a special sector, which theoretically made it possible to conduct anti-aircraft fire.

Subsequently, this was abandoned and the installation of the machine gun was carried out in a special flange, which provided more convenient guidance of the machine gun, both vertically and horizontally, as well as better protection of the arrow from bullets and shrapnel.

The first Soviet flamethrower tank HT-27 was created on the basis of the tanket. The fire mixture was ejected with compressed air to a distance of up to 25 meters. In the mid-thirties, light self-propelled artillery was created on the basis of the wedge, armed with a Kurchevsky 76-mm dynamo-reactive cannon, but did not go into the series, like all the “brilliant” works of Kurchevsky.

Attempts were made to install even more powerful weapons on the T-27, including the Hotchkiss 37-mm cannon and the 76,2-mm cannon, but they had to be abandoned because the chassis could not withstand the increased mass of the vehicle. Moreover, tests have shown that a light (less than 3 tons) wedge just lost stability when firing from a gun of this caliber.

In addition, in the tiny body of the wedge was not enough room to store ammunition to the gun. But what to say, the designers could not find a place to house the radio station, and it seemed that the reconnaissance vehicle was prevented from transmitting the reconstructed data.

Communication could only be carried out with other crews through flag signals. But for the Red Army of the time it was normal.



The performance of the T-27 was also not entirely unambiguous. On the one hand, a very simple and reliable design that does not require special skills and abilities to maintain. On the other hand, the permeability was below average. Narrow caterpillars did not allow easily overcome swamps, mud and deep snow.

It was also recognized that the light tank / wedge just needed a rotating tower and the ability to overcome water obstacles by swimming. So based on the T-27 and taking into account its operational experience, a light amphibious tank T-37 was created. But this is completely different. storyThe fact is that the whole family of Soviet light amphibious tanks was created based on the experience of using the T-27.

What would you do if there was nothing else? However, Guderian also developed his strategies from scratch. And nothing happened. The same happened with our tank designers.



In general, by the 1933, the 65 battalions of 50 tankettes in each were formed in the armored forces of the Red Army. T-27 even managed to make war. Tankettes were very useful in suppressing gangs of basmachs in Central Asia in the 30-s.

Were tested and the possibility of landing wedges. In 1935, the air transport of T-27 tank shoes suspended from heavy bombers TB-3 was tested.



The device with which the suspension was carried out was developed by the inventor A. F. Kravtsev. With the help of this device, the T-27 tankettes were not only suspended from the aircraft, but also dropped from a low height to the ground.

By 1941, the T-27 was considered obsolete and removed from the front line. There is evidence of their use in battles in 1941, but these were simply attempts to use everything that was at hand.

If we consider the issue seriously, the combat capabilities of the T-27 wedges were small. Her armor was punched from a distance of the order of 200-300 with armor-piercing German rifle bullets of the caliber 7,92-mm, moreover, such a bullet could easily put the wedge out of action.



If we talk about anti-tank rifles of the type of captured Polish rifle Maroszek or our own PzB 39, not to mention the anti-tank guns, then there was no chance at all.

There was nothing to oppose, because T-27 was gradually removed from the composition of the parts.

However, this does not mean that the tank shoes were written off for scrap. The above qualities with respect to cheapness and ease of maintenance have made the T-27 quite a good artillery tractor.



In addition, the T-27 could well be used for patrols, headquarters protection, as an armored tractor and transporter. The Germans, who generally did not disdain anything that fell into their hands, used any trophies that fell to them to protect bridges, airfields, and to fight partisans.

I will not utter the phrase "for its time." The T-27 tanket, whatever it was in essence, was a kind of launching platform for the appearance of a whole family of tanks. Perhaps it was not worth it to release in such quantities, it was clearly unnecessary, but that was the general trend at that time. Gigantomania ...



But again, working with a small wedge allowed the designers to train until the creation of quite large tanks. The main thing, as they say, is to begin.

Wedge T-27. Performance characteristics



Combat weight: 2,7 t

Dimensions:
Length: 2600 mm
Width: 1825 mm
Height: 1443 mm

Crew: 2 person



Armament: 1x7,62-mm machine gun DT
Ammunition: 2500 ammo

Reservations (forehead enclosure): 10 mm

Engine: carburetor Ford-AA, hp power 40

Maximum speed: 40-42 km / h
Power reserve: 110-120 km



As I said, the base T-27 has become a testing ground for working out different machines for the purpose.

