Was it so bad T-35: the story of a veteran tanker

The T-35 heavy tank has a very short military biography. He was able to take part in the hostilities of the first months of World War II.

T-35 tank abandoned due to a malfunction. USSR, 1941 year

Most tanks, which were part of the 34th Panzer Division of the 8th Mechanized Corps and stationed on the Lviv ledge, was lost due to breakdowns. Meanwhile, it was this five-turret tank in the 30s of the 20th century in the USSR that became a serial machine and personified its military power.

Today they talk about this car unless with a laugh. Indeed, the tank had a huge number of problems and shortcomings. For example, they talk about a stupid multi-tower vehicle layout, as a result of which it was difficult for the commander to control all the numerous weapons of the tank in battle, as well as weak T-35 armor. It is believed that at the time the war began, the tank was already outdated. Some military experts call this tank "huge steel squalor."

But how did the tankers themselves relate to this tank? The book of the Russian military historian and writer Maxim Kolomiyets gives an interview with senior reserve lieutenant Vasily Sazonov, who met the war on the T-35. The story of a veteran tanker is presented in the video:

Comments

[Cut Samshitov]

Great was the tank. The list of military victories confirms.

[svp67]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

The list of military victories confirms.

What kind?

[Cut Samshitov]

There is such a word - irony.

[svp67]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

There is such a word - irony.

There is now, in correspondence it is either explained or marked with an icon, like this)))

[Cut Samshitov]

Quote: svp67

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

There is such a word - irony.

There is now, in correspondence it is either explained or marked with an icon, like this)))

Come on? and don’t give a reference to the textbook of this grammar?

[GKS 2111]

in the Red Army, there were 48 T-35 tanks, which were in service with the sixty-seventh and sixty-eighth tank regiments of the thirty-fourth tank division of the Kiev PSB. Others were at the disposal of test sites and military schools. All T-35s, which were at the disposal of the 34th Panzer Division, were in the area of ​​Rava-Russkaya by the beginning of the war and were almost immediately lost. At the same time, only 7 cars were lost directly in the battles, 6 were under repair at the time of the outbreak of hostilities, and the other 35 were damaged due to malfunctions, broke down during the march and were destroyed or abandoned by the crews. The last use of two T-35s was in the battle of Moscow.
Military Review. Armored vehicles
Heavy tank T-35
25 2012 June

[knn54]

- "The fight was stupid ... I think they could have fought normally in XNUMX. Tanks could. Tankers - not yet."
Obstacle obstacles:
rise, hail: 20
vertical wall, m: 1,2
ford depth, m: 1
ditch, m: 3,5
And with such a mass than a tank for a breakthrough of defense.
And five machine guns and three guns provided massive fire at all 360 degrees. with enemy infantry already deep in the enemy’s defenses.
And do not forget, that EVERYTHING looked back at the 1st World War, essentially a trench war. Of course, other tanks ... and commanders were needed for a maneuver war.

[Narak-zempo]

IMHO the very concept of a multi-tower tank did not correspond to the technological level of that time. With automatic loaders or belt power for at least 45 mm guns, with weapon stabilizers and panoramic sights, it could take off.

[strannik1985]

IMHO

I could not, the model of military equipment is primarily a series, it already cost half a million rubles, and with the indicated bells and whistles it would cost even more.

[Narak-zempo]

Quote: strannik1985

and with these bells and whistles would cost even more

"The specified bells and whistles" at that time were simply impossible to implement, at least in the series and with an acceptable level of reliability, as, for example, a machine gun in the days of Napoleon. That is why I say that the idea did not correspond to the technological level.

[PSih2097]

Quote: knn54

And with such a mass than a tank for a breakthrough of defense.

at the time of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, the KV-1 was the only full-fledged tank to break through the enemy’s defense, the T-34 with a stretch, the T-28 with a very large stretch, even a shielded, T-26 / BT-7 tank for the destruction of rear communications, or for alteration under self-propelled guns / Memory / Tractor units. The T-35 was good only in parades and nothing more.

[Jager]

It is necessary to compare the T-35 with the German "technology" of the sample of the summer of 41. What was there? Pz. III with 37 mm (50 mm was also not enough), Czechs LT 35/38 and a few early Pz. IV with a short "infantry" 75 mm. Compared to them, the T-35 was a battleship. The problem with the T-35, like the KV-2, is that these tanks were NOT DESIGNED for counterattacks without air support. These machines were intended exclusively for breaking through the defense, as a qualitative reinforcement of linear connections. This is a completely different concept. I believe that the IS-2 was exactly the ideological continuation of the KV-2. And it's not the T-35's fault that their career ended so quickly. What could a couple of dozen cars, when the Red Army was losing thousands of tanks of other types.

