Stories about weapons. ZIS-30. Very bad luck

Interesting artillery system, created in the shortest possible time, but, unfortunately, not released a large series, and therefore did not make a significant contribution to the victory over the European team.

German mobility of mechanized and tank units at the beginning of the war immediately revealed the need for the Red Army in the means of confrontation. And not just anti-tank, but in mobile anti-tank and anti-aircraft self-propelled guns.

Tank units of the Wehrmacht turned out to be too operational, Soviet antitank batteries mounted on horse-drawn and car-thrusters looked too sluggish in terms of maneuver. And too vulnerable.

1 July 1941, the people's commissar of armaments, Boris Lvovich Vannikov, signed an order to read as follows:

“In view of the urgent need for anti-tank and anti-aircraft self-propelled artillery, and due to the lack of a special base for them, I order:

1. Plant No.4 develop and manufacture an 37-mm anti-aircraft gun on a self-propelled chassis;
2. Plant No.8 develop and manufacture 85-mm anti-aircraft and anti-tank guns on self-propelled chassis;
3. Plant No.92 develop and manufacture an 57-mm anti-tank gun on a self-propelled chassis.

When designing equipment, focus on the industrial trucks used by artillery and all-terrain or tracked tractors. Anti-tank guns must also have an armored cockpit. Projects of self-propelled units must be submitted for review on July 15 of the year.

In fact, on the shoulders of Vannikov lay the problem of correcting the mistakes of Comrade Kulik, who understood little in artillery in general and command in particular, but the huge ambitions of Marshal Kulik allowed him to bury a lot.

Including ZIS-2, the excellent 57-mm anti-tank gun Grabin.

But here it is more appropriate to give the floor to Grabin himself.

“Our design bureau, for many years developing the issue of increasing the mobility of artillery systems, concluded that artillery needs not only high speeds on the march along the roads, but also good maneuverability on the battlefield.

We decided to install the guns on a tracked vehicle - to create a self-propelled gun. First of all, it concerned the anti-tank and divisional artillery: then it could appear where it was not expected.

At the end of 1940, the KB made a proposal to create self-propelled guns. The head of GAU, Marshal Kulik, met this proposal kindly. The idea of ​​creating highly mobile and passable artillery did not leave us. We were looking for a tracked vehicle on which to install the ZIS-57 2-mm anti-tank gun and 76-mm F-22 USV divisional gun of the 1939 model year.

In the end, the idea of ​​using the F-22 SPM had to be abandoned: this gun was too large in size. But the ZIS-2, mounted on a Komsomolets trailer and on a wheeled-tracked all-terrain vehicle, showed excellent results when tested by shooting and hauling: high accuracy of combat, rate of fire, stability, mobility and maneuverability on all roads and even off-road. ”

We are most interested in what happened at the factory number XXUMX. There, to implement the order of Vannikov, a separate group of designers was created under the leadership of Pyotr Fedorovich Muravyov.

As a result of the work, already at the end of July, two self-propelled guns came out of the factory gates: the ZIS-30 and ZIS-31.

The first was a swinging part of the 57-mm anti-tank gun ZiS-2, mounted on the Komsomolets artillery tractor T-20.

The second is the same ZIS-2 gun, but on a specially booked three-axle GAZ-AAA truck.

Comparative tests of two cars, conducted in July-August, showed that the ZIS-31 when firing is more stable and has greater accuracy than the ZIS-30.

However, due to the fact that the permeability of the ZIS-31 was significantly lower than the ZIS-30, preference was given to the latter.

According to the order of Vannikov, Plant No. 92 from 1 of September 1941 of the year was to begin mass production of the ZiS-30.

But the trouble has crept up at all not from where it could have been expected from. The only manufacturer of Komsomoltsev, the Moscow plant No. XXUMX, due to an incorrect planning policy, completely shut down the production of tractor units and switched to the production of tanks.

For the manufacture of ZIS-30, plant number 92 had to withdraw "Komsomoltsy" from military units and engage in repair of vehicles coming from the front. As a result of these delays, mass production of self-propelled guns began only with 21 September. In total, up to 15 in October, the 1941 manufactured the ZIS-101 machine with the 30-mm ZIS-57 gun (taking into account the first prototype machine) and one ZIS-2 with the 30-mm anti-tank gun.

On this, in fact, everything. The lack of a base for creating self-propelled guns completely spoiled the matter. The release of ZiS-30 has been discontinued.

The group of Peter Muravyev did not give up, realizing the importance of this self-propelled gun. And in early October, the project ZiS-41 appeared, in which the gun ZiS-2 was mounted on the chassis of the semi-tracked all-terrain vehicle ZiS-22, which was produced in Moscow.

Tested in November 1941, ZIS-41 showed good results. However, by this time the Moscow ZiS plant evacuated and, in principle, could not provide a sufficient number of ZiS-22 all-terrain vehicles. Therefore, at the end of November 1941, all work on ZIS-41 was stopped.

The ZiS-30 self-propelled guns began to enter the army at the end of September 1941. All of them went to the staffing of PTO batteries in tank brigades of the West and South-West gables (in all, they were equipped with about 20 tank brigades).

There is one thing that complicates any research in this area. It is almost impossible to document the ZIS-30 machine from the 57-mm ZIS-2 gun. The fact is that the factory index ZiS-30 was not known in the military, and therefore in military reports these vehicles passed as “57-mm VET guns” - just like the 57-mm ZiS-2 guns.

Extremely rarely, they go through the documents as "self-propelled 57-mm VET guns". Well, plus statements on fuels and lubricants allow you to accurately understand where ZiS-2 was used, and where ZiS-30. ZIS-2 fuel was not required.

In battles ZIS-30 showed themselves very well. So, already October 1 at the plenum of the artillery committee of the Main Artillery Directorate (GAU), chaired by E. Satel, was reported "about the successful combat use of ZiS-30 vehicles."

However, during longer operation, self-propelled guns revealed many shortcomings, primarily due to the fact that the original base was not adapted to become a self-propelled gun.

The GAU Artillery Committee received feedback from military units on 57-mm anti-tank guns ZiS-2 and ZiS-30. Regarding the latter, in particular, the following was said:

“The car is unstable, the chassis is overloaded, especially the rear carts, the range is small and the load capacity is small, the dimensions of the motor group are small, the calculation of communication with the driver is not provided. Shooting is often done with raised coulters, as there is no time to deploy, and there have been cases of tipping cars. ”

Let's just say: it could be worse. But, with all the shortcomings voiced, ZIS-30 fought and fought successfully. The 57-mm anti-tank gun ZIS-2 successfully hit all the tanks of that time. But alas, by the summer of 1942, there were practically no such vehicles left in the army. Some of them were lost in the battles, and some were out of order due to breakdowns. And there was simply no place to repair them, since the plant was now producing tanks.

What was the ZIS-30 ACS?

As already mentioned, the ZIS-30 was a swinging part of the 57-mm anti-tank gun ZIS-2 with a barrel length 73 caliber, installed openly on the Komsomolets T-20 semi-armored tractor.

Artillery tractor T-20 "Komsomolets"

Combat calculation of the installation consisted of five people.

The upper machine gun was mounted in the middle part of the machine body. Vertical pickup angles ranged from -5 to + 25 °, along the horizon - in the 30 ° sector. For targeting, a worm-type lifting sector mechanism and a screw-type rotary mechanism were used, which ensured the pickup speed 4 degrees / s.

When shooting, a standard PS-2 or OP2-55 sight was used. Sight PP1-2 was used both for direct fire shooting, and when firing from closed firing positions. It consisted of a panorama and sighting part, interconnected by screws. At night, the device “Ray-1” was used to illuminate the sight scales.

A vertical wedge valve with a semi-automatic copier type allowed to achieve a rate of fire to 25 rds / min., The target rate of fire was 15 rds / min.

Shooting was conducted only from a place. The stability of the self-propelled installation when firing was provided with the help of folding coulters located in the rear part of the machine body.

Fastening of the gun in a marching way on the march was provided by means of a bracket mounted on the roof of the cab of the car, and a special stopper located in the rear of the hull.

For self-defense of the self-propelled unit, a regular DT 7,62-mm machine gun was used, which was installed in the ball joint on the right in the front cabin leaf. The machine gun was easily removed and used as a handheld.