HT-27. Chemical, that is, flamethrower tank. Machine gun left. A backpack flamethrower has been added, sending fire mixture to 25 meters using compressed air. Retooled 12 machines.



TT-27. Tele-controlled wedge. Carried a charge of explosives and remotely exploded in the camp of the enemy. It could also spray toxic substances or, on the contrary, carry out the degassing of the area. Built 5 instances.

CT-27. Project SAU with 76-mm regimental gun. The gun was mounted on the same wedge, and the ammunition and the calculation moved to another. This separation posed the threat of separation in the battle of the calculation and ammunition from his gun. The 3 prototype was released. The car was overloaded and could not move off the roads. The project has been stopped.



T-27 (supply wrist) On the sides of the wedge were installed two side pockets designed to transport 40 cartridge boxes (880 kg) and 24 curb machine guns.



MZ-27. Minelayer. The machine gun was not removed, loaded 170 mines, laid in a drum weighing 480 kg. Issued at least 5 MZ-27.



T-27PH. An underwater walking wedge, equipped with an air intake, with a sealed enclosure and a modified exhaust pipe design. The wedge overcame water barriers at a depth of up to 3 meters and could be under water for up to 30 minutes. Made by 1 prototype.







AC-T-27 is an airfield tractor based on T-27, equipped with a KAS-2 car starter for launching aircraft engines. Converted from 3 to 10 machines.



One can only wonder how much work has been done with one wedging.

Sources:
M. Baryatinsky. "Wedge T-27 and others."
M. Svirin. "Armor is strong. History of the Soviet tank 1919-1937".
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    18 September 2018 05: 37
    In fact, the T-27 was not developed as a reconnaissance vehicle, but as a full-fledged combat unit. Tukhach raved about the idea of ​​thousands of armada of such babies, calling them "men at arms of the 37th century." It was assumed that thanks to the armor and self-propelledness, the wedge will be able to replace the foot machine gun crew. But practice has shown that a tankette without a turret is ineffective in battle, that the view is disgusting, and it is necessary to make tankettes with a circular turret. As a result, the T-XNUMX was created.
    1. +8
      18 September 2018 10: 05
      Tukhachevsky was not the first!
      The French Colonel J. Etienne and the British Major J. Martel dreamed of "swarms of armored skirmishers" - light and cheap armored vehicles with a crew of one or two people. Such ultra-small cars were called “wedges” - the French diminutive of the English word “tank”. After the war ended, the idea of ​​their creation and combat use was developed by the British military theorist J. Fuller. In the mid-1920s, a kind of tanket boom began.

      And the reason for this was the TRIUMPH Renault Renault FT-17! The two-seater was cheaper, simpler and more manoeuvrable than its heavy counterparts!
      So the idea of ​​an even lighter and simpler machine for "dressing every infantryman in armor" was born in the minds of the military!
      And all light tanks and wedges in the Red Army / SA fell into reconnaissance because of a stupid opinion - since it’s easy (with respect to something), it means a scout! PT-76 tanks were transferred to the reconnaissance unit of tank divisions!
      1. +1
        18 September 2018 12: 12
        Quote: hohol95
        So the idea of ​​an even lighter and simpler machine for "dressing every infantryman in armor" was born in the minds of the military!

        How did these stupid theorists get it! Why, before adopting such blind and deaf cans, do not yourself get into this wedge heel and ride in it for at least 20 km? For example, Stalin himself did not disdain and was not too lazy to personally inspect the adopted equipment models, such as ISU-152:
        1. +5
          18 September 2018 13: 47
          All witnesses to this event note that before the show crews were removed from the cars, except for the driver, replacing those absent by a state security officer. The vehicles delivered to the Kremlin aroused the keen interest of the leader, who wanted to climb on ISU-152. None of those present expected this, and no ladder was stocked. Two zealous generals rushed to help the leader, but he dismissed them and climbed into the heavy artillery self-propelled guns independently, after which, looking at the combat department, he asked the state security officer what was done in the new self-propelled guns to improve ventilation, since during the fighting on the Kursk Bulge cases of crew poisoning with powder gases. It is clear that the respondent was silent as a partisan during interrogation, but the resourceful driver saved the situation and reported to the leader that an additional fan of the fighting compartment had been introduced in the indicated self-propelled guns.

