The evolution of medium tanks in 1942-1943 in the USSR. T-43
In previous articles of the cycle dedicated to our famous “thirty-four”, the author briefly examined the stages of the evolution of German means tanks. The Wehrmacht had two such at the time of the invasion of the USSR: T-III and T-IV. But the first turned out to be too small and did not have reserves for further improvement: even in its most “advanced” version, it had a maximum of 50 mm armor (although, in the frontal part, it was reinforced with an additional 20 mm sheet) and a 50 mm long-barreled gun, the capabilities of which, however , were no longer considered sufficient to deal with the latest Soviet armored vehicles. This, of course, was not enough, and the production of the T-III was curtailed, in fact, in 1942 - although in the 1st half of 1943 the tank continued to be produced, its production did not exceed 46 vehicles a month, although in February September 1942, the Germans came close to releasing 250 tanks monthly.
As for the T-IV, it, in fact, until the very end of the war remained a reliable "workhorse" of the Wehrmacht and completely retained its relevance. It was possible to install a very powerful 75-mm anti-tank long-barrel gun based on the famous Pak 40, and the thickness of the vertically located frontal parts was brought to 80 mm. But even the frontal projection was not completely protected by such armor, and the sides had only 30 mm protection without rational tilt angles, and made their way through almost any anti-tank means. In other words, the combination of good frontal armor and a very powerful gun made the T-IV a rather formidable and combat-ready tank until the very end of the war, but at the same time it also had very significant flaws that German tankers, of course, wanted to eradicate. However, within the framework of the design of the T-IV, this was not possible.
As a result, the Germans tried to create a completely new medium tank, with armor “like the T-34” and weighing up to 35 t, as well as a new, even more powerful gun than the T-IV cannon. The result was a “Panther” with its “indestructible” frontal armor 85-110 mm (and 85 mm at a rational angle) but with very vulnerable sides of the hull and turret thickness 40-45 mm. The Panther’s 75-mm cannon was a heavy-duty anti-tank gun, superior in armor penetration at a direct-shot distance even surpassing the famous 88-mm gun, but for all this we had to pay a huge weight for the medium tank of those years - 44,8 m. As a result, from a potentially excellent medium The Panther tank turned into a heavy tank of highly controversial merits, the main drawback of which was the impossibility of its production in an amount sufficient to equip tank divisions.
As mentioned earlier, the shortcomings of the pre-war T-34 arr. 1940 was not a secret either for the designers or for the military. Therefore, even before the war, in parallel with the fine-tuning and the organization of mass production of the T-34, the so-called T-34M was developed, which can be considered as a deep modernization of the T-34, and it can also be a new tank created taking into account the experience gained in creating T -34.
From the point of view of armament and the thickness of the body armor, the T-34M copied the T-34, but judging by the figures, the angles of inclination of the side armor plates of the hull and turret were less than that of the "thirty-four", which gave somewhat worse protection. But the tank received a relatively spacious tower for three crew members, the number of which, finally, increased from four to five. The commander’s turret was also envisaged, despite the fact that the tower itself, of course, had a wide shoulder strap. Christie's suspension changed to a more modern torsion bar, the gearbox was left at the first stage, although the creation of a planetary gearbox for the tank was carried out at an accelerated pace.
The T-34M project was introduced in January 1941. On the whole, it can be said that at the cost of a slight weakening of the T-34M’s armor protection, it got rid of most of the T-34 flaws and, in this form, was an excellent medium tank, far exceeding the German troika and "Four" with which Germany entered the war in almost all parameters. In addition, the design had a weight reserve of about a ton, which allowed the military to demand a head-up reservation to 60 mm.
According to the pre-war plans, the plants producing T-34 had to gradually switch to the production of T-34M, and the first 500 machines of this type were to be made already in 1941. Alas, T-34M was not embodied in the metal, and the 2 was the most important factor: first, with the beginning of the war, the number of combat vehicles delivered to the troops came to the fore, and to reduce the production of T-34, which even in the un-upgraded version was a formidable fighting force, was considered erroneous in the development of the new technology. The second factor was that the T-34M was supposed to use a new tank diesel B-5, the development of which was delayed. And, apparently, it was impossible to force it with the start of the war, since all the forces were thrown at eliminating the “childhood diseases” of the existing B-2, and even this task was not immediately solved.
Thus, the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, in fact, put an end to the further fate of the T-34M - the case was limited to the release of 2 cases with suspension, but without engines, rollers and transmissions and 5 towers, and it is unclear whether the guns were installed in them the plant was evacuated during the evacuation, but it did not find further use. Designers of the USSR concentrated on improving and improving the manufacturability of the T-34 design, and at the same time on organizing the release of the thirty-four already at 5 factories ...