The ammunition carried on the ZIS-30 included 20 shots to the cannon and 756 cartridges for the DT machine gun (12 disks).

The ammunition of the installation included shots with subcaliber (UBR-27Sh, UBR-271H), fragmentation (UO-271U or UO-271UZH) and armor-piercing tracer stupid-headed and sharp-headed (UBR-271, UBR-271K-XB-XN-X-UM-271, UBR-XNUMXK).

The range of the direct shot of an armor-piercing projectile with a target height of 2 m was 1100 m. The firing range of the fragmentation grenade UO-271U was 8400 m.

The power plant, transmission and running gear of the self-propelled unit ZIS-30 remained unchanged compared with the semi-armored tractor T-20, which we have already told here:

Stories about weapons. Artillery tractor T-20 "Komsomolets"

Tactical and technical characteristics of lightweight self-propelled guns ZIS-30:

Crew, prs: 4
Weight, kg: 4 000

Dimensions:
- length, m: 3,45
- width, m: 1,859
- height, m: 2,23
- clearance, m: 0,3

Reservations, mm
- body forehead: 10
- board: 7
- feed: 7

Armament:
- 57-mm gun ZIS-2, ammunition 20 shells;
- 7,62-mm machine gun DT, ammunition 756 cartridges.

Engine: "GAZ-AA", 6-cylinder, 50 hp
Cruising on the highway, km: 152
Maximum speed km / h: 50

Issued, pcs: 101.

Comments

[Lamatinets]

Thanks for the interesting article

[hagrid]

I didn’t understand a little, the sandpiper was against, the word grabin. Grabin says Sandpiper accepted the idea kindly

[gregor6549]

Many legends have been created about Marshal Kulik, often contradicting each other. Most legends make it look unsightly. In particular, he is credited with a lack of understanding of the role of artillery in armed struggle, underestimation of many advanced artillery weapons at that time, incompetence in attempts to help Pavlov organize a rebuff to the Germans on the Western Front in the early days of the war, illiterate command and control of troops in an attempt to prevent the blockade of Leningrad, and much more. At the same time, they somehow forget that it was under Kulik that the most advanced art systems at that time were created, which proved their effectiveness during the Second World War (unlike Tukhachevsky, who was fond of universal artillery systems such as anti-aircraft field guns, Kurchevsky's non-woven guns and other exotics), that it was basically impossible to help Pavlov, since both he and all his "consultants" (Kulikov, Karbyshev, etc.) were placed in such conditions that no clever people could have prevented the defeat of the Western and other fronts.
And they were put in such conditions by the "greatest commander of all times and peoples" comrade Zhukov, who decided that the experience he gained on Khalkhin Gol is universal and can be used 100% against Nazi Germany and its allies, and the entire defensive strategy can be limited to covering the Red Army troops at the stage of their concentration and deployment.
Unfortunately, the strategy proposed by Zhukov was supported by Stalin, and consequently by the entire high command of the Kr. Army, including Kulik (it was very fraught with shoving against Stalin in such matters). Those. the Army's strategy was based on an offensive strategy, and most of the weapons and military equipment that were not "sharpened" for such a strategy, did not receive the necessary "approvals" by I. Stalin and the ordering departments of the Kr. Army, including GAU,
Zhukov was also the first to accuse Kulik of illiterate leadership of the troops, in particular when trying to prevent the blockade of Leningrad, although it was Kulik who allocated the necessary number of troops to solve this problem, while Zhukov allocated most of the troops of the Leningrad Front to counter the German attacks on Leningrad, which were successfully recaptured by the troops of this front even before Zhukov. It was with Zhukov's slander against Kulik that the legend about Kulik's "professional incompetence" began. A typical approach of dullness: if you want to get rid of your own sins, smear the rest.

[Strashila]

From the order of the People's Commissar of Defense of the USSR of March 2, 1942:
Kulik G.I., former Marshal, Hero of the Soviet Union and Deputy Commissar of Defense, being authorized in November 1941 by the Headquarters of the Supreme High Command in the Kerch direction, instead of honestly and unconditionally fulfilling the order of the Headquarters “to hold Kerch at all costs and not to give the enemy occupy this area ”, arbitrarily, in violation of the order of Stavka and his military duty without warning Stavka, issued a criminal order on November 12, 1941 to evacuate all troops from Kerch within two days and leave the Kerch district and the enemy, as a result, and was put Kerch November 15, 1941.
Kulik, upon arriving in the city of Kerch on November 12, 1941, not only did not take decisive measures on the spot against the panic sentiments of the command of the Crimean troops, but with his defeatist behavior in Kerch only increased panic and demoralization among the command of the Crimean troops.
This behavior of Kulik is not accidental, since his similar defeatist behavior also occurred during the unauthorized surrender of the city of Rostov in November 1941, without the sanction of the Headquarters and contrary to the order of the Headquarters.
In addition, it was established that Kulik, during his stay at the front, systematically drank, led a depraved lifestyle and abused the rank of Marshal of the Soviet Union and the Deputy People’s Commissar of Defense, was engaged in self-supply and embezzlement of state property, spending hundreds of thousands of rubles on booze from state funds and contributing ranks of our command staff. Kulik G.I., having allowed unauthorized surrender of the cities of Kerch and Rostov to the enemy in November 1941, violated the military oath, forgot his military duty and caused serious damage to the country's defense. Further military events on the Southern and Crimean fronts, when Rostov and Kerch were soon recaptured from the enemy as a result of the skillful and decisive actions of our troops, clearly proved that there was a complete opportunity to defend these cities and not surrender them to the enemy. Kulik’s crime is that he did not use the available opportunities to protect Kerch and Rostov in any way, did not organize their defense and behaved like a coward, frightened by the Germans, like a defeatist, who lost perspective and did not believe in our victory over the German invaders.
For all these criminal acts, the State Defense Committee put Kulik G.I. on trial.
The special presence of the Supreme Court of the USSR established the guilt of Kulik G.I. in the charges against him. At the trial, Kulik G. I. pleaded guilty.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Strashila

Kulik G.I., former Marshal, Hero of the Soviet Union and Deputy Commissar of Defense, being authorized in November 1941 by the Headquarters of the Supreme High Command in the Kerch direction, instead of honestly and unconditionally fulfilling the order of the Headquarters “to hold Kerch at all costs and not to give the enemy occupy this area ”, arbitrarily, in violation of the order of Stavka and his military duty without warning Stavka, issued a criminal order on November 12, 1941 to evacuate all troops from Kerch within two days and leave the Kerch district and the enemy, as a result, and was put Kerch November 15, 1941.

It is called designate a scapegoat.

A study of the available documents shows that under the current conditions, the command of the Kerch forces, as well as the former Marshal of the Soviet Union G.I. Kulik with cash and, moreover, weakened forces and means, could not hold the city of Kerch and change the course of military operations in our favor ...

© GSh SA

[Ehanatone]

What kind of h.r.e. tovarisch hregor!? ...

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Gagrid

I didn’t understand a little, the sandpiper was against, the word grabin. Grabin says Sandpiper accepted the idea kindly

It is not clear why this author threw a lump of mud at Kulik.
= In fact, the problems of correcting the mistakes of Comrade Kulik, who knew little about artillery in general and command in particular, fell on Vannikov’s shoulders =
The author at least took an interest in Kulik's biography before writing such nonsense.
Kulik is a gunner by military profession. Kulik, who replaced Tukhachevsky at this post, ordered for the army the weapons that fought (!), In contrast to the ones that Tukhachevsky ordered.

[andrewkor]

Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin trusted Marshal Kulik, a comrade-in-arms of Tsaritsyn’s defense, where he showed himself well, commanding the Red artillery. But in peacetime and accelerated preparations for the Great War, the incompetence of the heroes of the Civil War revealed itself!

[Major_Vortex]

Stalin and Zhukov did not particularly trust until Germany attacked the USSR. And Zhukov’s fears about the possibility of an unexpected attack by Nazi Germany on the USSR without warning came true.

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

Stalin and Zhukov did not particularly trust until Germany attacked the USSR. And Zhukov’s fears about the possibility of an unexpected attack by Nazi Germany on the USSR without warning came true.