          BUT...
          Having finished the inspection, the leader descended to the ground and congratulated the People's Commissar V.A. Malysheva with a new achievement, and on September 4, 1943, with GKO decree No. 4043ss, heavy tanks KV-85, IS-85 and IS-152 (future ISU-152) were adopted by the Red Army. But if in relation to the KV-85 and IS-85 this could mean the immediate organization of mass production, then with the IS-152 this was still a long way off.
          Factory tests, passed in September 1943 and showed the machine many shortcomings, and most importantly - the cost of the sample was significantly higher than planned. Therefore, in September, the release of the SU-152 (KV-14) was preserved, and the IS-152 (ISU-152) was sent for revision.

          The Supreme did not climb inside the self-propelled gun! But, as you can see from the text, I knew what to ask!
          He knew about the problems of Soviet technology from the first hands, so to speak - from reports and complaints from the front!
          And it turned out that the designers did not think out the ventilation system of the fighting compartment!
          And I was well aware of the problems of the T-34 tank in terms of quality -
          The quality of the Sormovo tanks left much to be desired. In this regard, it will be appropriate to quote the words of Stalin, who in June 1942 wrote to V. Malyshev: “... and in conclusion, Comrade Malyshev, I really want to hope that you will finally be able to do something with the“ Sormovsky freak ”on which our tankers are afraid to fight ...”
        2. +3
          18 September 2018 13: 58
          Quote: Kot_Kuzya
          For example, Stalin himself did not disdain and was not too lazy to personally inspect the adopted equipment models, such as ISU-152:

          This is not ISU-152, but SU-152 of the penultimate series. We read the source:
          8 September 1943 of
          Today vol. Stalin, Molotov, Voroshilov, Beria, Shcherbakov examined in the Kremlin new tanks and artillery self-propelled guns IS, KV-85, SU-152, SU-85, S-76.
          Comrade Stalin himself climbed onto the IS, SU-152 and SU-85 tank (Comrade Stalin climbed the tanks for the first time). He carefully asked about the advantages of the new tanks, especially the IS and SU-85.
          He reproached that a self-propelled gun SU-152 did not have a fan in the fighting compartment. I promised that in 7 days we will deliver.
          I asked why, with thicker armor and a more powerful gun, the weight of the IS tank was no more than KB, I showed Comrade. Stalin on both tanks and drew his attention to the fact that the dimensions of the IS tank are smaller than KB, and said that due to this it was possible to reduce weight. Comrade Stalin said: "This is good."
          About the SU-85, he said that we need more of these machines. "She is a light, agile machine, jumps well and will beat German Tigers and Ferdinands well," said Comrade. Stalin.
          I was struck by the fact that Comrade Stalin in his years so easily climbed into tanks without outside help. He asked drivers and artillerymen whether it was convenient to work, whether it was crowded, if gases were stifled, etc.

          © from the records of the People's Commissar of the Tank Industry Malyshev

          Anyway, the ISU-152 "in metal" in September 1943 is fantastic.
          1. 0
            18 September 2018 14: 53
            In your opinion, the IS-1 (IS-85) tank could have been in the metal, but there is NO self-propelled gun with a 152 mm howitzer gun based on it?
            Then which car was factory tested in September 1943?
            Is the SU-152 (KV-14) preserved or the IS-152 (ISU-152)?
            1. +3
              18 September 2018 15: 59
              Quote: hohol95
              In your opinion, the IS-1 (IS-85) tank could have been in the metal, but there is NO self-propelled gun with a 152 mm howitzer gun based on it?

              No. Because the prototype ISU-152 - about. 241 - was made in metal in October 1943. And he could not get to Moscow a month earlier. smile
              Quote: hohol95
              Then which car was factory tested in September 1943?

              None. Tests of the IS-152 were conducted in October 1943.
              ... according to the results of the combat use of the SU-152 at the front, it became known that when firing inside the fighting compartment a large amount of powder gases accumulated, which caused the crew to “burn out”. This became known not only at the GABTU, but also at the highest level. The question of solving this problem on September 8, 1943, during the demonstration in the Kremlin of new types of armored vehicles, was personally raised by Stalin. In accordance with his decree, from September 23, 152 fans began to be installed on the roof of the fighting compartment of the SU-2. In total, 84 cars were delivered by the end of September.
              In October the situation with the SU-152 began to change. The fact is that self-propelled gun IS-152 came out for testing this month (ISU-152). On November 6, by GKO Decree No. 4504 “On the Heavy Self-propelled Artillery Mount IS-152 with the ML-20s Howitzer Cannon,” the new self-propelled gun was adopted.
              © Y. Pasholok
              1. +1
                18 September 2018 16: 01
                So you need to believe Yu. Pasholok and not believe M. Svirin?
                1. +2
                  18 September 2018 16: 36
                  Quote: hohol95
                  So you need to believe Yu. Pasholok and not believe M. Svirin?