[svp67]

The T-35 heavy tank has a very short military biography.

If his combat biography was short, in fact, one month of 1941, then as a "symbol of the power of the Red Army" he served for quite a long time ...

Some military experts call this tank "a huge steel squalor".

Nevertheless, bring these tanks in time to the border, to strengthen the line of SDs, provide normal technical support and infantry, they could show themselves in these battles.

[Cut Samshitov]

The tank was not very bad, the tank was not at all.

[svp67]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

The tank was not very bad, the tank was not at all.

I do not agree. Any technique has its own strengths and weaknesses, long marches were clearly contraindicated for this tank, but in defense it could play the role of a mobile bunker

[Cut Samshitov]

Quote: svp67

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

The tank was not very bad, the tank was not at all.

I do not agree. Any technique has its own strengths and weaknesses, long marches were clearly contraindicated for this tank, but in defense it could play the role of a mobile bunker

Compare the cost of a bunker and this "masterpiece" (quotes for the most intelligent), plus logistics, everything will become clear.

[svp67]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

Compare the cost of a bunker and this "masterpiece" (quotes for the most intelligent), plus logistics, everything will become clear.

I don't even want to answer this nonsense. (note the word "stupidity" in the answer is written without quotes, for especially smart ones)

[Cut Samshitov]

Quote: svp67

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

Compare the cost of a bunker and this "masterpiece" (quotes for the most intelligent), plus logistics, everything will become clear.

I don't even want to answer this nonsense. (note the word "stupidity" in the answer is written without quotes, for especially smart ones)

An excellent answer - I don’t even want to answer. Very smart and logical. Only emoticons are missing.

[Amurets]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

Compare the cost of a bunker and this "masterpiece" (quotes for the most intelligent), plus logistics, everything will become clear.

What do you know about pillboxes? The defense node is equal in armament, because bunkers were not built alone. Look and calculate the price! https://starcom68.livejournal.com/2666762.html
Was it cheaper than the T-35? There were several structures in Blagoveshchensk, in the city itself. At a distance of about 1,5 km there are two such nodes. One of them was turned into a museum, and the second was disarmed. So, count how much money is buried in the ground.
And here is the APK museum.
https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5ad408baf03173b2ad922e45/artilleriiskii-polukaponir-apk--108-5af61c2c83090599f5addd6d

[Cut Samshitov]

What do you know about pillboxes? The defense node is equal in armament, because bunkers were not built alone.

Exactly, and rooted t 35 is equal to the listed objects? with bulletproof armor and magpies? Well, compare its value with the Maginot line.

[Amurets]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

Exactly, and rooted t 35 is equal to the listed objects? with bulletproof armor and magpies? Well, compare its value with the Maginot line.

Do you think that the URA was taken in the forehead, artillery bombardment, direct attack? No, or they were circumvented, like the Maginot line or the Germans had special sapper-assault groups consisting of sappers and flamethrowers who, through ventilation pipes and gas exhaust pipes of diesel engines, put explosives into the bunkers and blew them up, poured the fire mixtures into the ventilation pipes, then burned or launched flamethrowers burning out the air and garrison bunker. A tank placed in a trench, provided that it was serviceable, could move to another position. Bunker cannot be moved.

[Cut Samshitov]

A tank placed in a trench, provided that it was serviceable, could move to another position. Bunker cannot be moved. Ingenious. Stupid French could just dig up Ball 2.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Amurets

Do you think that the URA was taken in the forehead, artillery bombardment, direct attack? No, or they were circumvented, like the Maginot Line or the Germans had special sapper-assault groups consisting of sappers and flamethrowers

Bunkers and Dosas are good in defense with trenches, infantry, and artillery. Not covered by infantry, they are very vulnerable. Most often, the DOS garrison of a dozen or two people was destroyed by a group of 2-3 sappers, usually without their losses. For everything about everything in half an hour - an hour.
Somehow they showed DOS, destroyed very simply. They broke a hole in the armored door with an overhead charge and burned through the hole with a flamethrower. On the first floor, everything burned out, and on the second (underground) one choked without oxygen.

[hohol95]

B. Sushinsky - "The River of the Murdered", "The Living Are Commanded to Fight"! Without cover on the flanks and in the rear - DEATH! But with their lives, the guys won minutes, hours, days for the retreating troops ...
A lot of complaints can be made against this author - but he is the only one who has literally described (in my memory) the Germans crossing the Dniester!

[Palch]

People .... you completely forgot about the availability of aviation. Well, where does this piece of iron creep out during a raid? Well, if you do not read special literature about the Second World War, at least the more accessible HFs for you look at this topic.

