Military Review

"Black Cat" Panzervaffe

160
"Black Cat" Panzervaffe
"Panther" on the Kursk Bulge proved to be a powerful but unreliable armored vehicle.


Of course, this is one of the most famous heavy tankswho participated in the Second World War. The catalyst for the creation of this combat vehicle, not provided for in the Wehrmacht’s tank weapons system, was the Soviet “thirty-four”. Its appearance on the Eastern Front forced the German Ministry of Arms to suspend the work that Henschel had been carrying out on a promising 1937-ton tank since 30.

The company Rheinmetall 18 July 1941, received an order to develop a long-barreled 75-mm gun, capable of penetrating 140-mm armor at a distance of 1000 meters. Daimler-Benz and MAN 25 companies, in turn, were issued orders for an 35-ton tank. The tactical and technical requirements for the new combat vehicle were the following: width - up to 3150 mm, height - 2990 mm, engine power 650-700 l. with armor protection - 40 mm, maximum speed - 55 km / h. Assignment assigned assignment name "Panther".

RELATED TO T-34

The tank, designed by Daimler-Benz, looked very similar to the T-34, but, oddly enough, Hitler liked it. From the Soviet car was completely copied layout with rear-engine compartment and drive wheels. Eight large-diameter road wheels were blocked by two and had leaf springs as an elastic suspension element. Soon, however, a version of the undercarriage with a staggered track roller and torsion bar suspension was developed. It was supposed to use a diesel engine Daimler-Benz MB 507 on the tank.



In early February, 1942, the construction of the prototype began - VK 3002 (DB), and four weeks later, Hitler ordered the Minister of Weapons Speer to issue an order for the first 200 machines to the company. However, the Fuhrer's point of view did not find understanding and support in the Ministry of Armaments, whose experts believed that in front-line conditions, an external resemblance to the T-34 could be the reason for the shelling of the tank with its own artillery. The project of the company MAN, which had a traditional German layout with the front of the transmission and drive wheels, seemed to them more preferable, although it was much more complicated. In fairness it should be noted that during the Second World War, all the fighting sides repeatedly fired at their own tanks, regardless of their degree of similarity with the enemy’s armored vehicles. So the argument against the “brainchild” of Daimler-Benz can be considered largely far-fetched.

13 May 1942, the report of experts on both projects was presented to Hitler: preference was clearly given to the MAN tank.

The constructors of Pz.Kpfw.V (the name “Panther” without mentioning the army index was entered by order of the Fuhrer only from February 27 1944 of the year) were the chief engineer of the tank department of the company MAN P. Wibicke and the engineer G. Knipkamp from the weapons improvement and testing department.

The first serial "Panther" left the factory workshop of MAN 11 January 1943. The tanks of the “zero” series (20 units) received the designation Ausf.A, while they had nothing in common with the same-name machines, which were produced later - from September 1943-th.



A characteristic feature of the first serial "Panther" was the commander's turret with a protrusion-tide on the left side of the tower and a single-chamber pear-shaped muzzle brake gun. The tanks were equipped with engines Maybach HL 210Р45 and had frontal armor 60 mm thick. They were used only in the rear for crew training. Since February 1943, the designation of the machines in this series has changed to Ausf.D. Until now, it is impossible to say exactly why the first large-scale modification of the Panther received the designation D. It is possible that the letters B and C were reserved for other variants.

The Pz.Kpfw.V Ausf.D tanks (this and subsequent modifications had the same index on the Wehrmacht combat vehicle designation system — Sd.Kfz.171) slightly differed from the prototypes and machines of the “zero” series. The changes affected mainly the commander’s turret and the muzzle brake of the gun - they acquired a more familiar “Panther” look. Frontal armor thickness increased to 80 mm. The tanks installed the engine HL 230Р30 and gearbox AK-7-200.

It should be noted that the commander's turret was similar to the Tigris turret on the first-generation 1943 vehicles; it was later replaced with a new one with seven periscopic perimeter surveillance devices and a special ring for installing the MG 34 anti-aircraft machine gun. Mortars NbK 39 were fastened along the sides of the tower to launch smoke grenades of caliber 90 mm.



The armor of the tanks released in the second half of the year was covered with tsimerit, in addition, they were equipped with forgers made of 5-mm armor plates.

Characteristic features of the D-series machines (officially D2) include the absence of a ball mount course machine gun (it was placed inside the tank, inserted into the narrow vertical slot closed by a hinged lid for shooting), and the presence of a round hatch in the left side of the turret for shooting from personal weapons in the sides and aft of the tower. To make up for the losses incurred in the battles near Kursk, a monthly production plan was adopted starting in August 1943 - 250 Panthers! However, in August, only 120 tanks were made - as a result of the Allied bombing aviation MAN factories in Nuremberg and Daimler-Benz in Berlin were badly damaged. It was not possible to fulfill the plan in September (197 vehicles), and only in October 257 tanks left the factory shops.

Since September 1943, the release of the next modification of the Panther began - Ausf.A. A few changes were made: instead of a rather useless yoke in battle conditions, a ball machine for a course machine gun appeared in the front hull sheet developed by Daimler-Benz for its VK 3002 (DB) prototype, eliminated the hatch for ejection of fired sleeves and the weapon slits for firing from personal weapons the sides of the tower, instead of two headlights on the upper front hull sheet mounted only one. The binocular sight was replaced with a monocular TZF 12. The angle of elevation of the tank gun was reduced from 20 ° (as in Ausf.D) to 18 °.

Modification Ausf.G - the most massive of the three (manufactured 3740 tanks) - launched into mass production in March 1944 of the year. The hull side sheets received an angle of inclination of 61 ° (for options D and A - 50 °), the thickness of the side armor increased to 50 mm, and the frontal armor of the tower - to 110 mm, the driver's hatch was removed from the front sheet. Landing hatches machine gunner and the driver began to recline on the hinges to the side, and not move, as in previous versions. Some tanks received a cannon mask with a kind of “skirt” below, which made it impossible to jam the turret when it hit the projectile. On three shots increased ammunition. Changes have been made to the design of the fans, engine louvers, exhaust pipes, etc.



The G-series tanks were planned to be equipped with support rollers without rubber bands, but the complete absence of photographs of combat vehicles with such a chassis suggests that this project remained on paper. A car with non-rubberized ice rinks was built by MAN in September 1944. Some serial "Panthers" had single non-rubber rollers on the last axis.



INNOVATIONS, IMPROVEMENTS, REFINING

The use by the allies of the anti-Hitler coalition in the ever-increasing volumes of aircraft to fight German tanks (especially after the opening of the second front in Europe) reduced the possibility of movement of tank units during the day to almost zero. There was an acute question about equipping tanks with night-vision devices, which AEG had been working on since 1936. As a result, an infrared searchlight-illuminator with a power of 200 W and a surveillance device were installed on the commander's turret of the “Panthers”, which made it possible to inspect the area from a distance of 200 meters. In this case, the driver of such a device did not have and drove the car, guided by the instructions of the commander. To fire at night, a more powerful illuminator was needed.

To do this, an Uhu infrared illuminator with 250 kW power was installed on the Sd.Kfz.20 / 6 semi-tracked armored personnel carrier, which ensured the operation of the night vision device at a distance of 700 meters. The tests were successful, and Leitz-Wetzlar manufactured 800 optics kits for night instruments. In November, 1944 Panthervafe received the Panthers 63, equipped with the world's first serial active night vision devices. Zeiss-Jena developed an even more powerful device that allowed to “see” at a distance of 4 km, but because of the large size of the illuminator - the diameter of 600 mm - the application on the “Panthers” he did not find.

In 1943, the design of the next modification of the Panther, Ausf.F, began to take place, which was significantly different from the previous models. The most important innovation was the tower, called Schmalturm (“narrow” or “cramped tower”), which was less standard and had a different design.



During 1944, several prototypes were manufactured and tested. The design ended only in January of 1945. As a result, the tower’s armor thickness was: forehead - 100 mm, board and stern - 50 mm, roof - 30 mm. There was still an embrasure in the front sheet for the TZF13 telescopic sight. In the final version, frontal armor increased to 120, onboard - to 60, and rooftop - to 40 mm. Installed a new stabilized periscope sight TZF1 and stereoscopic rangefinder company Zeiss. The range finder with a base 1320 mm and 15-fold magnification was located in front of the tower, on the sides of which there were armor caps for its eyepieces. Provided for the installation of a night vision device FG 1250.

The mask of the Saukopfblende type gun (“pig nose”) 120 mm thick was similar to that used on the Tiger II tank.

Innovations have not bypassed the tank armament. And if the gun remained the same and was only upgraded at the Skoda plants (it lost the muzzle brake and received the KwK 44 / 1 index), the MG 34 turret gun was replaced with the MG 42. Instead of a machine gun, the MP 44 machine gun was installed. Installation of weapons in the tower was carried out at the factories Krurr and Skoda. The changes affected not only the tower, but also the hull. The thickness of the roof was increased from 17 to 25 mm, changed the hatches of the driver and gunner-radio operator.

Two new engines were also tested: Deutz Т8М118 with power 700 l. with. (515 kW) and Maybach HL 234 with direct fuel injection and power 850 l. with. (625 kW).

Until the end of the war, not a single prototype appeared in its final form, although it was planned to start mass production in June of 1945. Earlier this year, Daimler-Benz assembled a chassis with a standard tower from Ausf.G. In turn, the “cramped tower” was installed on the Ausf.G chassis and tested in Kummersdorf. True, instead of the standard gun in the turret, they mounted a standard “Panther” KwK 42 cannon with a muzzle brake. In total, eight hulls and two towers were produced for the Panther Ausf.F, but not a single tank of this modification was assembled.

In February, the tactical and technical requirements for the Panther II, suggesting a high degree of unification of the Tiger II and Panther tanks, were developed by 1943. It turned out to be quite easy to carry out, since both types of machines were manufactured at Henschel’s factories.

On the "Panther II" was supposed to use the "cramped tower" and the new building. His frontal armor reached 100, onboard 60, and aft 40 mm. Armament - 88-mm KwK 43 / 2 cannon with a barrel length 71 caliber (elevation angle + 15 °). Since in this case the mass of the tank exceeded 50 tons, the question arose about the new power plant. The options considered were the Maybach HL234, Simmering Sla 16 (720 hp) and MAN / Argus LD 220 (700 hp) engines. In the 1945, the Panther II began designing a new tower with 150-mm frontal armor.

None of the two prototypes (the Armaments Directorate issued an order for them at the end of 1944) was completed. One chassis was brought to a more or less high degree of readiness by installing a tower from Ausf.G. It is interesting to note that in parallel with the design of the Panther II, the E-50 tank was being developed to replace it.

In the process of working on Ausf.F and “Panther II”, Krupp twice offered options for retrofitting the usual “Panther” with a KwK 43 L / 71 cannon with a 88 mm caliber, but to no avail. The Panther 100 75 caliber 1250 gun design with the initial velocity of the XNUMX projectile, m / s, remained on paper.



BAPTISM OF FIRE

The first military units that completed the “Panthers” were the 51 and 52 tank battalions formed in the winter of 1943 of the year based on the 2 battalion of the 33 tank regiment of the 9 tank division and the 1 battalion of the 15 X tank regiment. Tank Division, respectively. Both of these units had great combat experience and well-trained personnel, but many young soldiers and officers who had not fought on the Eastern Front were part of the crews of the Panthers. For their training, Pz.IV tanks were used, and only in May the Panthers 11 were brought to the battalions. The formation ended in June 96 on the 15, when units were brought into the 1943 tank regiment (Panther-Regiment 39).