But this did not mean stopping work on the new medium tanks for the Red Army.
Already in December, 1941, the design bureau of the plant No. 183 (Kharkiv) was ordered to develop an improved version of the T-34, and now the key requirements were no longer improved ergonomics and visibility, but also the addition of an 5 crew member, but increased armor protection and cheaper tank. The designers immediately got down to business, and already in February 1942 g, that is, literally, after a couple of months, submitted such to the NCTP.
In this project, we will not see either a broad shoulder strap, no commander’s cupola, or a new engine, and the number of crews was not that increased, but, on the contrary, reduced — they got rid of the gunner-radio operator. Thanks to the corresponding reductions, the thickness of the armor was able to reach the 70 mm (front of the hull) and 60 mm in the sides and stern. Of course, no one stuttered about the new engine, but the suspension was thought to be made torsion (although, it seems, it was quickly abandoned) and put in an improved gearbox.
In other words, if the project submitted by the Design Bureau of Plant No. 183 to NKTP for consideration had something in common with the pre-war T-34M project, it is only that it can also be considered as a deep modernization of the Thirty-Four. But the logic of this modernization was completely different, which is why the Kharkiv citizens turned out to have a tank completely different from the T-34M of the pre-war model. However, a lot of confusion was created by the fact that this new modification received the same name as the pre-war tank that did not go into the series, that is, the T-34M. In this case, the T-34M arr. 1941 and T-34M arr. 1942 has very little in common - only that T-34 was taken as the “source”. And T-34M arr. 1942 cannot be considered as the evolution of the pre-war T-34M - these are completely different projects, which should not be confused.
Incidentally, the draft of the new T-34M NKTP did not accept. The military time recalled the "blindness" of the "thirty-four" arr. 1940 g, and therefore proposed to designers to create an even more protected tank, with bringing armor to 60-80 mm, under the condition of ensuring maximum speed in 50 km / h., Reliability, guaranteeing mileage to 1500-2000 km and providing a good overview for the tank commander and his driver. In this case, the chassis and the engine should have remained the same as on the T-34.
This new tank received the name T-43, and during its design, of course, the design reserve obtained during the work on both previous "versions" T-34М was used, but still talking about some continuity with the "pre-war" T-34M - can not. In essence, T-43 was originally a T-34 arr. 1942, on which they installed a new, three-seat tower, again bringing the number of crew members to 4's. And again - except for the "triple" tower had nothing to do with that which was installed on the T-34M arr. 1941
On the pre-war T-34M model, it was supposed to find a place for the gunner by increasing the tower's shoulder strap from 1 420 to 1 700 mm. On the first T-43 models, the designers tried to solve a completely non-trivial task - to create a three-seat tower in a small pursuit, that is, the same 1 420 mm that the original T-34 model had. Of course, the place was categorically not enough, so several options were tried. Including the tower to be modeled on the one that was put on the T-50, in which the task of placing the three crew members was somehow solved: but you need to understand that having the same shoulder strap as the T-34, the T-50 tower it was not equipped with a 76,2-mm F-34, but only with a 45-mm gun. In the end, it was possible to “tamp” another member of the crew, but how? It seems that this layout was not in any tank of the world.
In this form, the T-43 drawings were ready in September-October 1942, and the prototype - in December of the same year. It must be said that despite the presence of a very original tower, other solutions differed by technical rationality - the fact is that by the end of 43, the majority of the T-1942 assemblies and assemblies were tested on conventional T-34 in order to identify and eliminate all kinds of childhood diseases. Interestingly, some of this was later given to the serial T-34: for example, the 5-speed gearbox, which began to be installed on the serial T-34 from the spring 1943, was developed for the T-43, but so well "fit" in T-34, that this was decided to use.
Of course, such a unification entailed a natural desire to embody the new T-43 on the serial T-34 to the maximum, and therefore in October 1942 was created T-34С (“С” - high-speed) - a certain hybrid of T-34 arr. 1942 and T-43. From the "forty-third" this car received a three-seat turret, the above-mentioned 5-speed gearbox and the reinforcement of the hull frontal armor to 60 mm. But tests have shown that in this form the ergonomics of the T-34С left much to be desired, and even with armor in 45 mm its mass exceeded 32 t, while a number of mechanisms worked unstably. Many trials caused triple tower of the original layout. The commander's turret did not have its own hatch, that is, the commander first needed to climb into the tower using another hatch, then lower the sleeve, then take his place, and raise the sleeve. The diagram clearly shows that the commander should have had a height no higher than average. There were also claims to leg support, mounting prisms in the commander’s cupola, etc.