Yeah, and for this "brilliant" foresight of Zhukov, Stalin, who began to trust Zhukov, removed the latter from the post of chief of the General Staff.

[Major_Vortex]

Quote: Krasnoyarsk

And for this "brilliant" foresight of Zhukov, Stalin, who began to trust Zhukov, removed the latter from the post of chief of the General Staff

On the eve of the war and at its beginning, Stalin made many mistakes. But this is the rare type of Russian leader who did not flee to the West with the stolen goods when it was "banged out", but continued to rule the country and correct earlier mistakes. And the USSR defeated Hitler's Germany. And Stalin did not have what was stolen - he was the last principled Leninist who believed that the Soviet people would live under communism. After him, everyone stole and fattened at the national expense. They just told the people about communism, and the people, starting with Khrushchev, already understood perfectly well that with "these" leaders there would never be communism in the USSR ..

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

On the eve of the war and at its beginning, Stalin made many mistakes.

And you, if they were in their place, they would not have been allowed. You are our ingenious!
Everything that you call errors, upon careful consideration, may turn out to be the only right decision. Do not accept that, the consequences could be even more catastrophic. Victories from mistakes are not formed.

[Major_Vortex]

Quote: Krasnoyarsk

And you, if they were in their place, they would not have been allowed. You are our ingenious!

Of course, I would not allow it. Because I know Stalin’s mistakes made by him at the beginning of the war and before its beginning. Zhukov clearly said what needs to be done to deprive Gemania of the opportunity to unexpectedly inflict on the USSR. But Stalin was influenced by other people in the leadership. It came late to Stalin that Zhukov was right.

[Krasnoyarsk]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

them at the beginning of the war and before it begins. Zhukov clearly said what needs to be done to deprive Gemania of the opportunity to unexpectedly inflict on

I laughed at the clear talkers of Zhukov.

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

But Stalin was influenced by other people in the leadership.

And from these words I almost got it right. Is this your humor?

[Alf]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

It came late to Stalin that Zhukov was right.

The beetles were so right that Stalin ousted him from the post of chief of the General Staff in July 41st and more did not allow him to the post of chief military officer in the country.

The chiefs of the General Staff were:

Shaposhnikov B.M. (August 1941 - May 1942),

Vasilevsky A.M. (June 1942 - February 1945),

Antonov A.I. (since February 1945).

[Major_Vortex]

Quote: Alf

The beetles were so right that Stalin ousted him from the post of chief of the General Staff in July 41st and more did not allow him to the post of chief military officer in the country.

Zhukov was just right. I heard this from front-line officers of the past WWII. And as the staff repressed at the beginning of the war, for the mistakes, as they believed, made by Stalin. Everything was not easy there. Due to Stalin’s mistakes in the first period of the Second World War, many staff officers lost their heads. Now none of them are alive - everyone has long died. But I managed to talk.

[Karenas]

So the signalman said that Zhukov during the Battle of Stalingrad was somehow not contained and began to obscure the father of the peoples, far from planning specific military operations ...
Which, however, did not prevent their friendship, strong and masculine ...

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

he was the last principled Leninist to believe that the Soviet people would live under communism

Met another version. Joseph Vissarionovich, despite the sins of his youth, was a truly Orthodox king, a deeply church man.

As a result, he transported a huge number of people to paradise, and at the same time as a new martyr to help save the soul. A kind of Orthodox Raul Wallenberg, a humanist and ascetic.

For me, it sounds logical.

[Alf]

Quote: Cherry Nine

As a result, he transported a huge number of people to paradise,

Yes, yes, the pitsotmilenov personally tortured.
Out of 170 million people, 2 million 500 thousand were sent to paradise. For 30 years of tyranny. In the stronghold of freedom and democracy in the United States in 2016, 2 and a half million convicts sat at once.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Alf

pitsotmilienov personally tortured.

Naturally five hundred million, and naturally in person. Numbers are less of an interest to us, aren't they?

Quote: Alf

Out of 170 million people, 2 million 500 thousand were sent to paradise. For 30 years of tyranny

No idea where such a strange figure came from. Canonical - Khrushchev - the number of people executed in the 58th order is 650 thousand, EMNIP.

Naturally, it would be mean and unfair to blame Comrade Stalin for the deaths of people who just accidentally died at that time. As a result of an unhealthy diet during the period of collectivization, for example, or an unsuccessful trip on a free ticket from the NKVD, or even an allergy to lead, not related to Article 58.

Quote: Alf

In the stronghold of freedom and democracy in the United States in 2016, 2 and a half million convicts sat at once.

1. It’s funny that you are comparing the number of people executed under a political article and the number of prisoners under criminal law.
2. The prison system and generally criminal law in the United States is a national disgrace, by far the worst system from all countries of the first world. Both from the point of view of humanism, and - and this is the main thing - from the point of view of results, i.e. crime rate.
3. Despite good PR, the structures of the US federal government are usually ineffective, but prone to cannibalism. Mercenary patriots are mostly right in pointing out the American experience with regard to almost any abomination. And the fight against the Internet, and crushing products with a bulldozer, and resolving business disputes in a criminal court, and the massacre of children in order to protect their rights, and, say, a life president — all this is fully consistent with American practice.

[Alf]

Quote: Cherry Nine

Quote: Alf
Out of 170 million people, 2 million 500 thousand were sent to paradise. For 30 years of tyranny

No idea where such a strange figure came from. Canonical - Khrushchev - the number of people executed in the 58th order is 650 thousand, EMNIP.

You confuse the shot and the planted. In the USSR, during the IVS, 642 thousand were shot and 2,5 million crouched.

Quote: Cherry Nine

1. It’s funny that you are comparing the number of people executed under a political article and the number of prisoners under criminal law.

You already decide-planted or shot. That's only 2,5 million + 642 thousand in the IVS includes both criminals and politicians.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Alf

You already decide-planted or shot. That's only 2,5 million + 642 thousand in the IVS includes both criminals and politicians.

It’s hard to understand what you are trying to skip to. Do you think Putin has already turned off the Internet?

According to "Certificate 1 of the special department of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs on the number of arrested and convicted in the period 1921-1953." dated December 11, 1953, signed by Pavlov, head of the archive department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, on the basis of which, apparently, a certificate was sent to Khrushchev for the period from 1921 to 1938 on the affairs of the Cheka-GPU-OGPU-NKVD and from 1939 to the middle of 1953 for counter-revolutionary crimes a total of 4 people were convicted by judicial and extrajudicial authorities, of which 060 were sentenced to death, 306 were sentenced to imprisonment in the camps and prisons, 799 were sentenced to deportation, and 455 were sentenced to “other measures” 2 people.

And, as I already said, the number of convicted prisoners should not be considered the result of measures to optimize the number of this effective manager. The events were much wider.

[Alf]

Quote: Cherry Nine

And, as I already said, the number of convicted prisoners should not be considered the result of measures to optimize the number of this effective manager. Events were much wider.

What kind of words? Reminiscent of the guarantor's speeches — many words without meaning.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Alf

What kind of words?

Tired of repeating the same thing.

Quote: Cherry Nine

It is unfair to blame Comrade Stalin for the deaths of people who just accidentally died at that time. As a result of unhealthy nutrition during the period of collectivization, for example, or an unsuccessful tour on a free ticket from the NKVD, or even an allergy to lead, not related to Article 58.

[Alf]

Well, which of these data is a blood tyrant? In Putin's Russia, the number of convicts roughly corresponds to the Stalinist USSR and modern USA.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Alf

In Putin's Russia, the number of convicts roughly corresponds to the Stalinist USSR and modern USA.

From here, chtol?
https://mikle1.livejournal.com/794911.html
How many did not get into the statistics on the zk, since it went to heaven? No, the number of people who went to heaven is not equal to the number of people executed, and even more so those sentenced to VMN.

[Alf]

Quote: Cherry Nine

No, the number of people who went to heaven is not equal to the number of people executed, and even more so those sentenced to VMN.

Constipation of thoughts, diarrhea of ​​words.

[Cherry Nine]

I'm sorry.