The baptism of the unit received during the operation "Citadel" - a large summer offensive of the Germans in the Orel-Kursk bulge, better known in our country as the Kursk Bulge. However, in the incomplete month that remained before the start of the operation, the Germans managed to provide training for the Panther crews only at the platoon level. Testing the interaction of units at the level of companies and battalions was not carried out at all and the firing was rare. As a result, in the very first attacks there were errors in the battle building of tanks, problems with the transfer of orders due to poorly organized communications. In addition, the situation was aggravated by mechanical failures and fire engines, which was quite common. For example, on July 3, during a march from the train station to the front line, fires in the engines killed two cars.

On the eve of Operation Citadel, the German command formed the 10-I tank brigade, which included a tank regiment of the Great Germany motorized division and the 39-th tank regiment. The brigade commander was Colonel Decker. But the commander of the tank regiment of the division "Great Germany", Colonel von Strachwitz was not satisfied with this decision, which subsequently had a negative impact on the course of hostilities.

Early in the morning of 5 on July 1943, the German troops launched an offensive. The 8.15 went on the attack and the 10-I tank brigade. In the first echelon, a regiment of the “Great Germany” division was moving, followed by the Panthers of the 39 Tank Regiment. In total, 266 tanks participated in the battle (four Pz.II, 12 Pz.III, 51 Pz.IV, three Tigers, 12 flamethrower tanks and 184 Panthers). The target of the attack was the village Cherkassky: in the defense zone of the Soviet 6 Guards Army was well fortified, the approaches to it were covered with wire barriers and minefields. Despite the stubborn resistance of the 67 and 71 units of the Guards Rifle Divisions and the counterattack of the 245-th separate tank regiment, by evening it was occupied by German troops. The loss of the 39 tank regiment during the day of the battle amounted to the 18 "Panther".

In the following days, the 10-I tank brigade continued its attacks. In the course of these battles, both her regiment and the “Great Germany” division, which accompanied them, suffered serious damage. In addition, on the morning of July 7, before joining the battle, the 39 tank regiment lost six Panthers, again due to the engine fire. By evening, the regiment had only 20 combat-ready "Panthers".



During 9-10 July, the capabilities of the 39-th tank regiment decreased even more. So, by the evening of 10 in July, there were only 10 combat-ready "Panthers" in it, 25 tanks were among the irretrievably lost, 65 were being repaired, and 100 required repairs (of which 56 were broken, and 44 were out of order due to breakdowns ). By the evening of July 11, the Panthers 38 were considered combat-ready, 31 was irretrievably lost, and 131 was in need of repair.

It should be noted that the repair units of the 39 Tank Regiment worked very efficiently, daily returning to the 25 tanks. There was no shortage of spare parts, as they were delivered from Germany by special aircraft. For the evacuation of the "Panther" from the battlefield, the regiment had 19 semi-tracked tractor Famo, soon 14 was added to them. For transportation of one lined "Panther" required three such tractor.

On July 18, the headquarters of the 10 Tank Brigade and the Panther Regiment removed from the Great Germany division and subordinated directly to the headquarters of the 48 Tank Corps. The next day, the 51 Tank Battalion transferred its tanks to the 52 Battalion, and personnel, vehicles and other equipment were loaded into trains and sent to Bryansk, on the northern front of the Kursk Bulge. The 52 Battalion continued to fight as part of the 52 Army Corps, and then the 19 Armored Division. At the end of July, he received a replenishment from the 12 Panthers, who arrived from Germany. In subsequent heavy battles the battalion suffered severe losses. The last "Panther" he lost near Kharkov.



Immediately after the start of the counterattack of our troops in the Belgorod area, a group of officers of the Red Army headquarters of the Red Army conducted a study and survey of Panther tanks, shot down in defensive battles on the Voronezh front. In conclusion, I would like to cite an excerpt from their report:

“The Panther heavy tank is a more powerful tank than the T-34 and KV tanks, and has the advantage of frontal defense and artillery weapons. It should be noted that in the Panther tank the driver’s and radio operator’s viewing openings are closed with lids flush with the front sheet, so the shells ricochet off from them. In the T-34 tank, the upper front leaf is weakened due to the protruding hatch of the driver and the mask of the course machine gun. Hitting projectiles in these places causes the destruction of the upper frontal sheet.

The tactics of the use of tanks "Panther" has the following features:

a) tanks are used in combat mainly along roads or near roads;

b) Panther tanks are not used separately, but as a rule, they are escorted by groups of medium tanks T-III and T-IV;

c) Panther tanks open fire from long distances, using their advantage in artillery armament, trying to prevent our tanks from approaching;

d) during the attack, the Panthers move in one direction, without changing course, trying to use their advantage in frontal defense;

e) during the defense, Pantera tanks operate from ambushes;

f) when the “Panther” is withdrawn, they are reversing to the nearest cover in order to not substitute the sides for artillery fire.

With the departure of the Germans, all the damaged and faulty tanks "Panther" explode. Undermining is made by a special charge transportable on tanks. The charge has a detonator, ignited through the fuse of the cord, the cord ignites a special charge.

75-mm tank gun arr. The 1943 of the year, mounted on the Panther tank, hits our T-34 from long distances 1-1,5 kilometer. "
Author:
Originator:
http://www.vpk-news.ru
160 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Letterksi
    Letterksi 28 September 2013 10: 31 New
    23
    Burned, they say, "Panthers" beautifully
    1. Witold
      Witold 28 September 2013 14: 31 New
      -43 qualifying.
      Yes, and the T-34 from them, too.
      1. Uhe
        Uhe 28 September 2013 16: 20 New
        65
        You personally, as an Israeli, need to pray for the Russian T-34. And not only for the tank, but for the whole Russian people.
        1. hiocraib
          hiocraib 28 September 2013 16: 39 New
          -36 qualifying.
          Quote: Uhe
          You personally, as an Israeli, need to pray for the Russian T-34. And not only for the tank, but for the whole Russian people.

          noble sketch!
          1. rolik
            rolik 30 September 2013 00: 15 New
            +1
            Quote: hiocraib
            noble sketch!

            A Jew is such a Jew)))))
      2. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 28 September 2013 17: 09 New
        +3
        Quote: Vitold
        Yes, and the T-34 from them, too.

        Apparently in Israel, the solarium is just blazing laughing
      3. Mitek
        Mitek 28 September 2013 20: 00 New
        +9
        Quote: Vitold
        Yes, and the T-34 from them, too.

        Well, yes .. If it weren’t for these T-34s, your grandmothers and grandfathers should be no less than disgrace your people, Vitold.
      4. soldier's grandson
        soldier's grandson 28 September 2013 20: 23 New
        16
        according to your koment, it’s clear that you are delighted with the fact that the Nazis worked with your people, but they say that in our time in Israel on May 9 young people laugh at veterans with awards- MEMORY IS SHORT!
        1. brelok
          brelok 28 September 2013 21: 32 New
          14
          Quote: Soldier's grandson
          in Israel on May 9 over award-winning veterans, young people laugh- MEMORY YOU SHORT!

          And they never had it long. For them, the main thing is to fill your pocket with who and when it’s the tenth
          1. Larus
            Larus 29 September 2013 12: 15 New
            +6
            I will add that the destruction of many peoples, they privatized in the "Holocaust" and only announced the destruction of an ever-increasing number of murdered Jews
      5. 0255
        0255 29 September 2013 17: 01 New
        +5
        Burned, they say, "Panthers" beautifully

        Yes, and the T-34 from them, too.

        Well, excuse me, that there are no indestructible tanks. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, including the T-34. There is no war without loss. American Shermans also burned from the Tigers and Panthers, could not compete with them on equal terms.
        It is only Abrams with the Merkavas that it is absolutely impossible to knock down ... in words.
        1. VARCHUN
          VARCHUN 29 October 2013 16: 06 New
          0
          What are you abrams and RPG is like a thread and a needle.
      6. Alone
        Alone 29 September 2013 21: 41 New
        +2
        You would, "dear" in Germany, at that moment. That would be the reason to speculate who burns more.
      7. Fedya
        Fedya 3 October 2013 16: 03 New
        0
        All tanks burn well, the question is how much for what you need to sweat to keep the tank warm!
    2. Heccrbq .2
      Heccrbq .2 28 September 2013 23: 24 New
      -1
      Where did you see how they burned? No need to engage in hats, German optics are the best in the world, German fighters, German submarines, the latest torpedo boats, FAU-1, FAU-2, the first assault rifle with an intermediate cartridge (7.62-39 ), the world's first jet aircraft and finally being ahead of everyone in the field of nuclear fission. Well, now look at the German cars! We fought with "meat" and not only in World War II! Ah forgot, I’m Russian and I’ll tear everyone for my own !!! And I do it periodically.
      1. family tree
        family tree 28 September 2013 23: 37 New
        +5
        Quote: Heccrbq .2
        We fought with "meat" and not only in World War II!

        After Stalingrad, total mobilization, and then also super-total, everyone rowed up to 60 years old, more soldiers of the draft age had already been knocked out, and they also had a medal for the winter campaign of 41, so they called it a medal : "Ice Cream Meat". Guess the country? tongue
        1. maxvet
          maxvet 30 September 2013 07: 55 New
          0
          Quote: perepilka
          and then also supertotal, rowing all up to 60 years old

          You forgot to add, from 14
      2. mejik
        mejik 29 September 2013 09: 47 New
        +1
        Everything first in the world is good, but an idea does not mean first-class execution. And the first-class performance of a weapon does not at all mean that it will be used by itself, without the use of "meat". Only they could not use it with the result, as their "meat" was clearly in short supply of heroism.
        And judging by your use of expressions
        We fought with "meat" and not only in World War II!
        You are not capable of understanding the feat of self-sacrifice in view of the scarcity of the soul. Well, this is not surprising for a generation brought up by the expression "saving our asses" and the TV channels TNT, STS, Discovery and others like them ...
    3. VARCHUN
      VARCHUN 29 October 2013 16: 03 New
      0
      Read the article, it still had to be burned, and to get close to burn, think about it.
  2. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 28 September 2013 11: 29 New
    11
    One of the best tanks of the Second World War.
    1. Rex
      Rex 28 September 2013 12: 58 New
      11
      Quote: Standard Oil
      One of the best tanks of the Second World War.