[svp67]

Quote: Palch

People .... you completely forgot about the availability of aviation. Well, where does this piece of iron creep out during a raid?

No, they have not forgotten. And also remember our aviation.

[strannik1985]

If we compare only in money, then the cost of the T-35 series will be more expensive than one UR. For example, the construction of the Slutsk SD (145 of the planned 262 structures) cost 64 million without weapons and 79 million with weapons. EMNIP one T-35 cost 500 thousand rubles.
But the 35th is not just a small-scale heavy tank, it is an experiment, our designers studied on it (developed with German help with an eye on the English "Independent"). A tank design school cannot appear suddenly, it takes time, money, experiments, one of which was the T-35.

[svp67]

Quote: Amurets

At a distance of approximately 1,5 km there are two such nodes.

So what? And how many were along the coast of the Amur in the composition of the bullet-bats of the Tank Fire Points, do not tell?

[Amurets]

Quote: svp67

Quote: Amurets

At a distance of approximately 1,5 km there are two such nodes.

So what? And how many were along the coast of the Amur in the composition of the bullet-bats of the Tank Fire Points, do not tell?

Before the Second World War, they were not in the city, and in the 60s there were thousands of them, from the T-34 to the IS-3, along the entire line of the Soviet-Chinese border. In one of the defense nodes there were three IS-2s. I saw it with my own eyes.

[Amurets]

Quote: Amurets

So what? And how many were along the coast of the Amur in the composition of the bullet-bats of the Tank Fire Points, do not tell?

In addition to the above, Valentin Runov. “All Ury and the defensive lines of the Second World War.” “Almost simultaneously with Khabarovsk, the construction of fortified areas began, the task of which was to cover the city and port of Vladivostok. From Manchuria, west of the village of Kraskino, Vladivostok was to be covered by two fortified areas, the construction of which was carried out on those Following the same principles as Khabarovsk, these fortified areas received numbers 7 and 8 after the completion of construction work.
A little later, the construction of ten more fortified areas began, the numbering of which began with the number 101. From north to south were located the 101st (Blagoveshchensky), 102nd (Ust-Sungaria), 109th (Imansky), 112th (Turiy Rog), 105th (Grodekovsky), 106th (Poltava), 111th (Shufansky), 107th (Barabashsky), 110th (Slavyansky) and 113th (Posyetsky) fortified areas. "Well, now you can and imagine how many tanks were placed as a TOD when strengthening the URs. And a photo of the Amur channel and the sector wiped off one of the half-caponiers (not 108, but its neighbor) which I mentioned above. My photo was taken from the roof of this half-caponier. August 2013. Flood on the Amur.

In the last photo, the place where he stands approximately

[gurzuf]

And that the bunker can move especially understanding?

[strannik1985]

In writing about a tank developed in 1931-1932. Without the T-24 (predecessor) and the T-35, Kharkov would not have produced such tractors as the Comintern (chassis from the T-24) and Voroshilovets (suspension based on the T-35 chassis). Issue 12 T-24 and 61 T-35 against the background of a couple of thousand good tractors are nothing.

[mark1]

Quote: svp67

in defense, he could play the role of a mobile bunker

Well, yes, during the defense of Kharkov, the Germans used the T-35 as a self-propelled gate to the barricade. And so even in fact they have a place in URs like a nomadic bunker.

[Kenxnumx]

The name of the Finnish pillboxes - millionaire pillboxes does not hint at anything?

[Orthochlorobenzalmalonodinetrile]

yeah, bunker !! its 37 mm could not penetrate. But the Germans would not have dragged their 4,7 cm Pak36, 5 cm Pak 38 or 7,5 cm Pak 40 !!! do not consider them as idiots.

[AU Ivanov.]

For what period of time? For the beginning of the thirties - not bad.

[Cut Samshitov]

Quote: AU Ivanov.

For what period of time? For the beginning of the thirties - not bad.

And in the time of Genghis Khan would be an absolute weapon.

[Corn]

The tank was not very bad, the tank was not at all.

The tank was far from the worst representative of its time. Let me remind you that at the same time and in truth, outstanding machines (t34, q, q2) showed themselves no better. The main trouble of the army was in the minds of the country's leadership, there was nothing to present to technology.

Compare the cost of a bunker and this "masterpiece", plus logistics, everything will become clear.

Dot will shoot one day, and the very next day he will be picked up by artillery. The tank, though not the most mobile, is much less vulnerable, and has much greater application flexibility.