[Vladimir 5]

Major V ... Why, you are sometimes just a joker, - about Stalin's escape to the west with money, - tyrant master does not run from his estate.! (It's like Hitler ran with millions of Reichsmarks to England). Why would Stalin need money, all his needs and whims to fulfill thousands of loyal people from the NKVD with the devoted Lawrence, while guards, including empty dachas, the dictator did not even want to see them nearby, Vlasyuk alone, in fact, worked as a minister to organize the life of a "genius" of all times and peoples "And, V, Stalin .. This is not enough for you, - so calculate what the personal life of JV Stalin cost to the state ... About the contribution of the" leader of all times and peoples "to weakening the state, all proactive, no less talented leaders, their replacement (often by physical destruction) by one, although perhaps no less talented leader, himself beloved, Joseph Vissarionych, with the rest as servants ... Think over such perspectives and views of such a historical landscape. ..

[victor50]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

After him, everyone stole and fattened at the national expense. About communism, they simply lied to the people, and people starting from Khrushchev

What did Khrushchev steal? And how did he fatten? I have never seen anything about this. Tell me if there is information.

[Major_Vortex]

Quote: victor50

What did Khrushchev steal? And how did he fatten? I have never seen anything about this. Tell me if there is information.

So under Khrushchev came a "new generation" of leaders of the USSR, who over several years developed such a mafia within the Soviet Union that the whole world gasped at the scale of theft and wealth of these new party bosses. True, in the USSR itself, they shyly kept silent about this and censorship filtered every word that was broadcast. And people saw everything. Therefore, they did not like Khrushchev then for a very long time. And the people are still defending Stalin. Although everyone knows about repression and no one hides it.

[Catfish]

Hi Comrade Major.
Is this Suslov with his associates "new generation" of leaders of the USSR? Fear God, comrade, here more than half of the people lived under the Soviets and at least somehow, but they know the history of their country. As for the pearl "and people saw", then this is also not necessary, I have been trampling this sinful earth for eight decades and I know very well what conclusions and from what these "people" draw. And I will not argue with you about Comrade Zhukov, you consider him "a genius commander of all times and peoples" - your own business. At least, in order to have a more accurate idea of ​​the veracity of the memoirs of the "Marshal of Victory", you would read the book of Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union N.G. Kuznetsov "Heading towards victory", about his friction with Zhukov, and then re-read Zhukov what he writes about this. So your Zhukov is simply lying there. But figure it out yourself.

[victor50]

[quote = Major_
[quote = Major_Vikhr] So under Khrushchev came a "new generation" of leaders of the USSR, who in several years developed such a mafia within the Soviet Union [/ quote]
Do not retell tales! Khrushchev was not loved for voluntarism, which was popularly associated with the corn epic. And there was nothing else that you write about. When Brezhnev was late, yes. And then not on a scale
[quote = Major Whirlwind] that the whole world gasped at the scale of theft and wealth of these new party bonzes. [/ quote]

[Major_Vortex]

Quote: victor50

And then not on a scale

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

that the whole world gasped at the scale of theft and wealth of these new party bonzes.

Khrushchev appointed "handsome men" who, a few years later, already lived like Middle Eastern sheikhs, creating local mafias for themselves in the Republics. The people saw this and understood everything from where the roots of the problems grow. And no one believed in communism anymore - Khrushchev put his guiding hand in this so that the people would stop believing in such a "communist leadership". Under Stalin there was a war (WWII), and the people lived better - this is a paradox, but that is how people remember Khrushchev. There was also about cornbread. Eyewitnesses told me how they were starved to death under Khrushchev, and then generally transferred to corn bread, which was even impossible to eat. The elites were fattening, and the people were starving - if not to study history through the pages of the Pravda newspaper, but through living people, eyewitnesses. And what happened under Brezhnev was often the result of personnel mistakes made by Khrushchev (see above). And the funny thing is that Khrushchev, like Gorbachev later, flew to the United States to negotiate with the Americans, and they dumped him. Khrushchev was narrow-minded. And a stupid person in leadership is more dangerous than an enemy.

[victor50]

Quote: Mayor_Vikhr

Under Stalin there was a war (WWII), and the people lived better - this is a paradox, but that is how people remember Khrushchev. There was also about cornbread. Eyewitnesses told me how they were starved to death under Khrushchev, and then generally transferred to corn bread, which was even impossible to eat. The elites were fattening, and the people were starving - if not to study history through the pages of the Pravda newspaper

It remains for me to applaud your stupidity! It doesn’t even occur to such clever know-it-alls that there are still a lot of people who, firsthand, unlike you, know those times. However, claims to omniscience have always been an indicator of stupidity. They didn’t say that they essentially didn’t answer: Almost everything was exactly the opposite, for example, peasant farmers in many places saw money for the first time — they received their salary, and not workdays! Farewell. Sorry to get into a discussion with you. I am ashamed.

[Major_Vortex]

As soon as you write about living people - contemporaries of Nikita Sergeevich, and their opinion about Khrushchev and the period of his reign, you will immediately receive accusations of "stupidity". Khrushchev returned the thieves to government. Yes, the people were “stupid” in the USSR, so “stupid” that Khrushchev was sent to retire in the countryside to live out his life - away from government. Because under Khrushchev, after the war, people learned anew what hunger is and when children swell from malnutrition. Brezhnev was kept to death, already a sick and old man. And I have heard a lot about Stalin from people who have passed through the Second World War, who called all anti-Stalinism nothing more than "the intrigues of enemies," although they were never Stalinists, but were rather patriots of their country. The people are "stupid" if they do not know anything further than articles in the Pravda newspaper. This is how the Soviet machine worked: there were newspapers with their own "truth", but the opinion of living people was different from the newspaper "Pravda". Now many do not understand this.

[Karenas]

Quote: victor50

What did Khrushchev steal? And how did he fatten? I have never seen anything about this. Tell me if there is information.

So he didn’t have health ... I told how he called doctors monsters that they did not allow to be charged in degrees ... and drank immediately faceted and took up a bottle and two skewers of barbecue ...
But he did not allow anyone to have a bite to eat in Sevan on the way to Tbilisi ... saying that there is no time, and we must hurry ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: andrewkor

But in peacetime and accelerated preparations for the Great War, the complete incompetence of the heroes of the Civil War revealed itself!

And in more detail, what specifically revealed Kulik's incompetence?

Much of what we know about Kulik is written by weapon designers. Which Kulik was like a bone in his throat, because he, to the best of his ability, did not allow the use of openly raw samples without testing and fought the practice that had developed in the 30s "first we will adopt, and then bring to mind ... maybe".

[Amurets]

Engine: "GAZ-AA", 6-cylinder, 50 hp

The author is interesting material, I liked it. Novot is a mistake. The GAZ-AA engine was 4-cylinder, the 6-cylinder was the GAZ-11 engine. The spark of these GAZ-202 engines was installed on the T-70 and SU-76 tanks

[Strashila]

An excellent technical solution in the current situation of that time, quickly and efficiently. The operation of the first samples made it possible to form a vision and understanding of the requirements for such installations during the war years and their place on the battlefield.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Strashila

The operation of the first samples made it possible to form a vision and understanding of the requirements for such installations during the war years and their place on the battlefield.

8)))))
And where then did this vision and understanding disappear?

[prodi]

a typical example of collective farm construction. It would be more sensible: to firmly (horizontally) attach the gun from behind, with the barrel back, and fight like a cart. With a small speed, the installation could move backwards, and the ammunition would increase

[garri-lin]

Can you give an example of the "non-collective farm" you described? Especially made in the west? You can do it with mench plus.

[prodi]

well, if you are hinting at the marder and Pzj1 - I won’t argue, it’s exactly the same, although the latter - well, somehow with something else

[garri-lin]

This was a trend of the time. It is good to look at the errors of ancestors from the height of their own experience.

[prodi]

Well, compare: the Germans had a lot of captured and outdated equipment, both trunks and self-propelled platforms - it was quite possible (and necessary) to deal with such nonsense.
We had nothing superfluous. Generally!

[garri-lin]

At the initial stage of the war, sonlasen. And there wasn’t too much of those. Opportunities were limited. But in the second half of the war, the situation changed. The opportunity has appeared. But there is no desire.