      Fair. Not finished only.
      1. Kars
        Kars 28 September 2013 13: 21 New
        23
        In principle, they were able to bring it to it. The Fritz turned out to be strange. Or an unarmed heavy tank, or a heavyweight medium. We were lucky that they made a mistake with the concept. It would have been much worse if you put the 88 mm stick on the panther immediately, or on the Tiger the inclined armoring of the frontal part .
        1. Argon
          Argon 28 September 2013 15: 07 New
          26
          This whole Reich with its "Abwehr" and "Anenerbe" could not reach the meaning of our saying - "Take the burden on yourself, so as not to fall when walking" - laughing
          1. VARCHUN
            VARCHUN 29 October 2013 16: 13 New
            0
            And the energy here
        2. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2013 19: 38 New
          +1
          __________________________
        3. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2013 19: 40 New
          +2
          ______________
        4. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2013 19: 43 New
          +7
          _________________
        5. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2013 19: 46 New
          +5
          ______________
          1. GastaClaus69
            GastaClaus69 28 September 2013 22: 42 New
            +1
            And why only 3 crew members, the other two are holding a tripod or played in a box?
        6. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2013 19: 53 New
          +2
          ________________
        7. vladimirZ
          vladimirZ 29 September 2013 18: 24 New
          +8
          On one of their sites I found the memoirs of a veteran who fought as a driver-mechanic in a "Panther" in the Red Army.
          ... the characteristic of "Panther".
          First impression. It is huge in comparison with the T-34-76, on which it fought from before. The armor is thick, rational, reliable in appearance. A very convenient place is the driver’s mechanic, the seat is much more convenient than on the T-34. Management is easier than on the T-34. Great TPU. High-quality triplexes - no turbidity (ours happened).
          ... Evaluation of driving performance. According to him, "round and round" is bad, there is no comparison with Soviet vehicles, although the tanks themselves are of better quality than domestic ones (less pull-up). Why is it bad? Firstly, chronic overheating of the engine. Secondly, the huge consumption of fuel and, especially, oil. Thirdly, the disgusting chassis, the tank is much more "shaking" than the T-34. .... The box and clutch "flew" constantly. The maximum travel speed is 30 km / h, usually 20-25.
          .
          Combat characteristics. ...
          Engine in battle. In addition to overheating, it turned out that the engine for such a tank was weak.
          They were really afraid of hitting a shell in the engine compartment. "On the T-34, a shell in the engine is happiness. For an Ambet tank, the crew is intact. Rest, wait for a new car. And the Panther is lucky - if it is in the engine, then there is a chance, and if it is in the gas tank, it will explode dearly. "
          Armor. The forehead is reliable. The tower is good in front, good from the sides and back. The side of the hull and stern is bad. The German 75 mm PTO cut the Panther into the side from 500-600 meters, and the 88 mm gun from a kilometer away. Another serious drawback of the armor is the departure of fragments due to cracking, ... wounded by pieces of armor (sometimes very hard) were after each battle. On the T-34, the armor was much more viscous and such wounds were rare. Both armor and chassis are unreliable.
          A gun. "Class!" Both the gun and the sight. The gunner was terribly pleased. She was hitting far and very accurately. .... the armor penetration of the gun was excellent, from it, in principle, already from 1000 m it was possible to "close up" any German tank, even the "Tiger" (and they had such cases). Of course, on the T-34-76 such a "trick" was impossible. Another thing is that the Germans had few tanks, there was "not enough" for all. In firing at pillboxes and anti-tank vehicles, I did not notice any special differences in power from the 76 mm T-34 cannon.
          Radio station and stuff. The walkie-talkie is gorgeous. Long-range, no noise, no wheezing. The review from all places is certainly better than on the T-34-76, but similar to the T-34-85. In general, the tower is very convenient, even more convenient than on the T-34-85. Not much, but still.
          Conclusion, an excellent gun, with an average reliability of armor and nowhere worthless chassis.

          http://awas1952.livejournal.com/2050849.html
        8. maxvet
          maxvet 30 September 2013 07: 57 New
          0
          or similar to the Panther’s tower and 4-gun
      2. projdoha
        projdoha 28 September 2013 19: 20 New
        +9
        one of the best tank guns of the second world war + good tower, well thought out.
        and the tank is very mediocre, for 3 years of its operation they could not be brought to mind, which speaks of the initially dead-end branch of development of everything below the tower.
        Compare it with the T-34 (later T-34-85) with Sherman (later long-stemmed)
        The tank has the main chassis, with the modified chassis sculpt the tower you want, otherwise you have an anti-tank gun.
      3. 0255
        0255 29 September 2013 17: 04 New
        0
        One of the best tanks of the Second World War.

        Fair. Not finished only.

        it is necessary to rejoice that not brought!
    2. Yarosvet
      Yarosvet 28 September 2013 17: 11 New
      +3
      Quote: Standard Oil
      One of the best tanks of the Second World War.

      COULD BECOME if we had time to bring it.
    3. Michael_59
      Michael_59 28 September 2013 18: 04 New
      -1
      Quote: Standard Oil
      One of the best tanks of the Second World War.


      Why, he was copied from the T-34!
    4. VARCHUN
      VARCHUN 29 October 2013 16: 10 New
      0
      Teach history, it is named one of the best because it is the tank of the Victorious Army, because it is simple and cheap, in principle, all its advantages. The tiger brought it down from 1500 meters, 34 had to go up to 400 meters. 34-85 that's the tank that deserved more.
  3. Constantine
    Constantine 28 September 2013 11: 42 New
    12
    Good article. Thank! As for the Panther, the tank is not bad. Especially as a frag for our St. John’s wort such as smile
    1. OffenroR
      OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 02 New
      +9
      And for "Jagdtiger" "frags" were ANY armored vehicles that were in service with the anti-Hitler coalition. hi
      1. smile
        smile 28 September 2013 15: 24 New
        +6
        OffenroR
        That's just Otto Carius was very unhappy with this unfinished machine. Constantly out of order, after any march the gun’s sight was lost and it shot anywhere, except for the place where I wanted to. Karius, of course, is a noble liar, this is especially true of how he destroyed Is2 in whole regiments with one tiger in half an hour (I do not exaggerate), but he usually did not slander his own. It was not for nothing that he wanted to return from Yagdtigr to the new one.
        1. OffenroR
          OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 51 New
          +3
          I ask for a request ... but you visibly confused the Jagdtiger with the Royal Tiger - an SPG and a heavy tank, respectively. And so you are right .... in fact, Jagdtiger also suffered from these shortcomings because it was created on the basis of the Royal Tiger. But in an ambush a platoon of these " monsters "could have done such a naughty thing ... KwK-44 ... this gun even T-54 could easily penetrate ...
          1. smile
            smile 28 September 2013 17: 35 New
            +2
            OffenroR
            If you think that I made a mistake correcting me, don’t apologize, because there’s just nothing to apologize for :))) I’m not touchy, and I don’t consider my point of view to be the only true one. I am often mistaken. :)))
            But, as far as I remember, Carius at the end of the war on the Western Front faced the Americans precisely on Jagdtiger 2. And the difference between these machines is known to me :))) By the way, it is believed that the Jagdtigr is not a self-propelled gun, but a tank destroyer, a turretless tank, like Swedish strv. Although in our classification it is usually called self-propelled guns.
            1. OffenroR
              OffenroR 28 September 2013 20: 36 New
              +2
              wink But Strv in front of the Yagdtiger like a mouse in front of an elephant))
              1. smile
                smile 28 September 2013 21: 27 New
                +2
                OffenroR
                Duc clear stump :))) I'm just about the concept of the machine. :)))
          2. OffenroR
            OffenroR 29 September 2013 00: 09 New
            +1
            Quote: OffenroR
            I ask for a request ... but you visibly confused the Jagdtiger with the Royal Tiger - an SPG and a heavy tank, respectively. And so you are right .... in fact, Jagdtiger also suffered from these shortcomings because it was created on the basis of the Royal Tiger. But in an ambush a platoon of these " monsters "could have done such a naughty thing ... KwK-44 ... this gun even T-54 could easily penetrate ...


            Against the T-54, PaK-44 was tested at the test site.
            1. smile
              smile 29 September 2013 16: 35 New
              +2
              OffenroR
              This is all true, but Carius boasted that he had twice attacked the IS2 tank regiment on the Tgr 1 tank and shot them alone in half an hour ... by the way, in one of our regiments Otto killed two more tanks than in the CCI: ))) ... because I believe that he is a liar ... I'm not talking about the fact that we did not have this in history - the destruction of ISP 2 in one battle ... and only with one tank. ...schnapps. I see that he was too picky ... Although he regularly received crosses, leaves and diamonds for these exploits ... :))))
              What a shame, he really was a good warrior, and if he wrote the truth. then it would be interesting to read, but go understand. where he lies and where to tell the truth ...
              1. kavad
                kavad 1 October 2013 08: 36 New
                0
                Here it is not necessary. Carius received the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, a total of 890 people were awarded.
                No diamonds! And before them is still the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves and Swords.
                The Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross with Oak Leaves, Swords and Diamonds Received a total of 27 people.
                And the Golden Oak Leaves are generally the only Rudel.
            2. Stasstoychev
              Stasstoychev 1 October 2013 09: 41 New
              0
              Specifics pliz. At what polygon, when and in the fig?
          3. Stasstoychev
            Stasstoychev 1 October 2013 09: 38 New
            0
            This is where CT and Jagdtiger met with the T-54?
      2. VARCHUN
        VARCHUN 29 October 2013 16: 17 New
        0
        By enemies you wanted to say, I see you have well learned the moronic slang of the game, speak normally.
  4. Sergey Medvedev
    Sergey Medvedev 28 September 2013 12: 46 New
    +8
    How many problems, it turns out, the Germans had with these Panthers! And they burn, and break, and 3 tractors for evacuation are necessary! Damaged and broken - almost equally! That's what it means to let a raw car go to war! For two years, the Germans prepared this response to our T-34. The brakes. We quickly responded to their Panthers and Tigers.
    1. OffenroR
      OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 09 New
      +7
      Now imagine how long it will take for "Lada" to switch to the production of Mercedes, Audi, BMW, etc.? Prior to that, the heaviest tank in production for the Germans was the T-4, which is only ... 3 times harder to make than the T-34 ... about the Tigers and Panthers, I generally keep quiet, the Germans were fixated on the quality and survival of the crew .. ..for this and paid. So that statements like "filled up with a mass at the end of the war" has a basis. Moreover, "filled up" on both sides. Otherwise, where does such statistics come from, for one shot down "Panther" - 7-10 Shermans ( and hell knows how many killed soldiers). In the east it is similar.
      1. Stasstoychev
        Stasstoychev 1 October 2013 09: 45 New
        0
        So give sources for statistics. Not V. Suvorov and others like him by chance? Or maybe the memories of German tankers? These guys knocked down so much that it’s not clear who drove to Berlin ... If you believe them, then all the tanks of the USSR right from the assembly line, stood in a row, so that their valiant Panzerwaffe would be shot from their wonderful cars
        1. OffenroR
          OffenroR 1 October 2013 17: 33 New
          +1
          But if somewhere they write that some kind of "valiant" Soviet tank crew single-handedly knocked out 34 Tigers on a T-76/5 (at a distance of 2 km in the forehead) ... you will immediately believe this, because the story is "our favor" and you will not begin to look for evidence. And "the honorable False-Historian-Self-taught Comrade Rezun" is not necessary here.
          Quote: StasStoychev
          then all the tanks of the USSR directly from the assembly line, became in a row

          So it was .... near Stalingrad tongue
    2. smile
      smile 28 September 2013 15: 29 New
      +3
      Sergey Medvedev
      Yes, by the end of the second day of the battle, July 6, there were 40 left of a couple of hundred vehicles. On the third day of the battle, the brigade commander was dismissed from command and replaced by another.
    3. maxvet
      maxvet 30 September 2013 08: 05 New
      0
      Quote: Sergei Medvedev
      How many problems, it turns out, the Germans had with these Panthers!