[Palch]

Well, the former Red Army command while drinking vodka after writing anonymous letters on each other probably did not suspect the existence of a product Junkers Ju 87 in the Luftwaffe (in common people a thing or a mocker), which at its peak easily laid a bomb in a single-standing medium tank, which is why it gave birth this is the perfection of engineering ..... but here you are what you drink when you write about the withdrawal of this scrap metal into the UR line .... ???? Strange people ... history has already confirmed everything and put it in its place, but they still carry the same nonsense ... and the grandfather of the tankman in the film is still apparently shaking from the threat of a real execution at that time for a negative assessment of Soviet military equipment.

[svp67]

Quote: Palch

while reveling in vodka

Mr. dear, shall I answer you in the same vein? To begin to answer, with the question, what are you pricking or what are you smelling?

Quote: Palch

which at its peak easily laid a bomb in a single-standing medium tank,

It remains to find out how many "pieces" were on the Eastern Front? So, in total, for the Blitzkrieg against the USSR, at first, 7 groups were involved, which included 273 Ju87s, although only 183 dive bombers were in combat readiness. And not all of them could plant a bomb on the transmission of a medium tank, and they suffered losses, mostly from the actions of our fighters. And most importantly, the dive bombers mainly worked on the support of tank groups, and those URs preferred not to get involved, using their high mobility bypassing them, giving the laurels of the winners of the URs to the "pioneers" and the infantry. Now net is full of photographs of our captured URs and bunkers in them, the vast majority of them were destroyed and captured by sappers.

Quote: Palch

and the grandfather the tankman in the film is still apparently shaking from the threat of a real execution at that time for a negative assessment of Soviet military equipment.

You know, you are talking nonsense. This grandfather honestly told about his military career. Could you do what he did? Think about it. Such as him, instead of moaning that everything was lost and throwing military equipment went to the enemy and caused the maximum possible harm to the enemy. Like unknown heroes on the T-28 passing on it through captured Minsk. Like an unknown crew of BT-7, who managed to knock down about 20 of German tanks in the border battle of June 23 and perish, but they all brought our Victory closer with their labor. They did not moan or cry, about the power of German dive-bombers, they just did their job, hard, dirty, deadly, masculine work.

Quote: Palch

write about the withdrawal of this scrap in the line of ur .... ????

I expressed my PERSONAL opinion, where, at least somehow, these tanks could be used to good use. And not just throw them on the sidelines and in the parks. And you know, I am well aware of the capabilities of Yu-87, I can say more, in those circumstances they would most likely be destroyed not in pieces, but by the fire of howitzers and anti-tank missiles.
So that one should always look for ways to Victory, and not "moan and cry", "that everything is lost and they cannot be defeated."

[Ros 56]

Well, the tanker himself did not want to, and confirmed the conventional wisdom about the quality of the T-35, the tankers, in contrast to the tank honor and praise for courage and courage.

[Errr]

Indeed, all the tankers who fought in the T-35 deserve to be awarded the medal "For Courage". As Vladimir Semyonovich sang:

And if you don’t catch lead in your chest,
You will catch a medal on your chest "For Courage".

Fate is not without irony.

Image of T-35 on the medal "For Courage".

[Nycomed]

This tank does not have any military victories. It seems to me that it was made only for parades on Red Square. A small, but from where to be big, the history of this tank can be read here:

Kolomiets Maxim Viktorovich
Soviet heavy tank T-35. "Stalin's monster"
Moscow: Eksmo: Yauza, 2017.-152s: ill .- (The War and Us. Tank Collection)

[sabakina]

I look forward to a parcel or a parcel (if in volumes) of the book Nycomedes "War and Me" with a personalized inscription.

[Nycomed]

Well, why are you doing that? After all, "for what I bought, for what I sell," I gave a link, the book is on my shelf.

[sabakina]

Don’t be so offended, I’m not from evil. The emoticon is set, you need to understand .... Moreover, no matter how, but Saturday today ....

[Nycomed]

Accepted, no offense!

[Prisoner]

And why bring this subject to light? Well, the tank is out of date before it was born. Everything has long been known to everyone. Yes, they made the wrong decision in higher structures regarding this tank. And at what time, in which countries and in what areas did the tops make a mistake? Name such miracle leaders with 100% hit on target.

[Alf]

Quote: Captive

Name these miracle leaders with a 100% hit on target.

Zeus Carbine.

[certero]

At the beginning of the war, of course, he was out of date.
With proper use, he could well fight. Alas, this opportunity did not work

[Gaersul]

At that time it was believed that multi-turret tanks are very good, and they were written in the educational literature. Time has truly corrected these views.

[sabakina]

What I don’t understand is why the cannon with such a short barrel was placed on the main tower?