In general, the upgrade failed, and since December 1942, all work on the T-34C was discontinued, and on the T-43, on the contrary, they were forced. By this time, the first prototype of the T-43 was ready "in metal". The tank turned out, let's say, very original. His crew was 4 man, but now three of them were in the tower with a narrow shoulder strap 1 420 mm. The designers honestly tried to alleviate the position of the tank commander, and achieved something in this area — for example, in order to “get” into his place he no longer had to move the sleeve-catcher. The radio operator arrow was abolished, the driver was transplanted from the left side of the tank to the right side, that is, to where the radio operator had previously been located, and the fuel tank was installed on the 500 l. The driver's hatch was refused, which, in combination with the new layout, to a certain extent increased the reliability of frontal projection protection, but worsened the possibilities for evacuating the mechanical drive. A machine gun fixed the motionless, while the fire from it was supposed to lead mechvod, focusing on the special risks in the surveillance device. But the most important innovation, of course, was the booking - T-43 received 75 mm forehead hull, 60 mm bead and hull stern and 90 mm forehead turret. In other words, the level of protection T-43 roughly corresponded to KV-1.
Nevertheless, in this form the T-43 is not that it did not pass state tests - it was not even allowed to them. But on the other hand, its factory tests lasted almost until the end of February 1943 and were very intense - suffice it to say that during this time the prototype T-43 passed 3 026 km. The tank turned out to be heavier than the T-34: the mass of the “thirty-four” arr. the beginning of the 1943 reached 30,5 tons, and the T-43 reached 34,1 tons (or 33,5 tons, it’s not entirely clear here) Of course, the driving performance of the tank decreased. So, the ability to overcome obstacles fell by about 5%, the speed of “clean movement” was 30,7 km / h versus about 34,5 km / h for the T-34, and the specific ground pressure reached 0,87 kg / sq. see what was deemed excessive.
However, apparently, the main "stumbling block" was a three-seat tower with a narrow shoulder strap - despite all the tricks of the designers, it was not possible to provide more or less acceptable ergonomics in it. In any case, NKTP, demanding the completion of the tank, decided to install on it a three-seat turret with a wide shoulder strap, as well as some smaller modifications, including a new type of track (with hinged hook) and a new radio station.
According to the documents, this tank was already passing as an improved T-43, the abbreviation T-43 (T-34М) was not applied to it. Work on it began as early as January 1943, with A. Morozov insisting on using two T-34 as “laboratories”, that is, a new tower with a wide shoulder strap was tested on them. Of course, this required a hefty revision of the Thirty-Fours design, because, for example, the new ring shoulder straps did not fit into the body - we had to make a special ring insert to lift the tower above the body so that it could freely rotate above the overmotor casing.
I must say that the new tower with epaulettes 1 600 mm was a success, everything worked well in it, except for the commander’s single-door hatch, which was unsuccessful, and was later replaced by a double-winged one. As planned, they installed a new radio station and tracks: otherwise, the new version of the T-43 differed little from the previous one, except that the driver was returned a full hatch.
The new tank, called the T-43-II, turned out to be a very successful vehicle, surpassing the T-34-76 in almost everything.
True, the torsion bar suspension was not installed, but with the new gearbox it turned out not so bad. The crew still made up only 4 man, but now the "economy" was achieved by the gunner-radio operator, which was still a better solution than combining the functions of the gunner and the tank commander. The booking was 75 mm front of the hull and 60 mm of the side and the stern, with rational tilt angles - but in the tower they could not be saved, but the thickness of its frontal armor reached 90 mm. The tower itself, having received a shoulder strap in the 1 600 mm, turned out to be quite successful, and gave a much larger amount of armor, while the armament remained almost the same - the X-NUMX-mm F-76,2M gun.
There were perhaps two main reasons for this. The first was that the tank was too late to be born. He was ready to be put into serial production by July 1943. It is interesting that the T-43 even managed to fight a bit as part of the so-called “special tank company No.100”, which, along with the T-43, included several promising tanks, such as the T-34 with an 57-mm gun. The specified company was sent to the Central Front on 19 in August and returned on 5 on September 1943, with the company commander giving T-43 excellent certification, and the crew of T-43 Junior Lieutenant Majorov was even presented with government awards for the destruction of three German anti-tank guns and two armored vehicles or armored personnel carriers. It is interesting that in his company every T-43 hit from 1 to 11 enemy shells, but not a single tank was disabled. However, all this does not negate the fact that the tank was ready only at the time of the beginning of the Battle of Kursk, in which the Germans massively used their Tigers and Panthers, and the 76,2-mm gun was no longer enough to fight these German tanks.