      And with Tiger-B there were even more problems
  5. individual
    individual 28 September 2013 13: 55 New
    20
    When the first "tigers" appeared, the correspondents asked how the new German tank differs from the old one.
    The soldier of the red army replied: "they burn longer."
    1. Witold
      Witold 28 September 2013 14: 32 New
      -34 qualifying.
      Well, the T-34 burned more.
      1. il grand casino
        il grand casino 28 September 2013 14: 41 New
        +6
        Unfortunately, yes ... but the comparison is not entirely correct here. Medium tank and heavy.
      2. smile
        smile 28 September 2013 15: 37 New
        15
        Witold
        Yes, we know, don't worry. What do you really want to kick us? Considering your identification marks, the Germans would hardly tell you: Gut, Maltshik Witold ... :))) Honestly, I'm sorry, but I immediately remember the phrase of one Real Jewish man - from a rather scandalous video 6 "But if it weren't for Red army ... "then remember? About a bar of soap? ... World man, you all would think so ...
        1. Uhe
          Uhe 28 September 2013 16: 29 New
          +7
          And he is not Witold, he is a three-letter word, and this is not a great and mighty masculine principle;) It is not for nothing that these "Vitolds" children write according to their mother, and not according to their father - their fathers have neither in their heads nor in their heads there is nothing ;)
        2. GastaClaus69
          GastaClaus69 28 September 2013 22: 48 New
          +2
          They would adapt, like the Jewish model soldier who propagated the Aryan appearance in the Third Reich. They have it in the blood.
      3. Jrvin
        Jrvin 28 September 2013 16: 40 New
        +3
        I’m reading your comments exactly and in each of the bottom negative in relation to Russia, what have we done to you?
      4. The comment was deleted.
        1. Igor39
          Igor39 28 September 2013 17: 11 New
          +3
          Jews have intensified recently, why would it? laughing
      5. Yarosvet
        Yarosvet 28 September 2013 17: 18 New
        +1
        Quote: Vitold
        Well, the T-34 burned more.

        Personally seen?

        Well, how does the solarium burn? laughing
        1. Kars
          Kars 28 September 2013 17: 26 New
          10
          Quote: Yarosvet
          Personally seen?

          like you personally saw burning panthers?
          Quote: Yarosvet
          Well, how does the solarium burn

          No worse than gasoline, kerosene, etc. And it’s even harder to put out than light fractions. Especially on a person, and burns leave more serious. I will refrain from the photo
          1. Yarosvet
            Yarosvet 30 September 2013 17: 14 New
            -2
            Quote: Kars
            like you personally saw burning panthers?
            I personally saw the solarium burn smile

            No worse than gasoline, kerosene, etc. And it’s even harder to put out than light fractions. Especially on a person, and burns leave more serious.
            Only a small nuance: while it flares up, eternity will pass, as a result of which the crew’s survival is several times higher than on vehicles with a gasoline engine
      6. 0255
        0255 29 September 2013 17: 10 New
        0
        Quote: Vitold
        Well, the T-34 burned more.

        why did you get to the T-34 ?! T-34 was respected by both Germans and allies of the anti-Hitler coalition.
        1. 0255
          0255 29 September 2013 23: 28 New
          +2
          and why is it that the majority of Israeli TOPWAR users omit Soviet and Russian technology and extol the USA? This despite the fact that without the USSR, the Americans would hardly have won the war, or entered it on the side of Hitler. Would the United States stand for Hitler, would Israel be now?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  6. Pashhenko Nikolay
    Pashhenko Nikolay 28 September 2013 14: 00 New
    +1
    It seems to me if our on captured trophies would have adapted our diesel B2, a tank bomb would have turned out.
    1. Bear52
      Bear52 28 September 2013 14: 37 New
      +6
      IMHO it was not worth it. Trophy "Panthers" we fought not very much. To plant entire R&D ... in the war.
      1. Pashhenko Nikolay
        Pashhenko Nikolay 28 September 2013 14: 38 New
        +2
        This is so purely theoretical.
    2. Yemelya
      Yemelya 28 September 2013 14: 57 New
      +9
      Quote: Pashhenko Nikolay
      It seems to me if our on captured trophies would have adapted our diesel B2, a tank bomb would have turned out.


      We wanted to use captured Panthers in 1943 in anti-tank defense, such as a tank destroyer, but they refused because of the complexity of maintenance and low reliability.

      In my opinion, it would be better to consider the option of re-equipping the existing "Shermans" with captured Panther guns, would get a direct analogue of the Jewish M50.
      1. OffenroR
        OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 13 New
        +5
        Without the German Jewry, nowhere ... even their independence was protected by the former German tank Pz.IV.
        1. Yemelya
          Yemelya 28 September 2013 15: 22 New
          +1
          Quote: OffenroR
          Without the German Jewry, nowhere ... even their independence was protected by the former German tank Pz.IV.


          Pz.IV were among the Syrians.
          1. OffenroR
            OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 54 New
            0
            They have stolen from the Syrians and Pz.IV?))) laughing
            1. gyl
              gyl 28 September 2013 18: 51 New
              +2
              This is called trophies taken in battle.
        2. Uhe
          Uhe 28 September 2013 16: 39 New
          +3
          150 thousand Jews fought on the side of Hitler, and 300 thousand on the side of the USSR. Apparently, this xxx is from the first;)
      2. Uhe
        Uhe 28 September 2013 16: 38 New
        +6
        Panthers were used, entire combat units were organized, some were as command vehicles. But the machine itself is shit, because the tank should not only have good performance characteristics, but also reliability, manufacturability; the crew must be trained, the unit harmonious ... The Nazis did not have anything of this.

        For some reason, many people forget that the war was between the powers and their attitude, world order - the Western Union of Europe under the leadership of Germany with a Nazi-capitalist ideology, a kind of incarnation of the Franks of the Roman Empire, Charlemagne, and the Soviet Union with the international socialist ideology, that is, Russian Slavic union. Everything is like in the 9th century. Only in the 9th century did they manage to win, and in the 20th century the Russian communists took revenge.
        1. The comment was deleted.
      3. kavad
        kavad 1 October 2013 08: 45 New
        0
        And what does the Ordnance QF 17 pounder Mk.IV not like? Which stood on the Sherman Firefly?
    3. lucidlook
      lucidlook 28 September 2013 16: 58 New
      0
      What are you alluding to? winked



    4. gyl
      gyl 28 September 2013 18: 48 New
      +2
      B2 - a converted German diesel engine, a resuser - often did not reach 50 hours, in comparison with 500 hours of a Maybach and working on synthetic gasoline - there was no oil at all elementarily, they were allocated fuel only to submariners.
      1. smile
        smile 28 September 2013 19: 54 New
        +4
        gyl
        You deliberately cited data from the initial period of the war, when the engine was still suffering from childhood diseases and the production culture made tanks unskilled personnel at often displaced enterprises, and even so built at a breakneck pace ... by the way, thanks to Stalin. When the motor resource was 100 or 150 hours according to the passport (I don’t remember). Question: Why? Why do you compare with the Germans, on whom, without sparing their stomach, the entire 400 millionth Europe worked.
        1. gyl
          gyl 28 September 2013 20: 58 New
          -8
          Tokmo for the sake of truth, it’s a military forum, and not propaganda-capricious for schoolchildren, I hope so. and the low reliability of soviet equipment led to the fact that half - 0,5, units of armored vehicles failed for non-combat reasons, until the end of the war, and the whole block of the Anti-Hitler coalition worked for a common victory, not sparing his stomach, and do not forget this .
          1. soldier's grandson
            soldier's grandson 28 September 2013 21: 02 New
            +2
            well amers brainwashed you, give examples of the inexhaustible bellies of the anti-Hitler coalition, which fostered it
            1. gyl
              gyl 28 September 2013 21: 29 New
              -13 qualifying.
              First of all, the grandson, grandfather should have told you how he was caught by the military registration and enlistment office and semi-trained, with a three-line sent against very correct guys in military affairs. And I, I suspect, the same untrained one, will tell you that the amers, they, went to the war purely and exclusively voluntarily, and died just as terribly and tragically as our grandfathers, and the boorish allies, you insult the sacrificial feat of our compatriots, the enemy was more common. I hope something cleared up in your brains ..
              1. soldier's grandson
                soldier's grandson 28 September 2013 21: 43 New
                +4
                justify your nonsense about catching by the military registration and enlistment office - by the beginning of the war, my grandfather was already an officer, was captured, made two escapes at the last, met with the allies and, according to him, they did not perform personal feats, as he told me in the garden near the summer oven for the production of the first one of our fighters is like 10 amers "100 grams of alcohol and a cigarette is not a soldier, but snot what they are weak for", but about the capture of the farm, they fired all the artillery and aviation that had a German machine gun while the infantry was lying and eating chocolate and whiskey
                1. gyl
                  gyl 1 October 2013 02: 56 New
                  -4
                  Yes, I realized that your grandfather in a detachment of detachments was a political officer at best, because no front-line soldier who at least once crawled under machine-gun fire would not have carried it.
              2. smile
                smile 28 September 2013 22: 33 New
                +9
                gyl
                As my grandfather said: Tyuyuyuyuyuyuyu ... From June 22, military commissars fooled, besieged by crowds of volunteers demanding to take them into the army ... from volunteers - from 15 year old boys to fifty year old men, had to fight back almost with the help of a guard ... my grandfather Dmitrenko Mikhail Romanovich, 22 years old — a mathematics teacher at a rural school (ten-year and three-month courses — and at a teacher) appeared at the military registration and enlistment office on June 22, 41 ... he had to live next to the military enlistment office for several days together with a whole top of volunteers every day of scandal, to be drafted into the army.
                He took part in hostilities starting in February 42, and began as the commander of a fire platoon in artillery. When the Cossack Kuban Corps was created, transferred to it and fought until the age of 45 ...
                to whom are you treating about drafted military commissars? it should be a shame ...
                And do not get out, try to translate the topic into allies, there was no talk of them. and no one belittles their merits, but they extol to heaven, pretending to be. that ours were not at all ...
                1. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 28 September 2013 22: 45 New
                  +3
                  bFjZMlDBXm6wVdGL0txydlifs918B [/ img] [/ center]
                  ] First, the grandson, grandfather should have told you how he was caught by the military commissariat [/ quote] It seems that the alien writes!
                  1. gyl
                    gyl 1 October 2013 03: 04 New
                    -1
                    Yes, Th, we saw putings on Poklonnaya, the same plan picture.
                2. gyl
                  gyl 1 October 2013 03: 02 New
                  -2
                  You must be at a certain age to distinguish between the usual jingoistic patriotic mood of condemnation on June 22 and the subsequent brain movements associated with the undoubted and obvious defeat of the Red Army. For where did only about a million military decisions come from, not all shooting decisions, mainly on desertion.
          2. lucidlook
            lucidlook 29 September 2013 02: 40 New
            +3
            Quote: gyl
            and low reliability shovels

            Let's compare the comparable (I apologize for the great quotes, but there is no way without them):

            "Tiger" was the first German tank with a chassis in which the road wheels were installed in a checkerboard pattern. This torsion bar suspension system provided a smooth ride and relative crew comfort. However, during the operation of tanks on the Eastern Front in winter time, mud and snow were packed between the rollers, which froze overnight and blocked the Tigers' chassis by morning.