                  Dear Mikhail Nikolaevich wrote a review paper on the basis of the documents that he had at that time. And uv. Yuri Pasholok wrote a monograph specifically on heavy self-propelled guns based on HF, searching through all the archives.
                  So in this case, I am more inclined to trust the data given in the book on SU-152.
                  Moreover, in another photo of the same show, the characteristic SU-152 feed is visible with a rounded aft sheet and transmission access hatches located on the MTO roof.
      2. +1
        18 September 2018 19: 21
        Quote: hohol95
        Tukhachevsky was not the first!
        The French Colonel J. Etienne and the British Major J. Martel dreamed of "swarms of armored skirmishers" - light and cheap armored vehicles with a crew of one or two people. Such ultra-small cars were called “wedges” - the French diminutive of the English word “tank”. After the war ended, the idea of ​​their creation and combat use was developed by the British military theorist J. Fuller. In the mid-1920s, a kind of tanket boom began.

        And the reason for this was the TRIUMPH Renault Renault FT-17! The two-seater was cheaper, simpler and more manoeuvrable than its heavy counterparts!
        So the idea of ​​an even lighter and simpler machine for "dressing every infantryman in armor" was born in the minds of the military!
        And all light tanks and wedges in the Red Army / SA fell into reconnaissance because of a stupid opinion - since it’s easy (with respect to something), it means a scout! PT-76 tanks were transferred to the reconnaissance unit of tank divisions!

        The reconnaissance battalion was a company PT-76. Probably due to the fact that floating. I found their school - I remember the wind in my ears laughing
    2. 0
      19 September 2018 07: 26
      The T-37 is more of a reconnaissance floating vehicle.
      Still, the development of this type is more suitable machine gun T_26
  2. +1
    18 September 2018 09: 27
    initially the concept of pornography, what kind of a reconnaissance vehicle, there after a hour and a half the crew will be incapable of chattering in a twisted body position, it would be necessary to make a superstructure then release the armored personnel carrier, we and the British had similar projects, by and large it could be made permissible tow truck for the wounded for 2-3 speed bumps, or a towing vehicle for 45 mm cannons as indicated in the article, this miracle was no good
    1. +1
      18 September 2018 11: 05
      Explain your position to these gentlemen - the French Colonel J. Etienne and the British Major J. Martel!
  3. +4
    18 September 2018 09: 32
    What can I say, the designers could not find a place to place the radio station, and it seems that the reconnaissance machine was deprived of the ability to transmit reconnoitered data.

    Wedges, which countries were equipped with radio stations?
    Italian CV3 / 33. Polish TK-3 / TKS or maybe Czechoslovak AH-IV?
  4. BAI
    +2
    18 September 2018 09: 42
    At the initial stage of the war in Spain, Italians on tankettes fought well until our tanks appeared.
    1. +3
      18 September 2018 10: 36
      The Italians used the main weapon for fighting tanks with the 47-mm Breda M-35 infantry gun, and directly with the Spanish units on both sides: the 40-mm Ramirez de Arellano infantry gun mod. 1933. In addition to them, 37 mm automatic guns of Beaufors and MacLean were also used for the purpose of anti-theft fire, the last of which was still in 1917.

      All tankers and crews of armored vehicles were "extremely uncomfortable" in that war.
      They were burned with bottles of combustible mixtures, thrown with bags of dynamite sabers, shot from heavy machine guns and anti-tank guns, stormed from the air!
  5. +11
    18 September 2018 10: 43
    The written "strategists" must definitely kick Tukhachevsky, who has "stamped" as many as 3342 T-27 tankettes.
    And in France, where Tukhachevsky was not, for the period from 1932 to 1940, 4496 Renault UE Chenillette were "stamped".
    And the British, somewhat rethinking the concept, on the basis of their Cardin-Lloyd Model VI in 1936 created the Universal Carrier, which until 1945 were "stamped" by about 113000, and which were used in some places until 1962.
    1. +8
      18 September 2018 10: 52
      And willingly received for the Red Army by Lend-Lease!
      1. BAI
        +2
        18 September 2018 16: 35
        Australia used something similar.