In other words, the T-34 had a great modernization potential, and in the T-43 it was used to enhance the booking and improve the ergonomics of the tank. As a result, we managed to achieve a sharp increase in body armor, and the new tower was good, but the “limits” were chosen even a little more than fully - the T-43 turned out to be the ultimate, eliminating further modernization, and at the same time appeared at the moment when its main armament ceased meet the requirements of the time.
Why was the creation of the T-43 so late? Apparently, this was to blame for its designer A.A. Morozov. Considering history T-43, we see a strange step backward in comparison with the T-34M arr. 1941 - although even before the war the ergonomic benefits of a broad-shoulder tower were clear, for a long time they tried to install a narrow-shoulder tower on a tank, looking for original ways to “stick” a third crew member there. In the end, they came to the conclusion that it was impossible to create such a tower, returned to the tower with a wide shoulder strap, but lost time on this - it can be assumed that if the T-43 was immediately created with a “broad-shouldered” tower, then the chances to go into series at the beginning 1943 g. Or even at the end of 1942 g. He would have had quite a lot.
But the fact is that it is A.A. Morozov advocated a narrow shoulder strap tower. On the one hand, there seems to be retrograde and short-sightedness, but on the other hand, A.A. Morozov mentioned in his correspondence that an increase in tower turret to 1 600 mm will increase the weight of the structure by 2 tons. In this case, A.A. Morozov understood very well that the medium tank should remain just the medium one and not go into the category of heavy, he was well aware that the problems with organizing the mass production of the T-43 would be less, the closer his design would be to the T-34. Of course, A.A. Morozov acted within the framework of the TTZ supplied to him, but he, obviously, understood all the validity of weight discipline and did not try to create “vundervaffe” for 40 tons by weight. And for a tank weighing 32-34, it is very difficult to find two tons “for the sake of ergonomics”, and, probably, it is possible only due to the deterioration of some other fighting qualities, but A.A. Morozov was tasked with creating a much better protected tank than the T-34 ...
The creation of a medium tank is always a way of compromise, designed to put a maximum of fighting qualities in a limited weight. The attempt to create a three-seat tower in a narrow pursuit, of course, was erroneous, but under the conditions when A.A. Morozov needed to dramatically strengthen the armor of the tank, he obviously did not consider it possible to allow himself to "throw away" tons of weight on ergonomics. The designer had very strong reasons to go exactly this way, and therefore, in the opinion of the author, one cannot blame him for moss or retrograde. However, I repeat, the attempt to squeeze the third member of the crew into the tower with an 1 420 mm shoulder strap was certainly an erroneous decision. She was not expected to succeed, but she delayed the development time, shifted to the right the timing of the tank's readiness for mass production, perhaps for a period from a quarter to six months.
So, by the middle of 1943 in the USSR, an excellent medium tank was created, but alas, for 1942.
And in 1943, the prospective tank of this subclass required not the 76,2-mm, but the 85-mm artillery system: but then the question arises, why not try to install it on T-43, and not on T-34? And here we smoothly approach the second reason, for which T-43 never went into mass production.
Of course, as already mentioned above, the T-43 turned out to be of the utmost design even with an 76,2-mm instrument, but, nevertheless, there were options to install an 85-mm gun on it. One of them is to reduce the capacity of the tower to two people. In this case, the 85-mm gun “climbed” onto the tank without critical overload. But, on the other hand, the size of the crew of the T-43 at the same time decreased only to 3 people, which would be clearly unwise.
Another approach to installing the 85-mm gun could be to reduce the protection of the tank, it is quite possible that it could have been balanced at some intermediate level between the T-34 arr. 1943 and T-43. But ... in general, according to the author, the same AA is to blame for further improvement of the T-43. Morozov.
As mentioned above, this is in every respect a talented designer, understanding the extreme importance of increasing the reliability of the future tank, and with the goal of minimizing any “childhood diseases” of the latter, practically throughout the entire history of the development, the T-43 tested its individual components and assemblies with conventional " Thirty-fours. The towers with a wide shoulder strap were no exception. So, when it became clear the need for arming tanks on the 85-mm artillery system, it quickly became clear that the new tower was suitable for this purpose as well as possible. However, this tower very well "stood up" on the T-34. And in the end it turned out that it turned out to be much easier and faster to finish the tower under the 85-mm artillery system on a conventional T-34 than to continue work on the T-43, while the upgraded T-34, again, would be much easier and faster run in the series. And the front urgently needed tanks with 85-mm guns.