            Or here's another, this time about "Panther":

            The “chess” design of the chassis made its contribution to the low reliability of the machine. The dirt that accumulated between the road wheels of the machine often froze in winter and completely immobilized the tank. Replacing Damaged Demolitions in land mines or artillery fire of internal road wheels was a very time-consuming operation, sometimes taking over a dozen hours.

            Or this:

            Of the entire complex of components and assemblies of the power plant, only the engine air filter had structural flaws that required serious revision. The old type filter, installed on the T-34 tanks in 1941-42. poorly purified the air and interfered with the normal operation of the engine, which led to rapid wear of the V-2. ... Filters "Cyclone" showed themselves excellently in 1944 45, when Soviet tankers passed hundreds of kilometers with battles. ... "For example, from under Jelgava we were moving through East Prussia. Three days. The march made more than 500 km. We made the march only at night. At night we made it, and in the morning we drove into the forest, camouflaged ourselves and stood all day. In the evening we leave and further we make a march. "


            Continue, or is the idea clear? Well, something and the reliability of the T-34 was at its best. Maybe not all engineering decisions were justified (for example, inclined armor), but this is not related to the reliability of the units.
            1. gyl
              gyl 1 October 2013 03: 08 New
              -1
              Funny, only the T-34 was released at times more than all German tanks, but in real time, in the ranks it was rarely possible to create a multiple advantage. I wonder why?
    5. builder
      builder 28 September 2013 23: 56 New
      +1
      It is better to put an 2-mm gun (88 cm KwK 8,8) with tiger and optics on the IS-36.
    6. maxvet
      maxvet 30 September 2013 08: 08 New
      0
      Quote: Pashhenko Nikolay
      It seems to me if our on captured trophies would have adapted our diesel B2, a tank bomb would have turned out.

      maybe it was easier to try to adapt the German guns (and 75 and 88) with optics on is or t34-85?
  7. vietnam7
    vietnam7 28 September 2013 15: 03 New
    11
    Once I read Baryatinsky, the panther's ride was too excellent, the crews were swayed, although the checkerboard arrangement of the rollers played a bad role in late autumn, if in the evening the crew did not have time to clean the chassis of dirt, by the morning everything froze and the tank was immobilized. If the "gloomy Teutonic" genius did not pursue technical superiority, but increased the production of TIV, they probably would have done better, although the RUSSIAN SOLDIER would have broken their back anyway.
    1. OffenroR
      OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 18 New
      0
      "RUSSIAN SOLDIER" ......... I don't even know what to tell you .... the Germans almost crushed everyone together .... and you are only talking about the Russians .... But in general it turns out like this- The Russians could not cope without the rest ... but the rest would not cope without the Russians. So the USSR was a fist, and now the CIS is a separate form of fingers ...
      1. Uhe
        Uhe 28 September 2013 16: 41 New
        +9
        And you don’t have to say anything. You better keep quiet, for you will marry a smart one.

        The USSR was the pinnacle of the Russian state. Russians have always united other nations around themselves, but united under their leadership. As soon as we miss our start, the country immediately falls apart.

        The CIS is ge in lean oil, designed to fool simpletons.
        1. vahatak
          vahatak 28 September 2013 17: 03 New
          +6
          And let's dissolve the CIS, since you do not like it.
          1. OffenroR
            OffenroR 28 September 2013 23: 26 New
            +2
            Quote: vahatak
            And let's dissolve the CIS, since you do not like it.

            And Armenia is so eager for Europe ..... forgetting that it is fed by Russians and even protect .....
            1. vahatak
              vahatak 30 September 2013 20: 49 New
              0
              What does the desire for Europe have to do with it?
              1. OffenroR
                OffenroR 1 October 2013 03: 50 New
                +1
                And where does the dissolution of the CIS have to do with it? If Armenia had not been in the CIS zone, it would have been difficult for it to suck out money from Russia only for occupying a strategically important territory for Russia. But if modern Armenia was located somewhere in Zimbabwe (whose territory also originally Armenian land) it would be unlikely that Russia would care about it. tongue
                1. vahatak
                  vahatak 1 October 2013 10: 31 New
                  -2
                  Some people know seven songs, and everything about how bad Armenia lives at the expense of others, etc., etc. My mistake is that I entered into a conversation with you. Continue to live in your pink little world.
                  1. OffenroR
                    OffenroR 1 October 2013 16: 19 New
                    0
                    Yes ... you are wrong. As long as Armenians like you will carry "the truth, and only the truth" and that everything is "OK" in Armenia, nothing will change in the real "world". In your schools they say that the Turks only did what they killed "innocent" Armenians (unfortunately, in our schools it is the same, only in the role of "innocent" we are already) Idiots on both sides do not care. We have already distorted each other's story so much that we no longer know where the truth is. Armenia has driven itself into a corner, Having made enemies for itself. Georgia is now enriched now thanks to us, even though Armenia could be in its place. The only thing that prevented this from coming true was the Armenian government, its policy and anti-Turkic agitation among the population. When you come to your senses .... it may be too late. ... We are not trying to destroy you,
                    you force us to do this.

                    It is better to have a rich friend than a rich enemy.
        2. OffenroR
          OffenroR 28 September 2013 23: 24 New
          +5
          CCCP could not exist .... not because the Russians created it, but because Russians were the locomotive of this state.And I do not deny that it was the Slavs who made the largest contribution to the defeat of the German troops. But .... do not underestimate the contribution of other countries at least disrespect. For example, 80 percent of fuel and lubricants were produced by Baku oil workers, almost all the fuel used by the USSR Air Force was produced in Baku. Azerbaijan gave 690000 thousand soldiers of which 300000 died in battles. And now you declare (like many others) the Russians won the war ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. kavkaz8888
          kavkaz8888 28 September 2013 23: 12 New
          +1
          Vasya, where are the facts? No? And the facts are that deliveries under Lend-Lease up to, according to various estimates, from 4 to 14% of the bulk of military products. And about the "reverse lend-lease" heard? It's nickel, copper, .... A lot of things. Therefore, there is no need for stew. Glory to the Union!
          1. gyl
            gyl 29 September 2013 04: 43 New
            -8
            Well, Vanek, to my mind - half a million studentbackers, plus spare parts and gasoline, the entire Red Army was motorized at Amer’s expense, then the scoops, stsuki, Chevrolet and Studov, Katyusha launchers were ripped off and paved onto ZiSy monuments, and it’s dust and dust in 45, about the stew, Vanya, it’s necessary that the people on the collective farms in the glorious Soviet Union were cold and death from starvation was recorded even at the front — I know about 21 armies in Karelia. Without Lend-Lease, the scoop was bent up without fail. High-octane gasoline, armored steel 40-50 mm - on the T-34, almost all aluminum, gunpowder and TNT. And the fact that allies paid for something, so that would be allies to help. Read books, helps ...
            1. lucidlook
              lucidlook 29 September 2013 11: 53 New
              +1
              Quote: gyl
              motorized for amerovsky account

              Come on, come on, more in detail here from this place, please. What about the account? Did Lendliz suddenly become the selfless help of the most tender American capitalists to the hellish Soviet commies? Will you be reminded of the payout amounts for these very accounts, or are you up to date? If in the know, then why write a deliberate lie? If you don’t know, why don’t you apologize?
              1. gyl
                gyl 1 October 2013 01: 57 New
                0
                Lend-lease [1] (from the English lend - to lend and lease - to lease, for rent) - a state program under which the United States of America transferred to its allies in World War II: ammunition, equipment, food and strategic raw materials, including petroleum products.
                The concept of this program gave the President of the United States the authority to help any country whose defense was recognized as vital to his country. The Lend Lease Act [2] (full title — The United States Protection Act, An Act to Promote the Defense of the United States), passed by the US Congress on March 11, 1941, provided following:
                delivered materials (cars, various military equipment, weapons, raw materials, other items) destroyed, lost and used during the war are not subject to payment (Article 5); [3]
                property transferred under Lend-Lease property remaining after the end of the war and suitable for civilian purposes will be paid in full or in part on the basis of long-term loans provided by the United States (mainly interest-free loans);
                if the American side is interested, undamaged and unused machinery and equipment should be returned after the war in the USA. [3] == or has the wiki blocked you?
              2. gyl
                gyl 1 October 2013 02: 22 New
                0
                Thus, of the total volume of US Lend-Lease deliveries of $ 11 billion, the USSR, and then Russia, recognized and then partially paid, $ 722 million, or about 7%. However, it is worth considering that today's dollar is "lighter" than the 1945 dollar by about 15 times. Ale, where do you apologize, shkolota, when will we start reading books about the war, and not love propaganda from a zombie man?
    2. Yemelya
      Yemelya 28 September 2013 15: 28 New
      +1
      Quote: vietnam7
      the panther had a very smooth ride, the crews were rocking,


      They there, it seems, wanted to stir up something with stabilization of weapons for firing on the move, for this purpose smoothness of the course was initially laid down, but it did not grow together.
    3. vahatak
      vahatak 28 September 2013 17: 02 New
      +2
      If the "gloomy Teutonic" genius stepped up the release of soldiers (more children had to be born), then we would speak German.
      1. smile
        smile 28 September 2013 20: 00 New
        0
        vahatak
        The Germans and their allies were able to set up as many if not more soldiers against us. Do you know this?
        1. gyl
          gyl 28 September 2013 21: 32 New
          -7
          Wrong.
          1. smile
            smile 28 September 2013 22: 13 New
            +9
            gyl (
            I prove, let's go.

            1. For the entire period from 41 to 45 years. The USSR put under arms a total of about 34 million people.
            Of these, about 24 million were sent to the army, including the war with Japan.
            A lot of? We consider the Nazis.
            2. From the age of 39, the Germans put under arms, according to various sources, from 21 million to 24 ... Germans .. According to the data of the super-trained pedagogy, over 21 million.
            in addition, all of Europe fought on their side.
            Even a meager hundred thousandth Luxembourg sent 12 thousand soldiers to the front, one and a half of which were in our captivity.
            By the way, the Poles captured over 41 thousand from 45 to 60, more than the Italians who we visited about half a million.
            The Hungarians who fought with us to the end, over a million, just look for laziness. But 513 thousand prisoners
            About a hundred thousand French prisoners about 30 thousand fought against us
            About a million Romanian prisoners a little less than 200 thousand
            the average number of Finns under arms is about 600 thousand soldiers, not taking into account the losses that were replenished.
            Even the Czechs took about 70 thousand. Imagine how many of them fought against us?