        Soldiers of the Australian Mounted Troops move on the armored personnel carrier "Bren Carrier". Africa, January 7, 1941
        1. +2
          18 September 2018 16: 40
          Vgep Gun Carrier.
          Adopted as the carrier of the 7,7 mm Bren machine gun around 1935.
          In general, the car was not much different from the previous model, which allowed to remake part of the early cars into the carriers of the Bren machine gun.
          At the same time, one machine in each platoon was armed with the Boyce anti-tank rifle.
          One of the varieties of the Universal Carrier Mk.I family
    2. 0
      18 September 2018 12: 10
      It was necessary for the RKK to rivet 3342 tractors, then it would not have been necessary to throw thousands of guns, tanks and property onto the battlefield in June-July 41st.
      1. +3
        18 September 2018 13: 57
        What enterprises rivet 3342 tractor? Do not share the list?
        1. +1
          18 September 2018 14: 09
          Apparently, Vadim meant to rivet tractors instead of useless tankettes on the T-27 chassis. There would be more benefits from these tractors than from useless blind, dumb and deaf "scouts". 45-mm and regimental 76-mm guns would be quite capable of such a tractor.
          1. +4
            18 September 2018 14: 20
            The power of such tractors would only be enough for a "forty-five"! The regimental guns had to be transferred to a sprung course and, because of the single-bar carriage, the coupling devices had to be used only for the developed gun.
            And it is not known whether such a tractor would have pulled a weapon 400 kg heavier than the "magpie".
            In addition, tractors based on the T-27 could not pull behind them guns with the front! In all the photos they pull only guns! So you would also need a machine for transporting shells and gun crews!
            1. +1
              18 September 2018 15: 05
              I am referring to the 1943-g halves made on the chassis of 45 mm cannons. They were slightly heavier than the 45-mm guns and also had a sprung course.
              1. +3
                18 September 2018 15: 21
                I will repeat the question - where were these tractors to be produced? Or is the T-20 "Komsomolets" tractor not enough for you?
                As of January 1, 1941, there were 4401 artillery tractor T-20 "Komsomolets", which amounted to 20,5% of the fleet of special tractors.
                1. -1
                  18 September 2018 16: 13
                  A 45-mm guns on June 1, 1941, numbered about 15 thousand pieces. That is, the vast majority of forty-five horseback riding at a speed of 5-6 km / h. Extra 3300 tractors for these guns would not hurt.
                  1. +2
                    18 September 2018 16: 22
                    At which enterprises was the opportunity to convert all 3 thousand T-27s into an artillery tractor?
                    Here is the answer to me? Which or which plants could do this?
                    At the same time, the wedges removed from the parts had to be replaced with something.
                    Transport to the place of conversion and naturally overhaul!
                    Were there any spare parts?
                    On June 1, 1941, there were 2558 T-27 tankettes in the Red Army, and 1134 were operational! So it was a little tight with spare parts ...
                    1. -2
                      18 September 2018 23: 16
                      I mean, if it were not for the "genius" Tukhach, the T-27 would have been originally made as tractors for 45-mm guns.
        2. 0
          18 September 2018 22: 17
          At the Leningrad, Kharkov and Stalingrad tractor, for three years it was quite possible to arrange the production of these tractors - something like the German heavy armored personnel carrier sWS
          1. +2
            18 September 2018 22: 22
            Tractors were just one of the factors of the Germans' fast attack, when calculating the armored vehicles of the parties they were not taken into account, and they were a mobile means accompanying German tanks - anti-tank, anti-aircraft, and large-caliber artillery.
          2. +1
            19 September 2018 08: 25
            Yeah ... Oh, good to live in the era of the Internet! And do not work on a milling machine ...
            February 13, 1931 by a resolution of the Revolutionary Military Council of the USSR, the Vickers-26 tank was adopted by the Red Army under the T-26 index. Its production was supposed to be deployed at the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant under construction, then at the Stalingrad (also under construction), and at the latter it was planned to create a special workshop capable of releasing up to 10 thousand tanks a year in wartime.