[prodi]

by and large, the Germans and I are quite on the level: we have Su76, they have Ferdinand-Elephant-Nashorn; although in general, no, I will not venture to draw conclusions from anyone more rational

[garri-lin]

There is even the very definition of what is rational and even uncertain. What is better to push every piece of iron to bring minuscule but good at the front? (German approach) Or not diversify efforts and focus on complex but complete technology? (Soviet approach of the second half of the war). Perhaps I agree with you. I will not decide rationally.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: prodi

by and large, the Germans and I are quite at the level: we have - su76, they have ferdinand-elephant-nashorn

1. One level of the Su-76 with Ferdinand is five.
2. The analogue of the Su-76, a self-propelled divisional gun for infantry, was, of course, not Ferdinand, but Marder. Given the difference between ZiS-3 and Cancer36 (p).

[prodi]

yes, it’s approximately comparable: the Germans made piece and powerful tools from piece, experienced, who did not go into a series of samples. However, we did not have a bad self-propelled gun from a bad (for objective reasons) tank

[Darcs]

Well, you compared the light Fri Sau against these armored mastodons

[prodi]

I did not compare the technique, but the level of remaking

[Darcs]

Well, Ferdinand, for example, is not a complete alteration since it was built on the prototype of Piggyback rather than the standard tiger

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: prodi

I did not compare the technique, but the level of remaking

Ferdinand, from a production point of view, is the disposal of a heavy tank chassis. SU-76 is an emergency attempt to attach tracks to a divisional cannon by selecting a chassis that can be large-scale. Not too similar in concept.

[prodi]

well, you’ll nevertheless take a closer look, the Su76 has six rollers, and not five, quite a serious job, although, perhaps, it is inferior to Nakhorn

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Cherry Nine

SU-76 is an emergency attempt to attach tracks to a divisional cannon by selecting a chassis that can be large-scale.

SU-76 are rather two concepts at once.
The first is to give the divisional cannon an engine, tracks and bulletproof armor. All the same, it is regularly used as a weapon of the RPE, right in the battle formations of the infantry, rolling around the field with the forces of calculation. Plus to how uv. M. Svirin, traction loss in operations of 1942 reached 25%. So you need to give the gun a protected traction.
The second - we have established production of obsolete LT. Is it possible to do something more modern on its basis, so as to preserve the established production as much as possible? You remember about the first approaches to the shell - ZIS-3 on the native five-wheeled chassis.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Alexey RA

SU-76 are rather two concepts at once.

My impression is that they wanted more. MORE MORE guns from the T-34, albeit without everything else. Fortunately, the loss is not great.
However, this is purely an impression.

[Alf]

Quote: garri-lin

But in the second half of the war, the situation changed.

That’s what the hans were going to release.

[garri-lin]

Keyword collected. If you look at their line E, then there is also much to eat. Only the Germans did not benefit from this, but the creators of Tanchiki. German branch in openwork. Going to release and establish release are two different things. Although this technique was by no means an ersatz or a collective farm.

[Alf]

Quote: garri-lin

Keyword collected.

But the idea is the same. Simpler, cheaper, faster. The crew is not covered by armor, no BK. What is the fundamental difference from the ZIS-30?

[garri-lin]

Passable and implement weight is not excessive. Why is there at least anti-fragmentation armor is not clear. I have long been surprised yet. Maybe because the effective range of this gun is large? Long range ambushes?

[Alf]

Quote: garri-lin

Is the range of effective fire from this gun large?

In theory. And the real one is 1000 meters. The projectile will fly by, but one must also get there.
Yes, and pay attention to the two openers at the back. Not talking about anything? For example, about the buildup after a shot?

[garri-lin]

I don’t understand what are you trying to say?

[Alf]

Quote: garri-lin

I don’t understand what are you trying to say?

Yes, all of you perfectly understood. Just this waffentrager is the same hasty ersatz product only from the German side. Fundamentally no difference. Frantically, the Germans tried to create another wunderwafel, which will defeat everyone. And the same design errors as the ZIS-30.

[garri-lin]

So at all times the Germans were above the roof of all ersatz. The more trophies the more collective farm in the army. Sometimes they were successful, sometimes not.

[Alf]

I agree. And so, for fun, what do you think are successful?

[garri-lin]

I honestly can not say. I never thought about it. A naabum without thinking I do not want to talk.

[Alf]

Quote: garri-lin

I honestly can not say. I never thought about it. A naabum without thinking I do not want to talk.

And personally, nothing comes to my mind, no matter how hard I try.

[Cherry Nine]

It is difficult to understand which technique will go for ersatz and which will not. Hetzer, for example, or even the Yagdpanzer - ersatz or what?
Given the Reich’s lack of ability to produce the right amount of new cars, the very idea of ​​converting old chassis into self-propelled guns is certainly a success.

[prodi]

the hatzer is not bad, although due to the inclination of the side sheets on a narrow base, the pz38 is cramped
yagdpanzer - quite successful

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: prodi

yagdpanzer - quite successful

The question is not that he is successful. And that Alf wanted exactly a successful ersatz, and successful cars are rarely called ersatz, even if this is true. For example, Sherman.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Alf

That’s what the hans were going to release.

This is already a heavy class. The German ZIS-30 analogue is 7,5cm Pak 40/4 auf gep. Selbstfahrlafette Raupenschlepper Ost: 75 mm anti-tank gun based on RSO tractor unit.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: garri-lin

Can you give an example of the "non-collective farm" you described? Especially made in the west?

Quote: prodi

attach the gun from behind, with the barrel back, and fight like a cart.

It's ridiculous to say, but it's Archer, a 17-pound valentine chassis.

[prodi]

no, it's much more serious there, at least in terms of the platform. I meant the carriage rigidly (although, in principle, detachable) connected to the tractor, and not the "second floor", although in terms of the collective farm it is better

[Alf]

Quote: garri-lin

Can you give an example of the "non-collective farm" you described? Especially made in the west?

In! But these are crafts of the Britons, how I personally fought on this miracle, I can’t understand.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: Alf

I personally don’t understand how they fought in this miracle.

Well fought. The best bush ambush that you can think of. Light, low, relatively mobile, massive and very powerful. A hundred times better than stupid and toothless racing Americans, high SU-57, even Nashorn. The only Allied Fri that was adequate for the 44th year.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: prodi

a typical example of collective farm construction.

And don't say ...

Quote: prodi

It would be more sensible: to firmly (horizontally) attach the gun from behind, with the barrel back, and fight like a cart. With a small speed, the installation could move backwards, and the ammunition would increase

Won't take off... © We have a Komsomolets tractor as a base. Which is designed for the much lighter 45mm.

[serg.shishkov2015]

thanks to the author! the sample is very rare, information about it came across contradictory, and the photo of a * live * sample never!

[igordok]

In addition to the ZIS-30, in the USSR there were also 57-mm self-propelled guns.
Experimental SU-57A and SU-57B based on SU-76 and T-70, respectively. An article about them on VO - https://topwar.ru/74777-sovetskie-hetcery-opytnye-sau-su-76d-i-su-57b.html

And Lend-Lease SU-57 (T-48). Made in the USA for Britain. But they didn’t like it, and almost everyone ended up in the USSR
57 mm. self-propelled gun SU-57. Service manual - https://yadi.sk/i/3KjsHPX5GoI4xg

[VictorZhivilov]

By the way, there was also such a self-propelled gun, it’s a pity that it didn’t go into the series.

GAZ-68 Experienced (KSP 76) '1944

"Experimental self-propelled artillery installation on an all-wheel drive chassis GAZ 63. GAZ 68 had an open armored hull with a sheet thickness of 12 mm. Armament - 76-mm cannon ZiS 3. Ammunition - 58 rounds. Crew - 3 people. The engine was located in the rear of the hull, the drive was carried out on the front fully steered wheels, the rear-wheel drive was connected forcibly. In fact, the GAZ 68 can be considered the first domestic front-wheel drive car. In terms of cross-country ability, it was not inferior to the same experienced at that time GAZ 62 and 63. It had good stability when driving on an icy highway, was twice as fast SU 76M and quieter. Throughout the second half of 1944 the vehicle was tested in the GBTU. There it also received its second name - KSP (wheeled self-propelled gun). The vehicle passed all tests. Its only characteristic drawback was poor passage of trenches on the battlefield. , at the time when serial tracked self-propelled guns took part in the liberation of the European hour from the Nazi invaders, the need for this self-propelled gun has disappeared. "
Source: https://www.autowp.ru/category/weapons-carriers/gaz-68_opytnyj/pictures/ehuxg4

[IL-18]

Accuracy and accuracy were extremely inadequate. If the ZiS-151 appeared in that period, then the mass and carrying capacity of the chassis would probably help get rid of the swaying after firing from the ZiS-3. Although, the attempt to create self-propelled guns on a wheeled chassis, taking into account access to European highways and comparative cheapness compared to tracked, was absolutely correct.