            Do you want to be more precise, Count yourself ...
            Well, do you like the numbers?
            And mind you, we drove them in the year 43, when a significant proportion of mobo-resources was under the Germans, almost 70 million people. The Germans in the Reich and the protectorates from where the call was made was simply more in number .... Are you satisfied? Take your words back? :)))
            1. gyl
              gyl 29 September 2013 05: 10 New
              -4
              That yes, they drove away, many enemies ... But it seems to me that you have some kind of logical mistake - well, the Soviet Union fought as if not alone, and the resources of the common allies far exceeded all possible resources of the Axis countries, including human resources. The pitiful SS Legions from the occupied countries, of course, was supplemented by former co-citizens in the amount of up to 2 million who served the Fuhrer, but even such help did not block the allied human mobility - the British Empire was larger than the whole of Europe with the councils combined, plus China and the USA.
              1. smile
                smile 29 September 2013 15: 59 New
                +3
                gyl
                We go further.
                Naturally. not alone. But
                1. The vast majority of the Wehrmacht. and its best part, nevertheless, lay in a fight with us. All Hitler's henchmen, except, of course, the Italians, fought against us. Czechoslovakia alone gave the Germans about 10 thousand tanks (along with the Hetzers), almost all armored personnel carriers and a lot of other armored combat vehicles. labor productivity at Czech enterprises was higher than at German ones. well, etc. Yes. Britain was ahead in terms of mobility resources - 550-560 million people ... but how many did they really send to the front? We are not talking about potential resources, but about how many soldiers came to visit us, and how many were drawn to counteract the Anglo-Saxons ... and the help from the satellites of Germany as a whole exceeds everything we received under the lend-lease ... by the way, read Hayem " Trade with the Enemy "Check out how a huge amount of American resources came to Hitler from the United States throughout the war ...
                1. OffenroR
                  OffenroR 2 October 2013 00: 26 New
                  0
                  Quote: smile
                  how much American resources came to Hitler from the USA throughout the war

                  Yes, that is, it turns out that the Germans made weapons with these funds and resources, which later mowed the ranks of the American Army itself (and not only)? Namely, for 1 year on the western front, the Germans banged on the ground, in the air, on the water, under water, and maybe even underground more than 320000 Americans, 200000 Britons and FIG knows how many other rabble from the rest of the world.

                  PS America began to pour into Germany the funds and resources after the war, having thoroughly destroyed it .... so that there would be a place to invest. Here is such disgusting, comrades ... is called business. In Japan it was similar ...
            2. vahatak
              vahatak 1 October 2013 10: 43 New
              +1
              Was all of Europe with Germany? I list:
              Allies of Germany or its affiliated countries:
              1. Austria
              2. Czechoslovakia (if you want, you can count in two)
              3. Italy
              4. Hungary
              5 Romania
              6. Bulgaria
              7. Albania seemed to be under the Italians, but I could be wrong
              Countries with which Germany fought:
              1 Poland
              2. France
              3. United Kingdom
              4 Denmark
              5 Norway
              6 The Netherlands
              7. Belgium
              8. R®РіРѕСЃР »Р ° РІРёСЏ
              9. Greece
              10 USSR

              It is only in Europe. I do not consider the United States, the colonies and dominions of England and France, as well as any jackals who joined the coalition in 1945.

              In general, I was not talking about the size of the army (I am far from thinking like "filled with meat"), but about the population, since in such wars the whole country becomes one army.
          2. gyl
            gyl 29 September 2013 04: 58 New
            -2
            Actually, yes, I was mistaken - only the Russian Wehrmacht Corps - not to be confused with the ROA, gave more than half a million people. In general, up to 2 million people served the former Fuhrer ...
            1. smile
              smile 29 September 2013 16: 22 New
              +5
              gyl
              We reach ... I hope to the last stop ...
              1. 2 million is a vile myth that has transformed from the myth of a million-creators went further.
              2. I detail. In total, the Nazis served a little more than 700 thousand.
              of them-
              Hee Vi-300-350 thousand. Nationalities are very different. These are people who were not trusted with weapons, and who did not fight with us, although their help to the Germans is undeniable. They got there forcibly, out of cowardice or in the hope of fleeing, since it was more difficult to do from the camp. And many succeeded and they still managed to get even the Germans in the ranks of the Red Army. On the form was a corresponding patch, which later allowed perestroika liars to claim that they were allegedly part of the ROA.

              The Ukrainian formations of about 100 thousand are Bandera and other Shushar, the backbone of which had German military ranks and was introduced to the USSR by the Germans.

              The Baltic states are also about 100 thousand ... I must say. that among the Baltic states was the highest percentage of Hitler's supporters, with the exception of the Crimean Tatars. But on the side of the USSR they fought no less.

              Russian traitors. In the formations of the ROA there were a little more than 30 thousand, several thousand traitors who called themselves Cossacks ... yeah, Hitler. If we count all sorts of policemen, etc., only about 50-60 thousand served in such national formations.

              The rest are scum of other nationalities.

              I bring the numbers from memory, because they are approximate. but accuracy is sufficient.
              So, statements about two millions are an ordinary lie, which was created to create the appearance that the people were against the USSR. Indirectly, this confirms the small number of traitors to our people brought to justice.
              1. gyl
                gyl 1 October 2013 02: 33 New
                +1
                Nda, etozh as it is necessary to bake the controlled people, that would massively go over to the side of the enemy. So = 1,2 million. Only not a "soldier of the Wehrmacht," but the so-called "hivi", ie. "volunteer assistants" (Freiwilligehilfe) - drivers, sleds, porters in warehouses, cooks, servants of repair shops, etc. These cannot be counted among the combat strength of the Wehrmacht.
                A separate line are Russian formations with a total number of about 900 thousand. Here is a complete list of them (without Ukrainian, Belarusian, Baltic, Caucasian, Tatar, Central Asian)
                Armed forces of KONR - (1 army, 4 corps, 8 divisions, 8 brigades).
                ROA CONR - (3 divisions, 2 brigades),
                ROA of the Wehrmacht - (10 divisions, 30 brigades),
                Airborne Forces of the Wehrmacht - (1 regiment, 26 battalions),
                RONA– (5 regiments),
                RNNA - (3 regiments),
                TAR - (2 regiments),
                Air Force KONR (Aviation Corps) - (87 aircraft, 1 air group, 1 regiment)
                15th corps of the SS troops - (3 divisions, 16 regiments),
                6th corps of the SS troops - (2 divisions, 2 brigades, 14 regiments)
                Cossack corps in Italy - (2 divisions, 4 brigades, 9 regiments),
                Cossack Marching Ataman Group - (4 brigades, 12 regiments)
                Wehrmacht Russian Security Corps in Serbia - (1 brigade, 5 regiments),
                Cossack Security (Russian) Wehrmacht Corps in Ukraine - (15 regiments),
                Wehrmacht 582nd Security (Russian) Corps - (11 battalions),
                Wehrmacht 583rd Security (Estonian-Russian) Corps - (10 battalions),
                Wehrmacht 584nd Security (Russian) Corps - (6 battalions),
                590th security (Cossack Russian) Wehrmacht corps - (1 regiment, 4 battalions, 12 companies),
                580th security (Cossack) Wehrmacht corps - (1 regiment, 9 battalions),
                532th security (Russian) Wehrmacht corps - (13 battalions),
                531st security (Russian - Muslim) Wehrmacht corps - (9 battalions),
                559th Security (Russian) Wehrmacht Corps - (7 battalions),
                BSA Belarusian Self-Defense Corps - (7 districts, 21 battalions),
                Belarusian regional defense "BKA" - (7 groups, 45 battalions),
                The Russian “People’s Guard” of the Moscow General Commissariat (13 battalions, 1 cavalry division).
                Cossack reserve FA-SS (1 brigade, 3 regiments),
                1st Cavalry Cossack Division (8 regiments),
                1st Don Cavalry Cossack Division (5 regiments),
                2nd Caucasian Cavalry Cossack Division (5 regiments),
                3rd Plastun Cossack Division (4 regiments),
                29th Russian (6 regiments),
                30th Russian (1st formation 44g), (5 regiments),
                "Abwehr Special Division" Russia "", (1 regiment, 12 battalions).
                442nd Special Purpose Division (2 regiments) - ROA,
                136th Special Purpose Division (2 regiments) -ROA,
                1st Russian National Division (2 regiments),
                Infantry "Von Stumpfeld" (2 regiment) ROA,
                600th Tank Grenadier (1st ROA) (7 regiments),
                650th Tank Grenadier (2nd ROA) (5 regiments),
                700th Tank Grenadier (3rd ROA), (5 regiments),
                4th ROA (3 regiments),
                Training division "Leginovo", Ostlegion (1 brigade, 5 regiments),
                Depot division "Milau". ROA of the Wehrmacht (4 regiments),
                162nd Training Ostlegion (6 regiments),
                81st Personnel (5 regiments) - Mixed,
                153rd Training Field, Ostlegionov (2 regiments),
                Combined Cossack Cavalry Division of the Field Police "Von Schulenburg" (4 regiments),
                454th - Cossack,
                209th ROA
      2. kurtz755
        kurtz755 30 September 2013 03: 15 New
        -1
        Who should know about this, if not Armani? ...
    4. soldier's grandson
      soldier's grandson 28 September 2013 21: 05 New
      +1
      panther chassis was a big minus in its design, rollers crumpled and had to carry spare
  8. Ulysses
    Ulysses 28 September 2013 15: 04 New
    +7
    The beast is certainly serious.
    Especially in armament and reservation.
    But the Germans clearly messed up the chassis.

    And in general, the pre-war concept of the possessed "to end the war with the technology that we started" in a protracted war did not justify itself.
    1. OffenroR
      OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 19 New
      +4
      Well, the "demoniac" was going to "crush the Russians" in two or three months .... @@@ him wassat
      1. Uhe
        Uhe 28 September 2013 16: 46 New
        +6
        So he was beaten by Cherchel and Stalin. Cherchel gave him a misinformation, saying that the British have huge forces concentrated on the island and Hitler will get a caput, and Stalin, on the contrary, will have only one defense line instead of the three that existed. Hitler was ready to enter the war around the same time that Stalin was about to complete the re-equipment of the army - the end of 43, the beginning of 44 years. Hitler understood that in 43-44 of the USSR he would never win, so he grabbed onto the disrita Britons. Well, I got zvizdyule from us. Already in mid-July, the German command became clear, judging by the recollections, that the plan of the Redbeard had failed. It took us only a month to show the Germans who was the boss in the house. Yes, then for almost 3 years we kicked them back, but the winter near Moscow was built in June 41st, and our fathers, grandfathers, great-grandfathers managed.
        1. OffenroR
          OffenroR 28 September 2013 23: 52 New
          +5
          Firstly, Germany was not alone Hitler .... Churchill himself said after the war that 150000 nemtsev would be enough to capture the British Isles. And so the English army is no match for the German ... "Rommel's brilliant ragrom in Africa" ​​he is only brilliant in words. How interesting could he have fought in the "war of engines" without fuel and with a fivefold numerical superiority of the enemy? In 1940, the Germans "cleaned the mustache" well for the French, give them free rein so they fled to Spain.

          And now about the USSR .... 1941 .... winter .... the regular composition of the Red Army was defeated, about 4000000 soldiers were taken prisoner, but the Germans are VERY battered. Minus 40 degrees, and the Germans in autumn uniforms, equipment "dubbed "in place, the weapon is jammed. And the USSR is fortified points, soldiers and militias, ready to fight to the death, and here is reinforcement from Siberia, 25 full-blooded divisions, with everything they need - winter is not a hindrance for them. The Germans stopped, counter-attack - the Germans were thrown back by crushing them in the literal sense .... Under such circumstances, the Germans had no chance to take Moscow. Here is the secret of victory near Moscow.