            So how many T-26s did these plants produce after being put into operation?
            Anyway, what were they doing all the time until 1941?
            Probably all crap ... Tractors for the national economy ...
            The USSR and cars had fewer motorcycles!
            What could they produce, and in the quantities that both the reserves of resources and the workers were capable of!
            1. -1
              19 September 2018 19: 35
              I started just on milling and turning machines, and now my production is 28 DMG machining centers.
    3. +2
      18 September 2018 12: 22
      Quote: Curious
      And in France, where Tukhachevsky was not, for the period from 1932 to 1940, 4496 Renault UE Chenillette were "stamped".

      This "freak" was used by the French as artillery tractors for 25-mm anti-tank guns and as carriers of ammunition to the front line. For the French in general, between the World Wars, all the tanks that were accepted for service were all, without exception, worthless junk. What kind of stupid and dirty FT-17 fan must be to make single turrets even on medium tanks?
      Quote: Curious
      And the British, somewhat rethinking the concept, on the basis of their Cardin-Lloyd Model VI in 1936 created the Universal Carrier, which until 1945 were "stamped" by about 113000, and which were used in some places until 1962.

      This is an armored personnel carrier, not wedges. And of course, that they were stamped a lot, because armored personnel carriers need a lot.
      1. +4
        18 September 2018 13: 04
        Yes, to the French and the British in 1935, a couple of site "strategists" - world history would have gone a completely different path. And if only a couple of Stalin - put out the light.
        And Universal Carrier - if you draw from Vicky, then yes, an armored personnel carrier. Only the British themselves called it a "universal transporter", which they tried to do from the T-27.
        1. +3
          18 September 2018 19: 28
          Quote: Curious
          Yes, to the French and the British in 1935, a couple of site "strategists" - world history would have gone a completely different path. And if only a couple of Stalin - put out the light.

          Not ... Vissarionych doesn’t need - why would he need a couple more workers at the logging site? smile Because our strategists will promptly propose to make sub-caliber shells - and in response to them "no tungsten, make a core of substitutes“And after a year of unsuccessful testing of these“ substitutes ”, strategists will go to redeem their money and time spent with hard work.
          It was the unsuccessful attempts of specialized developers to replace tungsten that they rolled - because they got this work from above. And the initiators will fly in full - like the citizen Brzezinski, who promised to create a super destroyer and received at the output something with performance characteristics worse than the serial "seven", flew in.
      2. +1
        18 September 2018 13: 56
        You are wrong! This vehicle was originally intended to carry a Vickers machine gun.
        The development of the most massive British armored personnel carrier of the Second World War began in the mid-1930s as part of the creation of the so-called machine gun carrier - a machine for transporting a Vickers heavy machine gun. When creating the machine, the chassis of the Vickers-Carden-Lloyd light tank was used. In 1936, Vickers-Armstrong manufactured 13 armored personnel carriers that received the designation Machine Gun Carrier No. 1 Mark I. However, soon seven of them were upgraded to version No. 2 Mark 1 - the machine gunner received an armored cabin advanced forward, and the front of the machine acquired your finished look. This modification of the herd first launched into mass production. The official order was 110 units.

        Design changes continued until 1937! And from 1937 to 1945 the last modification was produced - the well-known BTR Universal Carrier Mk.I.
        Machine Gun Carrier No. 1 Mark I.
        Machine Gun Carrier No. 2 Mark I.
        Vgep Gun Carrier.
        Scout carrier.
        Universal Carrier Mk.I
    4. +2
      18 September 2018 14: 01
      Quote: Curious
      And the British, somewhat rethinking the concept, on the basis of their Cardin-Lloyd Model VI in 1936 created the Universal Carrier, which until 1945 were "stamped" by about 113000, and which were used in some places until 1962.

      UC is more likely not a wedge, but a "micromotlega": a universal chassis-carrier of weapons (in stock - a machine gun).
    5. +2
      18 September 2018 17: 57
      And in France, where Tukhachevsky was not, for the period from 1932 to 1940, 4496 Renault UE Chenillette were "stamped"
      - sorry, but this vehicle was originally positioned as a light armored personnel carrier or a tankette for supplying infantry and weapons did not have, but it had a carrying capacity of under half a ton, the purpose is different, our classmate of this Frenchman is a tractor "Komsomolets"
  6. +1
    18 September 2018 12: 05
    The T-27 wedge, whatever it was in fact, was a kind of launching platform for the appearance of a whole family of tanks.

    ... Renault UE 2 for comparison.