[Amurets]

Quote: sabakina

What I don’t understand is why the cannon with such a short barrel was placed on the main tower?

In accordance with the purpose of the armament: The T-35 armament was intended to solve the following tasks: support infantry and destroy field fortifications (76 mm guns and machine guns) and combat armored vehicles (45 mm guns).
Initially, the T-35 head turret was equipped with a 76-mm KT (Kirovskaya tank) cannon, model 1927/32, which used the swinging part of a field regimental cannon of the 1927 model. CT had a shortened rollback length from 1000 to 560 mm,
From the beginning of 1936 the 76 mm T-35 cannons were completely unified with the KT-28 cannons of the T-28 medium tanks. "M. Kolomiets" Stalin's land battleships. "

[sabakina]

A short barrel is a small shot distance. Did I understand correctly?

[Amurets]

Quote: sabakina

A short barrel is a small shot distance. Did I understand correctly?

In principle, yes, the main recoil value is in the cramped dimensions of the turret. "Initially, the 35-mm KT (Kirovskaya tank) cannon, model 76/1927, was installed in the head turret of the T-32, which used the swinging part of the field regimental gun of the 1927 model KT had a shortened recoil length from 1000 to 560 mm, which was achieved by raising the pressure in the recoil and recoil brake. " The source is the same.

[sabakina]

Nikolay, thanks. Although it is not clear why their tanks reached Moscow?

Yes, the T-35 is not marching, but apparently they could not use it purely for its intended purpose ... But after all, at that time we already had T-34 and KV ...

[Amurets]

Quote: sabakina

Yes, the T-35 is not marching, but apparently they could not use it purely for its intended purpose ... But after all, at that time we already had T-34 and KV ...

Vyacheslav! The question you asked is very difficult to answer. I am a techie and will proceed from these positions. As for the T-34 and KV, I can answer, but this is IMHO. It is necessary to proceed from the fact that all new technology passes the period of "Childhood Illnesses". And here on the tanks there is also a fundamentally new, practically not mastered power plant. Tanks began to enter the Red Army in 1940. They simply did not have time to master them. In addition, the attitude towards weapons and military equipment was as follows: "A horse is not a motor, it requires care." Vasily Emelianenko. "Into the harsh air." This indicates a low technical education in the army. The lack or lack of spare parts for the manufactured equipment is also one of the problems.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: sabakina

A short barrel is a small shot distance. Did I understand correctly?

Howitzer in the tower. The most is for horizontal goals. And infantry, the goal is usually horizontal.
And indeed, outside of urban development, most targets are horizontal, including towed artillery of all types.

[boriz]

Not so much a small distance as mounted shooting. Benefits:
1. Shooting on the back slopes, behind which the enemy took refuge. When fired, the projectile flies through the top of the slope and flies away, where it is no longer dangerous to anyone.
2. The fragments give the side surfaces of the projectile. Therefore, when lay shooting (the projectile falls almost parallel to the surface of the earth), the shattering fragments fly left and right. The rest goes up and to the ground. And forward and backward there are almost none. If the projectile falls steeply, fragments of its side surface fly in all directions.
On the Pz-IV, although it was of a later development, there was an equally short cannon. And the race of long-barreled tank guns provoked the appearance of the T-34 and KV. Guderian was very sad that the guns of the mounted fire were supplanted by the long-barreled ones.

[your1970]

He has a gun for firing OFs at short distances. He is an anti-eye .....

[sabakina]

Quote: your1970

He has a gun for firing OFs at short distances. He is an anti-eye .....

Well then, it turns out that this is not a tank, but an infantry support vehicle ...

[Amurets]

Quote: sabakina

Well then, it turns out that this is not a tank, but an infantry support vehicle ...

Most likely a breakthrough tank. "The beginning of work on the creation of the T35 refers to 1931, when the UMM RKKA
gave the assignment to the design bureau at the Leningrad plant
"Bolshevik" "By August 1, 1932 to develop and build a new
A 35 ton TG type breakthrough tank (Tank Grote approx. Ed.). ” Assembly first
the prototype, designated T351, was completed on August 20, 1932,
and on September 1, it was shown to representatives of the UMM RKKA. "The magazine" Engine "2015. №3"

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: sabakina

Quote: your1970

He has a gun for firing OFs at short distances. He is an anti-eye .....

Well then, it turns out that this is not a tank, but an infantry support vehicle ...

So it is, an infantry support tank. And you can call it in different ways, and an infantry tank and a breakthrough tank, or whatever.

[Alf]

Quote: sabakina

What I don’t understand is why the cannon with such a short barrel was placed on the main tower?

And were there others at that time?
Although, there was an experimental version of the T-28 with an 85-mm F-30 gun.