And because I.V. Stalin was absolutely right in saying A.A. Morozov at one of the meetings about the following:
This is how the story of the T-34-85 began.
To be continued ...
As for the T-IV, it, in fact, until the very end of the war remained a reliable "workhorse" of the Wehrmacht and completely retained its relevance. It was possible to install a very powerful 75-mm anti-tank long-barrel gun based on the famous Pak 40, and the thickness of the vertically located frontal parts was brought to 80 mm. But even the frontal projection was not completely protected by such armor, and the sides had only 30 mm protection without rational tilt angles, and made their way through almost any anti-tank means. In other words, the combination of good frontal armor and a very powerful gun made the T-IV a rather formidable and combat-ready tank until the very end of the war, but at the same time it also had very significant flaws that German tankers, of course, wanted to eradicate. However, within the framework of the design of the T-IV, this was not possible.
As a result, the Germans tried to create a completely new medium tank, with armor “like the T-34” and weighing up to 35 t, as well as a new, even more powerful gun than the T-IV cannon. The result was a “Panther” with its “indestructible” frontal armor 85-110 mm (and 85 mm at a rational angle) but with very vulnerable sides of the hull and turret thickness 40-45 mm. The Panther’s 75-mm cannon was a heavy-duty anti-tank gun, superior in armor penetration at a direct-shot distance even surpassing the famous 88-mm gun, but for all this we had to pay a huge weight for the medium tank of those years - 44,8 m. As a result, from a potentially excellent medium The Panther tank turned into a heavy tank of highly controversial merits, the main drawback of which was the impossibility of its production in an amount sufficient to equip tank divisions.
And what happened at this time in the USSR?
As mentioned earlier, the shortcomings of the pre-war T-34 arr. 1940 was not a secret either for the designers or for the military. Therefore, even before the war, in parallel with the fine-tuning and the organization of mass production of the T-34, the so-called T-34M was developed, which can be considered as a deep modernization of the T-34, and it can also be a new tank created taking into account the experience gained in creating T -34.
From the point of view of armament and the thickness of the body armor, the T-34M copied the T-34, but judging by the figures, the angles of inclination of the side armor plates of the hull and turret were less than that of the "thirty-four", which gave somewhat worse protection. But the tank received a relatively spacious tower for three crew members, the number of which, finally, increased from four to five. The commander’s turret was also envisaged, despite the fact that the tower itself, of course, had a wide shoulder strap. Christie's suspension changed to a more modern torsion bar, the gearbox was left at the first stage, although the creation of a planetary gearbox for the tank was carried out at an accelerated pace.
The T-34M project was introduced in January 1941. On the whole, it can be said that at the cost of a slight weakening of the T-34M’s armor protection, it got rid of most of the T-34 flaws and, in this form, was an excellent medium tank, far exceeding the German troika and "Four" with which Germany entered the war in almost all parameters. In addition, the design had a weight reserve of about a ton, which allowed the military to demand a head-up reservation to 60 mm.
According to the pre-war plans, the plants producing T-34 had to gradually switch to the production of T-34M, and the first 500 machines of this type were to be made already in 1941. Alas, T-34M was not embodied in the metal, and the 2 was the most important factor: first, with the beginning of the war, the number of combat vehicles delivered to the troops came to the fore, and to reduce the production of T-34, which even in the un-upgraded version was a formidable fighting force, was considered erroneous in the development of the new technology. The second factor was that the T-34M was supposed to use a new tank diesel B-5, the development of which was delayed. And, apparently, it was impossible to force it with the start of the war, since all the forces were thrown at eliminating the “childhood diseases” of the existing B-2, and even this task was not immediately solved.
Thus, the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, in fact, put an end to the further fate of the T-34M - the case was limited to the release of 2 cases with suspension, but without engines, rollers and transmissions and 5 towers, and it is unclear whether the guns were installed in them the plant was evacuated during the evacuation, but it did not find further use. Designers of the USSR concentrated on improving and improving the manufacturability of the T-34 design, and at the same time on organizing the release of the thirty-four already at 5 factories ...
But this did not mean stopping work on the new medium tanks for the Red Army.
“The king is dead. Long live the king!"
Already in December, 1941, the design bureau of the plant No. 183 (Kharkiv) was ordered to develop an improved version of the T-34, and now the key requirements were no longer improved ergonomics and visibility, but also the addition of an 5 crew member, but increased armor protection and cheaper tank. The designers immediately got down to business, and already in February 1942 g, that is, literally, after a couple of months, submitted such to the NCTP.