[The leader of the Redskins]

The victory over the European team ... In both ... Not over fascism, not Nazism, but all at once with the same comb. And then we wonder why our neighbors are so cold? The author probably forgot that in 1941 England had been fighting Nazism for almost two years, neutral Switzerland shot down Nazi planes, infuriating Goering, and in Yugoslavia, France, Norway, Poland and other countries the partisan movement grew. This is how a good, informative article gets spoiled by one fly in the ointment ...

[Flooding]

Quote: Leader of the Redskins

Victory over the European team ... In what ... Not over fascism, not over Nazism, but at once all under one comb.

Will you like "Victory over Fascist Europe" more?
Or is it "Hitler's"?

[The leader of the Redskins]

It would be more correct, probably, "over Hitlerite Germany and her henchmen / allies ..." After all, there were anti-fascists. In that same Germany.

[VictorZhivilov]

After all, there were anti-fascists. In that same Germany.

That is it, that unconscious comrade. Forgot our German friend and sister.

[Cherry Nine]

Actually, German anti-fascists are Field Marshal Witzleben, for example. And not Comintern rot.

[serg.shishkov2015]

I suppose not over countries, including those who fought AGAINST fascism, but over the equipment of these countries, because the same British tanks were part of the Panzerwaffe and participated in the attack on our country, there was such a hodgepodge!

[faiver]

because the same English tanks were part of the Panzervaffe

- do not give an example? in which division?

[VictorZhivilov]

- do not give an example? in which division?

"A separate company of captured tanks (one PzKpfw III and three StuG III) on the Western Front, March 1942. On the side of the tank there is an inscription" Death to Hitler! "; On the ACS there are inscriptions:" We will avenge Ukraine! "," Avenger "," Beat Goebbels ! "
Source: http://military-photo.com/germany/afv2/spg2/stug3/13525-photo.html

[faiver]

Thank you, but I'm not talking about

[serg.shishkov2015]

As part of one of the battalions of flamethrower tanks, the 101st or 102nd was a supernumerary company of English * cruisers * A13, on June 22, 1941, these two battalions invaded the USSR, a photo of the English tank we destroyed from this battalion was recently published in * TiV *

[faiver]

thanks for the info

[Alf]

Quote: Leader of the Redskins

and partisan movement grew in Yugoslavia, France, Norway, Poland and other countries.

After the war, de Gaulle called the Resistance movement in France a propaganda myth. And what did the French do on the field near Borodino in 1941? And the Norwegians in the USSR, but in a mouse form?

[IL-18]

And I agree with the author. And Swiss precision instruments, coupled with the activities of banks to pay for raw materials from different countries, also do not honor the latter, and were not into the hands of our country fighting. All sorts of Poles, Czechs, French and others were not only in the Waffen SS, but also in the Wehrmacht. And there was a "blue division". And the Portuguese were in it. I'm not sure about San Marino, Andorra, but it is possible that they are not without sin. British! But even here, not without their efforts: the Munich Agreement, Poland did not let Soviet troops into Czechoslovakia.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: IL-18

Poles, Czechs, French and others were ... in the Wehrmacht

Hmm, are illiterate Stalinist patriots?

[IL-18]

You can’t pump up muscles in your head, read more, Cherry Nine. In the Wehrmacht, Soviet citizens also noted, even received pensions from the Federal Republic of Germany while living in the USSR.
I don’t know what hurt you. Maybe something personal for you in this thread?

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: IL-18

In the Wehrmacht and Soviet citizens noted

Yes, yes, great.

Quote: IL-18

even pensions from Germany were received while living in the USSR.

Wow, and pension currency, and the most delicious ice cream, here guessed so guessed.

[IL-18]

Quote: Cherry Nine

guessed

Dream rotten layer. First, give up, then sit in hivi in ​​auxiliary services. After serving five years in camps (not in the German stalag), return home, receive two pensions, and complain about the Germans' hard work and unkind attitude towards them at home. You would discuss the ruts with the boy; you would be more pleasant with him. Only he has already gone to Germany for free, but it will be difficult for you. But I will help you: offer the Bundestag a speech with the words of gratitude to Germany for the visit on June 41st. Yours will appreciate you.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: IL-18

But I will help you: offer the Bundestag a speech with the words of gratitude to Germany for the visit on June 41st. Yours will appreciate you.

In Germany, the concept of Hitler - an effective manager is not yet popular. Although this is even strange - the Austrians, Bohemians and Italians were immediately at fault for nothing, the Japanese closed the question of historical guilt in the 50s, EMNIP. The Germans were not lucky in this regard.

[IL-18]

The Austrians were part of the Reich, the Bohemians did not officially fight, even consider themselves victims, the Italians generally sided with the coalition. It remains for the Germans to answer for their deeds. The Japanese have the right to complain about us for the lightning defeat of the Kwantung Army. But again, they had to hold the entire Far Eastern Front against them, and for this Stalin was obliged to take Hokkaido as a punishment, North Korea would not go anywhere.

[irazum]

Scanty ammunition, very inconvenient to maintain for the calculation.

[abc_alex]

EMNIP the main problem of the introduction of ZiS-2 in the Red Army was the lack of capacity for the production of shells. Everyone liked the gun itself, but caliber 76 was mastered better, and 57 required development, which was very difficult for Soviet industry in the 30s.
In general, this is what surprised me. Why fence an ACS based on an artillery tractor? Why not at the base of the tank? Actually, all the WWII self-propelled guns from our side were like that. It is known that the production of tractors was not enough even for the needs of artillery, why should the scarce carrier be chosen as a base for the future ACS? This is "engineering thinking". We will choose what suits best, and who will do it - we do not care. :) And the logical result. Although in those conditions, no matter what you chose, the result would have been similar ... And the T-34 base would most likely not have been given to them ...

[The leader of the Redskins]

Somewhere it was mentioned that before the war, the mere proposal to use the tank chassis for other purposes was already fraught with consequences. The country needed tanks and only tanks. Although in the same Poland, artillery tractors were also built on the basis of the "vickers".

[abc_alex]

Yes, it seems they tried to make tractors on the basis of the T-26 and no one even sat down ...

[IL-18]

And self-propelled guns on the T-26 did experiments. Nobody planted either.

[irazum]

It is absolutely logical, of course, the T-34 would not give a nickname, but it is not needed for such a gun. But were they able to install ZiS-3 in a light tank? And it turned out the SU-76. Why not do the same with ZiS-2? The barrel is longer perhaps, but the base, probably, could have been lengthened.

[The leader of the Redskins]

In this way you did the wrong Hungarians, not the Romanians.

[abc_alex]

Again there were T-26 production lines ...

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: abc_alex

Again there were T-26 production lines ...

In Leningrad?

[abc_alex]

In Stalingrad. But he did 1000 a year. By the way, in Leningrad, I remember the T-26s were also assembled, in fact, they started from there.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: abc_alex

In Stalingrad

Instead of what? T-34?

[abc_alex]

And with what does not work? STZ is not such a small production, you know. He gave out a thousand with a T-26 tail per year, along with a fair amount of civilian products. But I do not insist on the T-26 chassis, they just sort out the possible options.

[Cherry Nine]

Quote: abc_alex

And with what does not work?

Do you think the T-34 was released half-force?

[abc_alex]

Quote: Cherry Nine

Do you think the T-34 was released half-force?

I think that for 300 with a little guns ZiS-2, you could even find the T-34 chassis.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: abc_alex

In Stalingrad. But he did 1000 a year.

In Stalingrad, the T-26 was not launched into the series - they released no more than one and a half hundred T-26 per year, and then for several years. And in 1939, the T-26 workshops were given under the T-34 line.