[Biodred]

There is one caveat: this gun on this tank never fired and could not shoot - just the top armor plate could not withstand the recoil of 85mm guns. All that was done was a cannon rollback.

[Alf]

Quote: BioDRED

There is one caveat: this gun on this tank never fired and couldn’t shoot -

F-30 by the same time passed 2 firing, in which a total of 68 shots were fired. As a result of the firing, some shortcomings were discovered in the design of the system, and the plant was engaged in its completion. By September 24, the number of shots reached 90, after which a crack was discovered in the breech. Tests of the F-30 continued until October 29, 1940, then the modified gun was dismantled from the T-28 and sent to the Kirov plant. Simultaneously with the tests at the factory No. 92, they began manufacturing the second F-30 prototype, which was completed at the very end of October. Further tests stalled.

That is, no fundamental flaws were found.

[Biodred]

You will not be offended if I believe not you, but Grabin?

Threat even in pedivikia it is clearly said: "The 85-mm F-30 cannon was developed under the direction of Grabin at the beginning of 1939 as a high-power tank gun. At the beginning of the summer of 1939, the sample of the gun was tested by carriage and on an artificial rollback on the T-28 tank ( the gun was installed in the turret). It was decided not to carry out the shooting tests, because when using the gun, the calculated recoil response to the shoulder strap exceeded the permissible one. "

[Alf]

Quote: BioDRED

You will not be offended if I believe not you, but Grabin?

I will not be offended if you quote Grabin.
And, then, what does YOUR phrase mean

experienced a cannon to rollback.

?
You can test the cannon to rollback only with practical shooting.

[Biodred]

What are you talking about! Artificial rollback - when the tool is pulled back to the extreme rear position by the winch. Grabin has this too. I won't search now - it's just that this question has already been raised. There is such an idiot graphomaniac "battalion knight", who is extremely mediocre graphomaniac in the genre of alternative history. Here he had another hit there who advised the ancestors of the T-28 to equip 85mm cannons and she tore the entire Wehrmacht. I gave him quotes from Grabin and only got a ban.

By the way, I'm not asking which "authoritative" source YOUR quote is from.

[Alf]

Quote: BioDRED

Here he had another popadane there, he thought of equipping the ancestors of the t-28 with 85mm guns and she broke the entire Wehrmacht.

Yes, the authors of the fellow travelers are such storytellers that just hold on.

https://warspot.ru/4884-opytnyy-tank-s-boevoy-biografiey

[colotun]

Thundering with fire, sparkling with a gleam of steel, cars will go on a furious campaign ...

[Kenxnumx]

Great tank for World War 1. Not in vain because so many guns and machine guns were crammed into tanks for breaking through the defense. Tanks had to clear the trenches through which they broke. That is, shoot in both directions. And the enemy was field guns with fragmentation shells and machine guns. For such an application, the tank is ideal. And what breaks, so it was not required from him to make 200 km of hauls. Overcome 10 km of the front line in a straight line and okay. Another thing is that VET in WWII has become somewhat different. Using a tank in mobile defense in the bunker line is a little better - to fight assault teams. BUT the tank is disabled by aviation at a time.

[xax]

Quote: Ken71

BUT the tank is disabled by aviation at a time

Also from the memoirs I will throw an example)
Not really about the tank, of course, but ...
"Self-propelled gunner's diary: Combat path of ISU-152 driver-mechanic" E.E. Priklonsky

In the afternoon, fascist aviation began to appear. What caused this is clear to us, and we keep our ears open. At first, the planes flew singly or in pairs, but we continued to move in the convoy, on the move increasing the distance between the machines and increasing speed, so that German bombs in vain fell down the forest or drilled swamps on both sides of the road.

... Tankers and self-propelled gunners tired for a long day, rejoicing in the respite, gladly carried out the command, quickly dispersing along both edges of the car and masking them with branches ...

... And over our clearing, at an altitude of about four hundred meters, lined up in a straight line, they are already slowly sailing twelve ju-87...

... And here the leftmost attack aircraft, obviously the flagship one, dives steeply down, falling onto the left wing, which makes it seem that it is bending predatoryly and is coming straight at us. The shells fired by the ace hit thirty-four and aboard our self-propelled guns, but we do not move from our seats in order not to give ourselves out. The second Junkers who dived into the same edge of the forest throws the first bombs. They completely sweep away all camouflage from both cars. Immediately it became terribly uncomfortable. You can’t stand still. [370]
- Start up! Fast forward! - without waiting for the second bomb attack, shouts Kugaenko. - Yes, push Lukin away from the driver! ...