In this project, we will not see either a broad shoulder strap, no commander’s cupola, or a new engine, and the number of crews was not that increased, but, on the contrary, reduced — they got rid of the gunner-radio operator. Thanks to the corresponding reductions, the thickness of the armor was able to reach the 70 mm (front of the hull) and 60 mm in the sides and stern. Of course, no one stuttered about the new engine, but the suspension was thought to be made torsion (although, it seems, it was quickly abandoned) and put in an improved gearbox.
In other words, if the project submitted by the Design Bureau of Plant No. 183 to NKTP for consideration had something in common with the pre-war T-34M project, it is only that it can also be considered as a deep modernization of the Thirty-Four. But the logic of this modernization was completely different, which is why the Kharkiv citizens turned out to have a tank completely different from the T-34M of the pre-war model. However, a lot of confusion was created by the fact that this new modification received the same name as the pre-war tank that did not go into the series, that is, the T-34M. In this case, the T-34M arr. 1941 and T-34M arr. 1942 has very little in common - only that T-34 was taken as the “source”. And T-34M arr. 1942 cannot be considered as the evolution of the pre-war T-34M - these are completely different projects, which should not be confused.
Incidentally, the draft of the new T-34M NKTP did not accept. The military time recalled the "blindness" of the "thirty-four" arr. 1940 g, and therefore proposed to designers to create an even more protected tank, with bringing armor to 60-80 mm, under the condition of ensuring maximum speed in 50 km / h., Reliability, guaranteeing mileage to 1500-2000 km and providing a good overview for the tank commander and his driver. In this case, the chassis and the engine should have remained the same as on the T-34.
This new tank received the name T-43, and during its design, of course, the design reserve obtained during the work on both previous "versions" T-34М was used, but still talking about some continuity with the "pre-war" T-34M - can not. In essence, T-43 was originally a T-34 arr. 1942, on which they installed a new, three-seat tower, again bringing the number of crew members to 4's. And again - except for the "triple" tower had nothing to do with that which was installed on the T-34M arr. 1941
On the pre-war T-34M model, it was supposed to find a place for the gunner by increasing the tower's shoulder strap from 1 420 to 1 700 mm. On the first T-43 models, the designers tried to solve a completely non-trivial task - to create a three-seat tower in a small pursuit, that is, the same 1 420 mm that the original T-34 model had. Of course, the place was categorically not enough, so several options were tried. Including the tower to be modeled on the one that was put on the T-50, in which the task of placing the three crew members was somehow solved: but you need to understand that having the same shoulder strap as the T-34, the T-50 tower it was not equipped with a 76,2-mm F-34, but only with a 45-mm gun. In the end, it was possible to “tamp” another member of the crew, but how? It seems that this layout was not in any tank of the world.
In this form, the T-43 drawings were ready in September-October 1942, and the prototype - in December of the same year. It must be said that despite the presence of a very original tower, other solutions differed by technical rationality - the fact is that by the end of 43, the majority of the T-1942 assemblies and assemblies were tested on conventional T-34 in order to identify and eliminate all kinds of childhood diseases. Interestingly, some of this was later given to the serial T-34: for example, the 5-speed gearbox, which began to be installed on the serial T-34 from the spring 1943, was developed for the T-43, but so well "fit" in T-34, that this was decided to use.
Of course, such a unification entailed a natural desire to embody the new T-43 on the serial T-34 to the maximum, and therefore in October 1942 was created T-34С (“С” - high-speed) - a certain hybrid of T-34 arr. 1942 and T-43. From the "forty-third" this car received a three-seat turret, the above-mentioned 5-speed gearbox and the reinforcement of the hull frontal armor to 60 mm. But tests have shown that in this form the ergonomics of the T-34С left much to be desired, and even with armor in 45 mm its mass exceeded 32 t, while a number of mechanisms worked unstably. Many trials caused triple tower of the original layout. The commander's turret did not have its own hatch, that is, the commander first needed to climb into the tower using another hatch, then lower the sleeve, then take his place, and raise the sleeve. The diagram clearly shows that the commander should have had a height no higher than average. There were also claims to leg support, mounting prisms in the commander’s cupola, etc.