          So the USSR was a bone which the Germans choked on ... fatally.
          1. lucidlook
            lucidlook 29 September 2013 12: 46 New
            +2
            Quote: OffenroR
            1941 .... winter .... the regular composition of the Red Army was defeated, about 4000000 soldiers were taken prisoner, but the Germans are VERY battered. Minus 40 degrees, and the Germans are in autumn uniforms, the equipment is "dubbed" in place, the weapon is jammed. USSR-fortified points, soldiers and militias


            Yes you are right. The German gunner Joseph Dec wrote at this time:
            Loaves of bread had to be chopped with an ax. First aid packs petrified, gasoline froze, optics went out of order [covered with hoarfrost], and hands clung to metal. In the cold, the wounded died a few minutes later. Several lucky ones managed to acquire Russian uniforms taken from the corpses warmed by them

            I add that in some units the losses from frostbite reached 70%.

            But it is important to understand that it was not only a matter of fortified points or Siberian soldiers in sheepskin sheepskin coats. For the most part, Soviet technology turned out to be much better adapted technically to work at low temperatures. For example - airplanes. Compare: from the beginning of November to the beginning of December of the 41st year, the Soviet Air Force made 15,840 sorties, while the Luftwaffe - only 3,500. The Germans were extremely demoralized by this fact.

            So it was a frost for everyone, but for some reason the MG-34 fired only single shots, and the DP thrashed in bursts. Yes, I understand that it was a matter of lubrication, but after all, frosts did not break out in July.
            1. OffenroR
              OffenroR 29 September 2013 16: 17 New
              +2
              Quote: lucidlook
              For the most part, Soviet technology turned out to be much better adapted technically to work at low temperatures. For example - airplanes. Compare: from the beginning of November to the beginning of December of the 41st year, the Soviet Air Force completed 15,840 sorties, while the Luftwaffe - only 3,500. The Germans were extremely demoralized by this fact.

              This is understandable .... The T-34 drifted directly in the snow ..... the Pz.IV's trucks were almost twice as narrow. + German tanks "ate" only high-quality gasoline (it froze), while the Russians diesel (it did not freeze).

              Quote: lucidlook
              So it was a frost for everyone, but for some reason the MG-34 fired only single shots, and the DP thrashed in bursts. Yes, I understand that it was a matter of lubrication, but after all, frosts did not break out in July.


              As for the Mg-34 ... in the summer they shot solo because the machine gun overheated very quickly (one of the reasons for the creation of the Mg-42) and in the winter because there was no grease .... they would shoot in bursts the machine gun would fall apart on the spot.
              1. ramsi
                ramsi 29 September 2013 20: 33 New
                0
                gasoline froze, (even synthetic!) - this is unlikely, rather - diesel fuel, it has such a tendency
              2. kurtz755
                kurtz755 30 September 2013 03: 37 New
                0
                Really ?? Straight single and fired in the summer, right? And in the winter, too, single? And if not, then he just fell apart? Bad machine gun, not suitable. Azazaza, stupid boshes! They couldn't even make a machine gun. And even (!) For some reason they were carrying replaceable barrels! Here are stupid people! And DP beat himself and beat himself! The barrel does not heat up. "In general, the MG-34 was a very worthy weapon, but its disadvantages primarily include increased sensitivity to contamination of mechanisms. In addition, it was too laborious to manufacture and required too many resources, which was unacceptable for wartime conditions, which required This is why the much simpler and more reliable MG-42 machine gun, using more advanced technologies, was born, but the MG-34 was a very formidable and versatile weapon that earned its place of honor in the history of small arms. "
  9. Ivanovich47
    Ivanovich47 28 September 2013 15: 51 New
    +1
    German designers, having received captured T-34s, tried to create their own, German counterpart. Did not work out. But some constructive developments of our tank were successfully applied in the "Panther". The car was serious, but it was created hastily (time was running out). Therefore, the reliability was not high. The high fighting spirit of the Soviet soldier reduced the combat capabilities of new models of German armored vehicles.
    1. OffenroR
      OffenroR 28 September 2013 15: 56 New
      +1
      Ivanovich47

      "German designers, having received captured T-34s, tried to create their own, German counterpart. It did not work."

      Still how it happened .... read about Vk 3002 (DB)
      1. Alex 241
        Alex 241 28 September 2013 18: 54 New
        +3
        The unfinished prototype VK 3002 (DB) until the end of the war remained at one of the Daimler-Benz enterprises almost until the very end of the war. According to data that still needs to be clarified, the hull of the tank was cut into metal in 1945. The young man is writing here before, at least you will get acquainted with the materials, do not make people laugh!
        1. OffenroR
          OffenroR 28 September 2013 23: 55 New
          0
          So this project was closed in favor of a project from MAN ... And the Germans could finish it.
  10. barbiturate
    barbiturate 28 September 2013 16: 03 New
    +4
    unsuccessful tank, very complex and not giving high-quality superiority, huge mass and low technical reliability for only 75mm guns (which was already not enough for 43g). The armor for such a mass is again thin. The design is an anachronism since transmission in front of the tank and dviglo behind, to which it leads well well It is incorrect to compare it with the T-34 because they are artificially crammed into one category - medium tanks and the creation time were very different (for war times 5-6 years the difference is very significant). We’d better be honest and compare it with the T-44 (the year it was created in the index) or the IS-2 (yes, yes, the difference in weight is 1 ton, here are classmates)
    such a comparison will be objective both in terms of the time of creation and in the mass of the tank, otherwise the Germans could call it a light tank (think 45 tons, we have here projects of hundred-ton E-100s, so Panther pulls on a light tank)), but you twist a finger at the temple to someone who would begin to compare it with T 70)
    1. OffenroR
      OffenroR 28 September 2013 16: 41 New
      -10 qualifying.
      "not giving quality superiority" "75mm cannon, which was already not enough for 43g"
      110mm armor, 45 km / h on the highway, 7,5 cm KwK 42 which easily penetrated T-34-85 armor .... And the Germans had their answers to any Soviet tank, against the Is-3 they had E -75, against the T-44 were the E-50 and Panther 2.

      PS against T-70 the Germans had VK 1602 "Leopard"
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate 28 September 2013 17: 07 New
        +9
        who told you about the ease of breaking through the armor of the t-34-85? 110mm is the thickest armor with a mass of 45 tons? not funny yourself? Is-3 compare with E-75?) And was there such a tank? or E-50?) You play tanks when you play, don’t believe everything)
        PS The child decided to pay attention)
        1. Snoop
          Snoop 28 September 2013 17: 18 New
          10
          They completely cheated on their WOT))) Serial war tanks are not distinguished from promising and design tanks))) Everything mixed up in their head ... people ... horses)))
          Judging by the game of Belarusians, it turns out the Tiger and Panther were very slop tanks))) After all, they all pierce them)), they just do not take into account that many tanks have top guns - these guns were not really used in battles))
        2. Michael_59
          Michael_59 28 September 2013 18: 28 New
          +4
          Quote: barbiturate
          PS The child decided to pay attention)


          A young man typical AlEn - outplayed in WoT - and broadcasts, the bottom ...
        3. Alex 241
          Alex 241 28 September 2013 18: 56 New
          +8
          Quote: barbiturate
          E-75?) But was there such a tank? or E-50?)
          Well, of course, the E-50, which did not even go into the series. Here he is handsome on the battlefield laughing
          1. kavkaz8888
            kavkaz8888 28 September 2013 23: 20 New
            0
            In WoT, in the information about the technology it was written it was produced in series, or was only in development. It just forgot to read the lad. And the tanks are the norm toy.
          2. OffenroR
            OffenroR 29 September 2013 00: 05 New
            0
            Quote: barbiturate
            who told you about the ease of breaking through the armor of the t-34-85? 110mm is the thickest armor with a mass of 45 tons? not funny yourself? Is-3 compare with E-75?) And was there such a tank? or E-50?) You play tanks when you play, don’t believe everything)
            PS The child decided to pay attention)

            Quote: Snoop
            They completely cheated on their WOT))) Serial war tanks are not distinguished from promising and design tanks))) Everything mixed up in their head ... people ... horses)))
            Judging by the game of Belarusians, it turns out the Tiger and Panther were very slop tanks))) After all, they all pierce them)), they just do not take into account that many tanks have top guns - these guns were not really used in battles))

            Quote: Michael_59
            Quote: barbiturate
            PS The child decided to pay attention)


            A young man typical AlEn - outplayed in WoT - and broadcasts, the bottom ...


            AlEN yes it means ..... "comrades general designers" - sorry for getting into your "professional bazaar" but all the equipment samples I listed were prototypes ... only the E-100 chassis had time to be built. Here, with the T-44, the Germans would have suffered for a very long time ... especially if a D-10T cannon was installed on it (which was on the Su-100, and later on the T-54 "+ 100-120mm armor for a medium tank ... nothing at all.)

            Py Sy .... I don't play in your "AlEnskiy" World of Tanks .... I downloaded the truth on the equipment to take a look, but until you buy it, you won't see it)))
            1. barbiturate
              barbiturate 29 September 2013 04: 04 New
              0
              you confuse the concept of a prototype and a drawing on a piece of paper, read what a prototype is in technology. The Germans did not have a prototype! they had only drawings and creative blueprints and the desire that the giant abyss with a real machine.
              1. OffenroR
                OffenroR 29 September 2013 16: 33 New
                +1
                Quote: barbiturate
                you confuse the concept of a prototype and a drawing on a piece of paper, read what a prototype is in technology. The Germans did not have a prototype! they had only drawings and creative blueprints and the desire that the giant abyss with a real machine.


                Is this also a "drawing" in your opinion? The E-100 chassis .... the only model of the "E" series .... to which they managed to make at least some part ... all the others were not made even as a model ....
    2. gyl
      gyl 28 September 2013 19: 04 New
      0
      Yes, perhaps with the IS-2. It should be compared ...
      1. OffenroR
        OffenroR 29 September 2013 17: 18 New
        +2
        Then the Germans fought against super-heavy tanks in 1941. The mass of the Pz.IV Ausf.B-18.8t, T-34 32t. The Germans at the beginning of the war, the Pz.IV was considered a heavy tank. And the cannons for the Germans in general were probably monsters) This is already then the classifications changed, the Germans began to make very heavy vehicles .... and now, for Russians, German tanks became super-heavy tongue
    3. family tree
      family tree 28 September 2013 20: 51 New
      +2
      Quote: barbiturate
      The design is an anachronism since transmission in front of the tank and dviglo behind, to which it leads well well

      Emcha, aka "Sherman", is the second in the number of produced, with various modifications, after the T-34. He rode to the end of the Korean War in his own army, and even longer in others. request Yes, and Pz-4 is not sickly train. It’s not the location of the transmission.
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate 29 September 2013 04: 06 New
        0
        Rather, not only in it, but still. Now no one is doing this, the shaft going from the engine to the transmission increases the height of the machine and can’t get anywhere from it, the mass grows from the height, etc.
    4. svp67
      svp67 28 September 2013 21: 02 New
      0
      Quote: barbiturate
      It is incorrect to compare it with the T-34 because they are artificially crammed into one category - medium tanks
      These are two tanks of "immediate infantry support" and "operational formations". And they solved the same problems, so their comparison is RIGHT. In contrast to the comparison with "Tiger", the main task of which was - "quality enhancement ...". And there can be no question of any "artificiality" here.
      Quote: barbiturate
      The design is an anachronism since transmission in front of the tank and dviglo behind, to which it leads well well

      Of course it is known - at that time this led to a "balance" of the placement of the fighting compartment and the turret, that is, it was in the geometric center, which made it possible both to improve the "working conditions" of the crew, and to use a longer-barreled gun, with a lesser likelihood of it sticking into the ground ... Our tank building, was able to achieve a similar result only on the T44, after installing the engine across the hull ...
      1. barbiturate
        barbiturate 29 September 2013 04: 39 New
        0
        Quote: svp67
        These are two tanks of "immediate infantry support" and "operational formations". And they solved the same problems, so their comparison is RIGHT. In contrast to the comparison with "Tiger", the main task of which was - "quality enhancement ...". And there can be no question of any "artificiality" here.