Quote: abc_alex

By the way, in Leningrad I remember the T-26 was also assembled, in fact, from there they started.

In Leningrad, the main plant on T-26 No. 174 stopped the production of T-26 before the war in connection with the transition to the production of T-50.
You see what the matter is — there were no free lines and free capacities in the USSR. If something is released, it is only to be loaded with a new order. The districts that sent LKZ to modernize the T-28 were the first to encounter this problem: with the transition of the plant to the production of HF, work on the T-28 ceased. The plant did not accept new tanks; no work was carried out on old ones. The commission, which arrived at the plant, was surprised to find that it would not be possible to assemble all the tanks received at the plant even in its original form:

By the time of the termination of repair of T-28 machines at the Kirov plant there were only 83 T-28 tanks, of which:
1. 23 cars were in various stages of repair
2. 27 cars dismantled for repair
3. 17 cars not dismantled
4. 16 cars decommissioned according to acts ...
(...)
... it is impossible to restore all disassembled cars at this time at either Kirovsky or another factory:
1. 10 hulls located at the Izhora plant were rejected and not suitable for assembly.
2. 17 buildings require major repairs, which, on the basis of the decision of the Government, Izhora Plant categorically refused.
3. Of the repair units at the Kirov Plant, only gearboxes and final drives remained. The rest of the units, such as side clutches, main clutches, chassis, engines, transmissions to the fan, were either used to repair 23 machines, or rejected and taken out for remelting.
4. From the presence of new parts available in the warehouses of the plant, none of these units can be assembled due to the incompleteness of these parts.

© Ulanov / Shein

[abc_alex]

Quote: Alexey RA

In Stalingrad, the T-26 was not launched into the series - they released no more than one and a half hundred T-26 per year, and then for several years. And in 1939, the T-26 workshops were given under the T-34 line.

Yes, I'm sorry, I was wrong.

Quote: Alexey RA

You see what the matter is — there were no free lines and free capacities in the USSR. If something is released, it is only to be loaded with a new order.

I understand perfectly. That is why I say that the choice of chassis was strange. In the Red Army, artillery tractors were already lacking due to the sharp growth of the Red Army before the war. So what was the point of choosing an obviously scarce chassis? Moreover, the production of which was curtailed, the war barely began.

I started with the fact that it was better to choose a tank chassis. in the end the ZiS-2 guns weren’t so many. In 1941, they were made a little more than 300 and stopped production until 1943.
300 tank chassis could be found in the Red Army. The same T-26 was in abundance.

[Amurets]

Quote: irazum

It is absolutely logical, T-34, of course, would not give a nickname, but he is not needed for such a gun. But were they able to install ZiS-3 in a light tank?

There was such a T-34. Details on the link.

https://wek.ru/mongolskaya-ugroza-dlya-bajkala
The article is titled: "Battlefield. T-34-57 - a rare tank that saved Stalin and could fight the" Tigers "
Read completely: https://42.tut.by/462228 "

[irazum]

Thank you, to be honest, I did not know. But it’s excusable for me, I’m more interested in aviation, and as much as I can.

[hohol95]

T-34 tanks with 57mm guns took part in battles in the fall of 1941 during the offensive on the city of Kalinin as part of the 21st tank brigade.

[Alf]

Quote: Amurets

The article is titled: "Battlefield. T-34-57 - a rare tank that saved Stalin and could fight the" Tigers "

The title of the article is nailed right away. 133 tanks saved Stalin? From whom ?

[AsmyppoL]

The problem is the same as described above in other comments: lack of projectiles. I think and not the correct use of these tanks (in fact, PT SAC), as conventional tanks. Hence the complaints about the insufficient action of the high-explosive projectile

[Nikolaevich I]

[quote = irazum] after all, were they able to install ZIS-3 in a light tank? And it turned out SU-76. / quote]
I also "tied" ZiS-2, ZiS-3, SU-76 ... But ...
PS Actually, the ZiS-3 was not installed "in a light tank", but on a tank chassis ... the "base" of a light tank ...

[Amurets]

Quote: Nikolaevich I

I also "connected" ZiS-2, ZiS-3, SU-76 ... But ... request
PS Actually, the ZiS-3 was not installed "in a light tank", but on a tank chassis ... the "base" of a light tank ...

Not only. January 19, 1943 - the chairman of the artillery committee of the GAU KA Lieutenant General Khokhlov informed the deputy chief of the GBTU KA Korobkov that the chief of the GAU KA N. Yakovlev approved the tactical and technical requirements for the development of the 76-mm self-propelled gun SU-76 on the chassis of the Artsturm trophy self-propelled guns "And T-3 tanks. https://mihalchuk-1974.livejournal.com/10565.html

[Nikolaevich I]

Yes ... there was such an "episode" ... (by the way it was an SU-76I ...) But exactly what an "episode"! As well as the ZiS-30 based on Komsomolets, produced "once" until they "ran out" ...

[irazum]

Well, I'm forgiven, but I didn't "sin" much against the truth?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: irazum

Why not do the ZIS-2 in this way?

Because when there was a ZiS-2, there was no light tank. And when free LT chassis appeared, the ZiS-2 did not.

[andretry]

Tanks and tractors were produced by different commissariats. Grabin was quicker to agree on the "Komsomolets" than with the tankers. He was almost at odds with the tankers, "Tank - a cart for a cannon" against "Armor is strong and our tanks are fast."

[AsmyppoL]

I would clarify that the differences were with Kotin

[Alexey RA]

Quote: andretry

He was almost at odds with the tankers, "Tank - a cart for a cannon" against "Armor is strong and our tanks are fast."

This is according to the memoirs of Grabin.
And according to the documents, it turned out that Comrade Grabin submitted new guns for testing, which the tankmen did not like. Take, for example, the 85 mm F-30 and T-220. The first sample: 90 shots - and a crack in the breech. The second sample: after assembling the tank, suddenly (!) It turned out that the gun was not balanced (and this did not even come to the shooting test). As a result, the T-220 had to go with the towers from the KV-1, since no one dared to put a gun on the battle tank (not tested by shooting) (as a result, the native tower with the F-30 went to KaUR as a BOT).

And these are still flowers. In the war, Grabin applied for testing guns for self-propelled guns with epic dimensions as a breech sharply restricting UGN, and also demanded to change the design of the tank tower already worked out in production for installing his gun (instead of fine-tuning the gun itself).

[Alf]

Quote: abc_alex

Why not a tank base?

Did you read your entire message?

Quote: abc_alex

And the T-34 base they most likely would not have been given ...

[Alexey RA]

Quote: abc_alex

In general, I was surprised by this. Why make a self-propelled guns based on an artillery tractor? Why not a tank base?

Because during the appearance of the ZIS-30 (August-October 1941) there were no free tank chassis. Generally no. The NKTP is struggling to equip hundreds of tank brigades with at least some kind of equipment - there, Katukov even got BT-4s in 2 TBRs.
T-60 will be only in October 1941 - and will again go to the army.

[faiver]

Interesting artillery system, created in the shortest possible time, but, unfortunately, not released a large series,

- here with Roman here, I completely disagree with you. This ersatz self-propelled and its positive qualities are very controversial in mind not well-chosen chassis ...

[svp67]

It is a pity that they did not offer to use the T-26 chassis as a BS, there were still a lot of them in the troops and, as a first-line tank, it was just good against the Japanese.

[SerB60]

The question is tormenting: why didn’t such good barrels like the 57 mm ZiS-2 replace the 76 mm ZiS-3 on the Su-76M in 43-44, when the 57 mm anti-aircraft guns themselves were already put into production?

[The leader of the Redskins]

Apparently because of the weak explosive action 57 mi projectile. ZIS 3 divisional weapon capable of fighting both tanks and enemy manpower. The ZIS 2 anti-tank gun, infantry support by fire and the destruction of enemy field fortifications were not part of its capabilities.

[SerB60]

For two Su-76M, 1 Su-57M would not look bad, I'm talking about proportions. You yourself know how the ZiS-3 "fought" the "Tigers" and "Panthers". But of course dreams are dreams ...

[The leader of the Redskins]

Manage and supply two different types of guns, albeit on the same chassis? Difficult and expensive to manufacture. Not so many of those "tigers" were ....