In general, the upgrade failed, and since December 1942, all work on the T-34C was discontinued, and on the T-43, on the contrary, they were forced. By this time, the first prototype of the T-43 was ready "in metal". The tank turned out, let's say, very original. His crew was 4 man, but now three of them were in the tower with a narrow shoulder strap 1 420 mm. The designers honestly tried to alleviate the position of the tank commander, and achieved something in this area — for example, in order to “get” into his place he no longer had to move the sleeve-catcher. The radio operator arrow was abolished, the driver was transplanted from the left side of the tank to the right side, that is, to where the radio operator had previously been located, and the fuel tank was installed on the 500 l. The driver's hatch was refused, which, in combination with the new layout, to a certain extent increased the reliability of frontal projection protection, but worsened the possibilities for evacuating the mechanical drive. A machine gun fixed the motionless, while the fire from it was supposed to lead mechvod, focusing on the special risks in the surveillance device. But the most important innovation, of course, was the booking - T-43 received 75 mm forehead hull, 60 mm bead and hull stern and 90 mm forehead turret. In other words, the level of protection T-43 roughly corresponded to KV-1.
The very prototype
Nevertheless, in this form the T-43 is not that it did not pass state tests - it was not even allowed to them. But on the other hand, its factory tests lasted almost until the end of February 1943 and were very intense - suffice it to say that during this time the prototype T-43 passed 3 026 km. The tank turned out to be heavier than the T-34: the mass of the “thirty-four” arr. the beginning of the 1943 reached 30,5 tons, and the T-43 reached 34,1 tons (or 33,5 tons, it’s not entirely clear here) Of course, the driving performance of the tank decreased. So, the ability to overcome obstacles fell by about 5%, the speed of “clean movement” was 30,7 km / h versus about 34,5 km / h for the T-34, and the specific ground pressure reached 0,87 kg / sq. see what was deemed excessive.
However, apparently, the main "stumbling block" was a three-seat tower with a narrow shoulder strap - despite all the tricks of the designers, it was not possible to provide more or less acceptable ergonomics in it. In any case, NKTP, demanding the completion of the tank, decided to install on it a three-seat turret with a wide shoulder strap, as well as some smaller modifications, including a new type of track (with hinged hook) and a new radio station.
According to the documents, this tank was already passing as an improved T-43, the abbreviation T-43 (T-34М) was not applied to it. Work on it began as early as January 1943, with A. Morozov insisting on using two T-34 as “laboratories”, that is, a new tower with a wide shoulder strap was tested on them. Of course, this required a hefty revision of the Thirty-Fours design, because, for example, the new ring shoulder straps did not fit into the body - we had to make a special ring insert to lift the tower above the body so that it could freely rotate above the overmotor casing.
I must say that the new tower with epaulettes 1 600 mm was a success, everything worked well in it, except for the commander’s single-door hatch, which was unsuccessful, and was later replaced by a double-winged one. As planned, they installed a new radio station and tracks: otherwise, the new version of the T-43 differed little from the previous one, except that the driver was returned a full hatch.
The new tank, called the T-43-II, turned out to be a very successful vehicle, surpassing the T-34-76 in almost everything.
T-43-II
T-34-76 and T-43-II
True, the torsion bar suspension was not installed, but with the new gearbox it turned out not so bad. The crew still made up only 4 man, but now the "economy" was achieved by the gunner-radio operator, which was still a better solution than combining the functions of the gunner and the tank commander. The booking was 75 mm front of the hull and 60 mm of the side and the stern, with rational tilt angles - but in the tower they could not be saved, but the thickness of its frontal armor reached 90 mm. The tower itself, having received a shoulder strap in the 1 600 mm, turned out to be quite successful, and gave a much larger amount of armor, while the armament remained almost the same - the X-NUMX-mm F-76,2M gun.
Why did he not go to the series?
There were perhaps two main reasons for this. The first was that the tank was too late to be born. He was ready to be put into serial production by July 1943. It is interesting that the T-43 even managed to fight a bit as part of the so-called “special tank company No.100”, which, along with the T-43, included several promising tanks, such as the T-34 with an 57-mm gun. The specified company was sent to the Central Front on 19 in August and returned on 5 on September 1943, with the company commander giving T-43 excellent certification, and the crew of T-43 Junior Lieutenant Majorov was even presented with government awards for the destruction of three German anti-tank guns and two armored vehicles or armored personnel carriers. It is interesting that in his company every T-43 hit from 1 to 11 enemy shells, but not a single tank was disabled. However, all this does not negate the fact that the tank was ready only at the time of the beginning of the Battle of Kursk, in which the Germans massively used their Tigers and Panthers, and the 76,2-mm gun was no longer enough to fight these German tanks.
In other words, the T-34 had a great modernization potential, and in the T-43 it was used to enhance the booking and improve the ergonomics of the tank. As a result, we managed to achieve a sharp increase in body armor, and the new tower was good, but the “limits” were chosen even a little more than fully - the T-43 turned out to be the ultimate, eliminating further modernization, and at the same time appeared at the moment when its main armament ceased meet the requirements of the time.