        Yes you? Is the comparison valid? The Panther has one and a half times the mass, but both are medium tanks). If you think not in artificially created categories (where even experts are confused where and which tank to cram), but in life, then boxing will be a direct analogy and what will we see there? ... I generally keep quiet about the laboriousness of manufacturing. The Panther was not a medium tank, but rather the first swallow of the so-called "main" tanks. And all the tanks had different tasks to solve, and the Tiger and Panther went into attacks and fired from ambushes, all were equal, the difference was in quantity.

        Quote: svp67
        Of course it is known - at that time this led to a "balance" of the placement of the fighting compartment and the turret, that is, it was in the geometric center, which made it possible both to improve the "working conditions" of the crew, and to use a longer-barreled gun, with a lesser likelihood of it sticking into the ground ... Our tank building, was able to achieve a similar result only on the T44, after installing the engine across the hull ...


        The Germans explained their balance with the technical dogmas that they could not part with during the war (to our happiness). The crew’s working conditions are not determined by the location of the transmission. The ability to install a long-barreled cannon is also determined not by this, and this can be clearly seen even in the pictures of the tanks) Installing the engine across, yes, allowed to increase the fighting compartment on the T-44, this is true, but this does not apply to the Panther’s layout, where the shaft goes through the entire tank time quickly put everything in its place and the post-war German Leopard was done correctly, according to the Soviet scheme, however, like all other post-war tanks.
  11. Arkan
    Arkan 28 September 2013 22: 14 New
    +1
    The gun on it is good, the SLAs, well, everything else is mediocre. Machine for defense.
  12. Glory333
    Glory333 28 September 2013 22: 55 New
    +3
    I read that Guderian was against the release of the new Panther tank and instructed on the further modernization of the "workhorse" T-4, indeed the T-4 was a much cheaper, easier to manufacture and reliable tank, its release would not have created serious delays that are inevitable during the transition on a fundamentally new technique. Listen to the Germans of Guderian, and instead of 5 thousand Panthers, they could release at least 10 thousand T-4 new modifications that caused the allies much more problems.
    1. barbiturate
      barbiturate 29 September 2013 04: 44 New
      0
      I also think so, it was necessary to improve the t-4 and the tiger, panthers were superfluous
    2. smart ass
      smart ass 29 September 2013 07: 34 New
      0
      And the result would be the same, in order to reverse the outcome of the war, it was necessary to produce a minimum of 60 thousand tons
      1. maxvet
        maxvet 30 September 2013 10: 35 New
        0
        the result would be the same, but more sad for us - instead of 7 thousand panthers, the Wehrmacht would receive 12-14 thousand modernized pz4
  13. bublic82009
    bublic82009 29 September 2013 00: 04 New
    +2
    good or bad Panther showed the history of the Second World War.
  14. smart ass
    smart ass 29 September 2013 07: 31 New
    +1
    Moreover, statistically tanks with diesel engines did not have fire safety advantages in relation to vehicles with carburetor engines. According to statistics from October 1942, diesel T-34s burned even slightly more often than T-70 tanks refueling with aviation gas (23% versus 19%). The engineers at the NIIBT training ground in Kubinka in 1943 came to the conclusion directly opposite to the household assessment of the potential for ignition of various types of fuel. “The Germans' use of a carbureted engine, rather than a diesel engine, in a new tank, launched in 1942, can be explained by: [...] a very significant percentage of tank fires with diesel engines in combat conditions and the absence of significant advantages over carbureted ones in this regard engines, especially with a competent construction of the latter and the availability of reliable automatic fire extinguishers ”article Captain A. V. Maryevsky: German vehicles were against *** the T-34

    Enough already to drive about diesel advantage
  15. shasha
    shasha 29 September 2013 10: 15 New
    -6
    German tanks are the best
    1. 0255
      0255 29 September 2013 17: 16 New
      0
      German tanks are the best

      only T-34s were effective against German tanks from the very beginning of the war.
  16. In the reeds
    In the reeds 29 September 2013 12: 39 New
    +2
    Quote: soldier's grandson
    according to your koment, it’s clear that you are delighted with the fact that the Nazis worked with your people, but they say that in our time in Israel on May 9 young people laugh at veterans with awards- MEMORY IS SHORT!

    No one laughs. My mother was the oldest in the brigade and therefore the foreman. near each machine there was an inverted box, they made shells for the front. Mom was 15 years old
  17. In the reeds
    In the reeds 29 September 2013 12: 49 New
    0
    Quote: brelok
    Quote: Soldier's grandson
    in Israel on May 9 over award-winning veterans, young people laugh- MEMORY YOU SHORT!

    And they never had it long. For them, the main thing is to fill your pocket with who and when it’s the tenth

    Sometimes sir is more important, just a muzzle
  18. _DeSteN_
    _DeSteN_ 29 September 2013 14: 34 New
    -1
    Of course, this is one of the most famous heavy tanks.

    I did not read these words. This is a medium tank.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  19. vietnam7
    vietnam7 29 September 2013 14: 40 New
    0
    Quote: _DeSteN_
    Of course, this is one of the most famous heavy tanks.

    I did not read these words. This is a medium tank.
    Of course, in vain, according to whose classification: According to our average, with a stretch, in German - heavy, the Germans divided tanks into medium and heavy guns in caliber.
  20. _DeSteN_
    _DeSteN_ 29 September 2013 14: 45 New
    0
    Quote: vietnam7
    In our medium with a stretch, in German - heavy, the Germans divided the tanks into medium and heavy guns in caliber.

    According to Doyle, this is a medium tank. And he always was.
  21. vietnam7
    vietnam7 29 September 2013 14: 55 New
    0
    About Doyle can be more detailed, the first time I come across.
  22. _DeSteN_
    _DeSteN_ 29 September 2013 15: 01 New
    0
    Encyclopedia: Fairly accurate and popular in narrow circles.
  23. barbiturate
    barbiturate 29 September 2013 15: 36 New
    +1
    Doyle is not the only expert and not the ultimate truth, all these names and categories are far-fetched, what is he average for us, if one and a half times heavier than our average? and how much our heavy IS-2 weighs. For us, it is clearly a heavy tank both in terms of weight and laboriousness of manufacture, and even stupidly in size. All this leapfrog with categories was stopped with the appearance of the "main" tank, everything became simple and clear.
    The Panther is not a medium, but not yet a heavy tank, rather the first swallow of the category of "main" tanks.
  24. motorized rifle
    motorized rifle 29 September 2013 20: 32 New
    +1
    Say a word about solarium.
    Let it be known that diesel fuel is cheaper than gasoline! Especially in those days, this is a heavier fraction than gasoline and it turned out along with it, i.e. it’s impossible to make one gasoline or one solarium from oil, and more solariums are obtained. In addition, it does not evaporate well, which means it has significantly less losses during transportation and the overflows accompanying it from one container to another. In addition, it is safer to use; you can stew matches in it, especially in winter. Yes, if you ignite it, then it burns be healthy and try to extinguish it, but at the same time, when working with it, it is not afraid of sparks, cigarette butts and an open flame, unlike gasoline. And if we assume that at least one percent is lost during the evaporation of gasoline, then imagine the total losses, well, at least in the front-line or army fuels and lubricants. And with diesel fuel you can do the experiment yourself, pour two liter cans with diesel fuel and gasoline and leave it open in a warm garage, gasoline will evaporate in a maximum of two days, and pour it into the solarium in a month because you will get tired of waiting. Now answer yourself, what would you like to refuel the tank in battle?
    1. smart ass
      smart ass 29 September 2013 20: 59 New
      +2
      Diesel fuel, it’s good only not in Germany. 75% of gasoline in Germany was produced by the chemical industry ... and diesel fuel only from oil ... therefore there are no options
      1. maxvet
        maxvet 30 September 2013 10: 46 New
        +2
        in addition, kriegsmarine was the main consumer of diesel fuel in Germany
  25. vikov
    vikov 29 September 2013 23: 41 New
    0
    Quote: motorized infantryman
    Say a word about solarium.
    Now answer yourself, what would you like to refuel the tank in battle?


    A controversial issue, especially in winter, the diesel engine was not jammed, i.e. the enemy knew about the advance of tanks, and burns from solariums are much heavier than from gasoline.
  26. Omskgasmyas
    Omskgasmyas 30 September 2013 11: 25 New
    +2
    The Germans could have made tanks with diesel engines perfectly, but they all went to the fleet of submarines, of which there were more than 1000 and each filled tons of 150-180 diesel fuel per exit to the sea. Fuel in the Reich was distributed like this: synthetic gasoline - auto, motorcycle, armored vehicles. Aviation gasoline and diesel fuel were obtained from oil. Gasoline - on airplanes, diesel fuel, as I already wrote, on the submarine.
    The chassis of the Tigers and Panthers, with their greater smoothness and a more even distribution of the load on the rollers, was heavy. For IS-2, the chassis weighed 8,5 tons, for the Tiger - 14 tons. Hence, the Germans had constant problems with breakdowns and repairs.
    My tears welling up when I read about the terrible frosts in Russia and the fingers of German young soldiers frozen to arms. And no one thought that on the other side of the front some Uzbek or Azerbaijanian was freezing, who didn’t even see the snow on TV, because he didn’t have a telly then? Reference: there were less than 60% of Russians in the population of the USSR.
    1. maxvet
      maxvet 30 September 2013 18: 54 New
      +1
      Quote: Omskgazmyas
      And no one thought that on the other side of the front some Uzbek or Azerbaijanian was freezing, who did not even see the snow on TV, because he did not have a telly then? Reference: there were less than 60 Russians in the USSR population

      I could put five pluses at once, I would put seven! And as for the frozen German fingers, they knew where they were going, and the fact that they screwed up in terms of time, their sexual (and not only sexual) difficulties
    2. Stas57
      Stas57 30 September 2013 19: 24 New
      +1
      The Germans could have made tanks with diesel engines perfectly, but they all went to the fleet of submarines, of which there were more than 1000 and each filled tons of 150-180 diesel fuel per exit to the sea. Fuel in the Reich was distributed like this: synthetic gasoline - auto, motorcycle, armored vehicles.

      I would advise you to see the share of diesel cars in the Wehrmacht, there will be a lot of surprising things there.
  27. Fitter65
    Fitter65 30 September 2013 15: 16 New
    0
    Quote: LetterKsi
    Burned, they say, "Panthers" beautifully

    Quote: Vitold
    Yes, and the T-34 from them, too.

    Both are right, but the T-34 entered Berlin, and the Panthers did not take more than one city.
  28. Ilja 22
    Ilja 22 12 December 2013 09: 22 New
    +1
    They burned, but as a result, the victory remained with our "34", a tank that became a legend "for centuries." Great memory and glory to our grandfathers !!!