... Another vulture dived - by! There is a rumble and light whirling in my head from a close and powerful explosion. What are they, scum, clinging to one of me? Damn you bald! You will only take us with a direct hit! Yes, you still get first, fascist raskoryak! Again the explosion - on the left, after a few seconds - in front. Hunt you bastards ?! Making sharp turns, I suddenly change direction, write out big eights and zigzags, suddenly hide in the shadow of the edge and again jump out onto the road. There is a lot of room for maneuver ....

... Unfortunately, the side of the clearing turned out to be low, damp, and I was afraid to turn around, but only slowed down. Suddenly two dark spruces arose in front of the machine, no less than the thickness of the girth. I hit both at once. The trees faltered, [371] but resisted. In a rush, I add gas - the caterpillars, resting on the trunks of fir trees, stalled, cut through the sod - and the ISU is already sitting on the bottom, neither backward nor forward. And then it began, before which all the previous seemed to us fun ...

... One and a half-meter clearing, laid by my car straight from the edge to two tall fir trees, and two wide black stripes from the tracks served as an excellent guide for German pilots. They methodically went along it after sunset, the bombs lay down farther, now closer to the car, sometimes almost close, but they never hit it. The edge of the funnel from the 100-pound high-explosive blackened just three steps from the right caterpillar. On the fifth approach (aircraft attacked one at a time), the dive set fire to a large tarp, tied to the right wing. The worst part was that next to it, on the same wing, there were two additional fuel tanks ...

... The bombing explosions and the wild howls of dive-bombers have long been lost, our nerves are stretched to the limit, like a string about to burst ... And what the hell carried me to the forest?! ...

... Our fiends, once again knocking on the armor of self-propelled guns from machine guns (the bombs were then wasted for nothing), went away without sipping sloppy salt. And "then we began to count wounds, comrades to count ...

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Ken71

BUT the tank is disabled by aviation at a time.

Neither in 1941 nor in 1942 did any of the warring armies have effective aviation means of fighting tanks.
There was nothing but aerial bombs, and a direct hit by an aerial bomb in a tank is a rarity
The Germans in those years blocked the supply of tank units with their aircraft, destroying vehicles. As a result, in conditions of retreat, most of our tanks were lost due to breakdowns, lack of ammunition or fuel, and not in battles with tanks or artillery.

[Kenxnumx]

A large, maneuverable with thin armor T-35 could be hit even by fragments of closely fallen bombs. This one seems to have gotten a bomb. Although I do not affirm

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Ken71

A large, maneuverable with thin armor T-35 could be hit even by fragments of closely fallen bombs. This one seems to have gotten a bomb. Although I do not affirm

The funnel should be from the bomb, but it is not visible. Rather, sappers blew up.

[Kenxnumx]

Torn holes in the board still seem to be from fragments. The funnel of another bomb may be behind the photographer. Although the devil knows him. Maybe ammunition pulled

[Geo⁣]

We were proud of our land battleships T-35 and T-28, with whom we were at parades in Moscow every year as part of the heavy tank brigade of the RGK.

The T-35 tank was five-turret. He was armed with three guns and five machine guns. Weighed 50 tons. His crew consisted of ten people, including two medium-sized commanders. And in total there were about a hundred command personnel in the battalion — a friendly, welded team.

I was very pleased with the service, with zeal I devoted myself to it and dreamed of only one thing - to command this part of my beloved one for longer. And then suddenly a telegram from the district about the enrollment of me and the chief of staff of the brigade (my classmate at the academy), Major N. N. Radkevich, by students of the Academy of the General Staff

From the memoirs of Shtemenko S.M. "General Staff during the War".

[senima56]

If the Army does not fight, but skids, any equipment is bad for it! "Airplanes - coffins!", "Tanks - gasoline", and the Germans have solid MP-38 ("Schmeisers") and we are against them with a "three-line"!
These are all fables to justify the unwillingness of the Army to fight, and the inability of the commanders to make the Army fight! How sad it is ...

[Geo⁣]

Quote: senima56

Army reluctance to fight

One of the most "gifted" conclusions about the causes of the defeat of the initial period of the Second World War, which I have ever heard. The author's brilliant awareness and his powerful intellect, unparalleled analytical abilities are immediately visible.

[Alexey G]

Neither desire, rather inability! Alexander Suvorov, not with AK and PK Turks smashed, and with a bayonet, but a bullet.

[arthropod]

Quote: senima56

make the army fight!

As I look, it’s not only the current government that bad people have got. The Soviet with this woeful people, too, must have suffered. While you force the che-thread to do normally - seven pots will come off. Ah ah ah

[Alf]

Quote: senima56

These are all fables to justify the unwillingness of the Army to fight, and the inability of the commanders to make the Army fight!