Why was the creation of the T-43 so late? Apparently, this was to blame for its designer A.A. Morozov. Considering history T-43, we see a strange step backward in comparison with the T-34M arr. 1941 - although even before the war the ergonomic benefits of a broad-shoulder tower were clear, for a long time they tried to install a narrow-shoulder tower on a tank, looking for original ways to “stick” a third crew member there. In the end, they came to the conclusion that it was impossible to create such a tower, returned to the tower with a wide shoulder strap, but lost time on this - it can be assumed that if the T-43 was immediately created with a “broad-shouldered” tower, then the chances to go into series at the beginning 1943 g. Or even at the end of 1942 g. He would have had quite a lot.
But the fact is that it is A.A. Morozov advocated a narrow shoulder strap tower. On the one hand, there seems to be retrograde and short-sightedness, but on the other hand, A.A. Morozov mentioned in his correspondence that an increase in tower turret to 1 600 mm will increase the weight of the structure by 2 tons. In this case, A.A. Morozov understood very well that the medium tank should remain just the medium one and not go into the category of heavy, he was well aware that the problems with organizing the mass production of the T-43 would be less, the closer his design would be to the T-34. Of course, A.A. Morozov acted within the framework of the TTZ supplied to him, but he, obviously, understood all the validity of weight discipline and did not try to create “vundervaffe” for 40 tons by weight. And for a tank weighing 32-34, it is very difficult to find two tons “for the sake of ergonomics”, and, probably, it is possible only due to the deterioration of some other fighting qualities, but A.A. Morozov was tasked with creating a much better protected tank than the T-34 ...
The creation of a medium tank is always a way of compromise, designed to put a maximum of fighting qualities in a limited weight. The attempt to create a three-seat tower in a narrow pursuit, of course, was erroneous, but under the conditions when A.A. Morozov needed to dramatically strengthen the armor of the tank, he obviously did not consider it possible to allow himself to "throw away" tons of weight on ergonomics. The designer had very strong reasons to go exactly this way, and therefore, in the opinion of the author, one cannot blame him for moss or retrograde. However, I repeat, the attempt to squeeze the third member of the crew into the tower with an 1 420 mm shoulder strap was certainly an erroneous decision. She was not expected to succeed, but she delayed the development time, shifted to the right the timing of the tank's readiness for mass production, perhaps for a period from a quarter to six months.
So, by the middle of 1943 in the USSR, an excellent medium tank was created, but alas, for 1942.
And in 1943, the prospective tank of this subclass required not the 76,2-mm, but the 85-mm artillery system: but then the question arises, why not try to install it on T-43, and not on T-34? And here we smoothly approach the second reason, for which T-43 never went into mass production.
Of course, as already mentioned above, the T-43 turned out to be of the utmost design even with an 76,2-mm instrument, but, nevertheless, there were options to install an 85-mm gun on it. One of them is to reduce the capacity of the tower to two people. In this case, the 85-mm gun “climbed” onto the tank without critical overload. But, on the other hand, the size of the crew of the T-43 at the same time decreased only to 3 people, which would be clearly unwise.
Another approach to installing the 85-mm gun could be to reduce the protection of the tank, it is quite possible that it could have been balanced at some intermediate level between the T-34 arr. 1943 and T-43. But ... in general, according to the author, the same AA is to blame for further improvement of the T-43. Morozov.
As mentioned above, this is in every respect a talented designer, understanding the extreme importance of increasing the reliability of the future tank, and with the goal of minimizing any “childhood diseases” of the latter, practically throughout the entire history of the development, the T-43 tested its individual components and assemblies with conventional " Thirty-fours. The towers with a wide shoulder strap were no exception. So, when it became clear the need for arming tanks on the 85-mm artillery system, it quickly became clear that the new tower was suitable for this purpose as well as possible. However, this tower very well "stood up" on the T-34. And in the end it turned out that it turned out to be much easier and faster to finish the tower under the 85-mm artillery system on a conventional T-34 than to continue work on the T-43, while the upgraded T-34, again, would be much easier and faster run in the series. And the front urgently needed tanks with 85-mm guns.
And because I.V. Stalin was absolutely right in saying A.A. Morozov at one of the meetings about the following:
"Comrade Morozov, you made a very good car. But today we already have a good car - the T-34. Our task now is not to make new tanks, but to enhance the fighting qualities of the T-34, to increase them release".
This is how the story of the T-34-85 began.
To be continued ...
Information