    ... and the Polish counterpart of TKS (anyone interested) hi
  7. +1
    18 September 2018 13: 25
    If we consider the issue seriously, the combat capabilities of the T-27 wedges were small. Her armor made its way from a distance of the order of 200-300 m armor-piercing German rifle bullets caliber 7,92-mm, moreover, such a bullet could very well disable the wedge. Why are there Germans and 41! Back in the 30s, the T-27 was hit by basmachi from English rifles rifle armor-piercing bullets...
    And the wedge did not "die" in the 40s! Once in one military magazine of the 60-70s there was a picture of a small-sized tracked open conveyor with a 120-mm mortar on a trailer (France). In the description, this conveyor was called a wedge ... wink
    1. +3
      18 September 2018 15: 26
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      ... And the wedge did not "die" in the 40s

      hi ... She left to return in the 1970s.
      Porsche released several prototypes of the future Bundeswehr fighting vehicle in 1975, but the Bundeswehr stopped the project in 1978 due to lack of funds. However, Porsche continued to develop, due to interest from other countries.

      In 1985, the Bundeswehr ordered 343 vehicles. The Wiesel was introduced as a new weapon system for the Bundeswehr with supplies starting in the late 1980s. The vehicle was named Wiesel ("weasel") because of its small size and maneuverability, which make it very difficult to spot on the battlefield. Production of the Wiesel 1 ended in 1993. Of the 343 Wiesel vehicles, 1 210 were armed with a Raytheon anti-tank guided missile system, and a 133-single KUKA E6-II-A1 turret, armed with a 20-mm Rheinmetall autocannon with a double feed. Germany deployed both types to Somalia in 1993 as part of a UN force ... hi
      1. +1
        18 September 2018 19: 33
        Quote: san4es
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        ... And the wedge did not "die" in the 40s

        hi ... She left to return in the 1970s.
        Porsche released several prototypes of the future Bundeswehr fighting vehicle in 1975, but the Bundeswehr stopped the project in 1978 due to lack of funds. However, Porsche continued to develop, due to interest from other countries.

        In 1985, the Bundeswehr ordered 343 vehicles. The Wiesel was introduced as a new weapon system for the Bundeswehr with supplies starting in the late 1980s. The vehicle was named Wiesel ("weasel") because of its small size and maneuverability, which make it very difficult to spot on the battlefield. Production of the Wiesel 1 ended in 1993. Of the 343 Wiesel vehicles, 1 210 were armed with a Raytheon anti-tank guided missile system, and a 133-single KUKA E6-II-A1 turret, armed with a 20-mm Rheinmetall autocannon with a double feed. Germany deployed both types to Somalia in 1993 as part of a UN force ... hi

        Yeah, Wiesel! Learned without reading the text. laughing drinks
        1. 0
          18 September 2018 20: 22
          hi ... Valentine.
          Quote: Doliva63
          ... Wiesel! Learned without reading the text. laughing drinks

          ... Have you really seen it "in kind"? smile
  8. +1
    18 September 2018 19: 08
    In fact - the prototype of the BRM laughing
  9. +1
    18 September 2018 20: 12
    And yet, what was the bad idea itself?
    An armored wedge is much better and more practical than a motorcycle with a machine gun. For a raid on the rear, where there is no anti-tank threat, it’s not bad at all.
    Execution let us down.
  10. 0
    19 September 2018 12: 35
    Interesting tachanka
  11. +1
    19 September 2018 15: 53
    For diving, with breathing tubes and mouthpieces ... No, "I disagree. Better cut me here."
  12. +1
    22 September 2018 14: 41
    by the fact that I know that there were more 25-30 air-launched aircraft and they were designed to perform three tasks - an air-launched, an airplane tractor and an airfield patrol car, the rework of the old tankette was successful, the equipment for starting aircraft engines did not interfere with the use of a machine gun, aircraft were towed successfully and all these cars hit the air regiments
  13. 0
    7 November 2018 13: 17
    Quote: BAI
    At the initial stage of the war in Spain, Italians on tankettes fought well until our tanks appeared.


    Good afternoon, colleague.

    The knights fought well, too, until crossbows with their bolts appeared. hi

    Quote: Doliva63

    The reconnaissance battalion was a company PT-76. Probably due to the fact that floating. I found their school - I remember the wind in my ears


    We, the 54th OTP, had three PTukhs in the reconnaissance company, all with Zarya stabilizers. They ran really splendidly and the nickname was "Army Volga", and the second - "Samovar", this is for armor. smile