[Dimka75]

The question is tormenting: why didn’t such good barrels like the 57 mm ZiS-2 replace the 76 mm ZiS-3 on the Su-76M in 43-44, when the 57 mm anti-aircraft guns themselves were already put into production?

SU-76 / M is a tracked infantry support weapon - it is NOT a tank
This is a regiment / division gun 76 mm
tank and anti-tank equipment must fight tanks
these self-propelled guns were already used for other purposes - to fight against enemy tanks, in attacks on the enemy - especially at the beginning of production - and a lot was lost

[AsmyppoL]

The ACS you specified are essentially divisional tools on a tracked chassis. As a PT, they are, in my opinion, somewhat weak. SAUs were considered, incl. as a means of supporting tanks not only against tanks and tank destroyers, but also against artillery, long-term points (with the support of infantry).
It seems to me that is why they were not put on the ACS. For example, 76-mm cannons ZIS-3 from 1943 of the year (before Victory) produced more than 30 thousand units (not counting SAU of the Su-76 type and 76-mm guns in T-34 type tanks), and ZIS-2 - less 7 thousand

[Alexey RA]

Quote: SerB60

The question is tormenting: why didn’t such good barrels like the 57 mm ZiS-2 replace the 76 mm ZiS-3 on the Su-76M in 43-44, when the 57 mm anti-aircraft guns themselves were already put into production?

Because the SU-76 is a light assault self-propelled gun, not a tank destroyer. This is an infantry escort weapon, for which the main thing is the power of the OFS. And the main goals of the SU-76 are the bunker, the position of machine guns and anti-tank vehicles.
To combat the tanks were SU-85.

[VictorZhivilov]

Thank you for such an interesting article. The Germans also had a similar self-propelled guns, by the way, too, based on the T-20 Komsomolets.

Soviet soldiers walk past a German improvised self-propelled guns hit in the vicinity of Smolyak village on the basis of the captured T-20 Komsomolets Soviet tractor. The Germans installed a PaK 37 cannon on the 36 tractor. Erzats-self-propelled guns received the designation “3.7cm PaK auf gep Artillerie Schlepper 630 (r)”, information on the number of vehicles built was not preserved.
Source: http://waralbum.ru/161891/
The Germans also had another self-propelled guns that were not anthological for their intended purpose. Which successfully found application in the Soviet army.

Soviet tank crews driver Yakimenko and gunner Protazanov clarify the combat mission near the captured tank destroyer Panzerjäger I (4.7 cm Pak (t) Sfl auf Pz.Kpfw.I Ausf.B). Supposedly, the 31st Army of the Western Front. The machine is equipped with a Soviet-made headlamp.

Sources of photo information:
1. M. Kolomiets. "Trophy tanks of the Red Army"
2. M. Baryatinsky. «Tanks Blitzkrieg Pz. I and Pz. II "

PS
Another interesting twist of fate ...

"SU-76I (foreign)
In total, during the serial production of the SU-76i, 37 SPGs were produced at Plant # 1943 from March to November 201 (including 20 commanders). This was a forced measure, since mass transmission accidents of the SU-76 (SU-12) adopted for service began to occur. The cause of these accidents was the parallel installation of two twin motors running on a common shaft, which led to the occurrence of resonant torsional vibrations. And at the beginning of 1944, the head of the GABTU issued an order to transfer all SU-76s from combat units to training units and to replace them with SU-76Ms. "
Source: http://military-photo.com/ussr/afv/spg/su-76i/9180-photo.html

[Kenxnumx]

Why such a high anti-tank gun, even self-propelled. On security - a cardboard box. Better self-propelled guns. Ideal like a hatzer.

[abc_alex]

The battlefield of such a self-propelled gun on the T-3 and T-4 was beyond. More than a kilometer. And guaranteed defeat in any projection.

[Kenxnumx]

And it is guaranteed to be noticeable from any distance. With guaranteed defeat by anything

[abc_alex]

Why all of a sudden? You try to yourself consider something at a distance of a kilometer. It doesn’t hurt. Especially if it is buried or disguised. Towed PT guns are even worse, self-propelled guns are at least protected from bullets and splinters.

[Kenxnumx]

Perhaps I do not argue. But towed along the trunk cannot be distinguished even from 300 m. Although running away is certainly more difficult. However, the destruction of 1 tank fully pays off.

[VictorZhivilov]

Why such a high anti-tank gun, even self-propelled. On security - a cardboard box. Better self-propelled guns. Ideal like a hatzer.

Well, here the concept is simple as everything ingenious ... from a disguised position hit the enemy from the first shot, and then, using the terrain, move to the next firing position. By the way, the Germans successfully used similar tactics.

75 mm anti-tank self-propelled guns based on the RSO or Raupenschlepper Ost chassis (Vostok crawler tractor)
Источник: http://warwall.ru/photo/warwall/dragon/7_5cm_pak_404_auf_rso/11-0-2735

[bk0010]

And how did such VETs mask? You’ll bury them for sane time. And again, that so rested on this unfortunate Komsomolets? The same could be done on the basis of the T-70, like the SU-76, only anti-tank. Trunks threw into Gorky, and from there - ready-made self-propelled guns.

[VictorZhivilov]

And how did such VETs mask? You’ll bury them for sane time.

So they did not bury it.

Padded under the Wedge 57-mm self-propelled guns ZIS-30. Autumn 1941
Source: http://military-photo.com/ussr/afv/spg/zis-30/4485-photo.html

[Alf]

Lord, Ostap suffered again.
[quote] The ammunition of the installation included shots with subcaliber (UBR-27Sh, UBR-271N) [/ quote
The author, these are sub-caliber shells, the release of which began in 1944 and after the war. How could they enter the self-propelled gun’s BC, which they knocked out by the spring of 42?
And by the way, what kind of projectile is UBR-27Sh?
Fragmented UO-271UZH-post-war, UBR-271K-post-war.
[quote] Comrade Kulik, who knew little about artillery in general and command in particular, but Marshal Kulik’s huge ambitions allowed him to bury a lot.
Including ZiS-2, a beautiful 57-mm anti-tank gun Grabin. [/ quote]
I did not understand anything and destroyed ZIS-2. But right there
[quote] At the end of 1940, the Design Bureau proposed to create self-propelled guns. The head of the GAU, Marshal Kulik, welcomed this offer kindly. The idea of ​​creating highly mobile and passable artillery did not leave us. We were looking for a tracked vehicle on which to install a 57mm ZIS-2 anti-tank gun [/ quote]
That is, the Kulik retrograde in every possible way hacked ZIS-2 and immediately was delighted with its installation on the chassis.
Again the question arises of the cross and the cowards.

[Alexey RA]

In fact, on the shoulders of Vannikov lay the problem of correcting the mistakes of Comrade Kulik, who understood little in artillery in general and command in particular, but the huge ambitions of Marshal Kulik allowed him to bury a lot.
Including ZIS-2, the excellent 57-mm anti-tank gun Grabin.

ZIS-2 was buried by the People’s Commissar Vannikov’s commissar when he was the People’s Commissar of Arms. The super-expensive barrels + the absence of a fragmentation shell left the ZIS-2 no chance of remaining in production with the outbreak of war. Moreover, the ZIS-2 competed in production capacities with a much simpler, cheaper, and most importantly, desperately needed RKKA 76-mm divisional gun (it was necessary to make up for the losses that five times blocked the pre-war calculations + guns were needed for the unplanned formation of new divisions, the basis of fire whose relics were just artillery regiments).

[meandr51]

Quote: Leader of the Redskins

neutral Switzerland shot down Hitler planes, infuriating Goering, and a partisan movement grew in Yugoslavia, France, Norway, Poland and other countries.

The immortal feat of Switzerland, which shot down as many as 2 fascist planes, is, of course, quite comparable to the "battle for England", you immediately understand that she spent the whole war with German payments solely for a diversion. Goering was not particularly angry with Soviet pilots: what to take from them - the Slavs, but the Swiss immediately drove him to madness! And with just two planes. It costs a lot.
And the partisan movement in Europe ... It grew, grew, but did not have time. Probably ate a little ... Except for Yugoslavia. They fought there.

[jurgen2206]

Great article and great SPG!