And where did the desire to fight after the 43rd come from?
And how did the commanders make the spacecraft fight? Only nonsense about penal battalions and detachments do not mention.

[Alexey G]

Well, apparently there was no order a step back either? That's bullshit??

[Geo⁣]

Hitler, later, also demanded to stay at all costs. So what?
Do not overestimate the miraculous power of such orders. They didn’t order - they didn’t want, they ordered - they wanted. Nonsense is complete.

[Alexey G]

Nonsense? And the execution for not fulfilling the order? Nonsense too? The army is, above all, discipline: tough and rigorous! It is not necessary to compare with the Germans, this is an incorrect comparison! We had strength, but lacked skill! Discipline won us time to reach the autumn thaw! In the long, we had a chance to reorganize! The Germans did not have the strength and took time to create a military weapon, but did not manage to thank God!

[xax]

Quote: Alexey G

It is not necessary to compare with the Germans, this is an incorrect comparison! We had strength, but lacked skill!

Seriously?

The balance of power of the parties, deployed on the western border of the USSR by the time of the outbreak of hostilities it was by no means in our favor. The loss in the number of personnel was not compensated by a conditional gain, for example, in the total number of tanks and assault guns: in order to realize this simple fact, it is enough to remember which tanks made up the bulk of that "armada". A qualitative loss can be awarded to the USSR in aviation as well. And in artillery, for example, the number of guns was reduced to naught by the lack of the proper amount of support equipment (which is also true for tank units), as a result of which there were barrels, and there were not enough shells for them, plus the maneuver (this is in a maneuverable war) was extremely difficult. About communication, for example, in general before the war, it seems that everyone has forgotten. Etc. etc. Thus, the necessary number of forces (taking into account their quality) deployed on the western border of the USSR by the beginning of the war clearly did not have!

However, the total number of armed forces of the Soviet Union (not deployed on the western border, but in general all) - could allow our country to meet the enemy much more worthily. But the introduction of these forces into the battle in parts did not allow this advantage to be used. What is one of the criminal miscalculations of the military-political leadership of the USSR.

So it’s not worth blaming from a sore head for a healthy one - this is an extremely stupid occupation.

[Alexey G]

And where does this argument ??? I don’t see the connection! Our leadership just took time to mobilize the forces available in the country! But the Germans, by the end of the war, when Hitler began to copy the Stalin's order, He could not mobilize a single step back! Only scientists who were forced to create a miracle weapon V-1 for example or an atomic bomb!

[xax]

Quote: Alexey G

the leadership just took time to mobilize the country's available forces!

Mobilization began on June 23. What kind of pre-war mobilization are you talking about?

Quote: Alexey G

I don’t see the connection!

Let's immediately agree: your level of intelligence is not my problem. All the necessary information is given to you - then on your own.

[Alexey G]

Well, if it began on June 23, then it would take time in the conditions of the enemy offensive! You are some kind of slow-witted! Sorry for the expression of course. The information you provided is trivial and banal! It is in old textbooks of poor quality. Read it to your brothers in intellect!

[Geo⁣]

Quote: Alexey G

if it began on June 23, then it took time

Are you inadequate? They wrote you the fact that they began to scratch properly only when the "thunder struck".

[Alexey G]

Don’t poke me! And here it is! Stalin had something to mobilize 2 times and no Hitler! Drunk or what?

[Alexey G]

You are an idealist! A lot of words and emotions but a little in fact! In personnel, we were a bit inferior to the Germans at the beginning of the war, but they were advancing and, with competent defense of the USSR, could recoup! Moreover, the number of our tanks was much higher than the German!

[xax]

Quote: Alexey G

A lot of words and emotions

This message looks extremely stupid from a person who uses three instead of one question mark at once, and his exclamation marks instead of dots.

[Alexey G]

Excession is not stupid, it is only outrage at your ignorance

[xax]

I saw these - permanently indignant. And laughter and sin.

[Alexey G]

I also saw those who were so dull and reluctant to laugh.

[Alexey G]

That's just strange it turns out like that! If there was order with discipline in the troops, then why is such a tough order needed ??? And the strictness of its observance ?? Can you answer? And here it is somehow strange, but after the issuance of the order and measures to comply with it, the enemy began to slow down the offensive? Coincidence??? I don’t think so.

[xax]

Quote: Alexey G

If there was order with discipline in the troops, then why is such a tough order needed ???

Then, why was it needed, for example, the mass shooting of the leadership of the Western Front in the initial period of the war. To get the hell out of my head, as I wrote above, to a healthy one. I must admit that for some individuals who do not aspire to think, that move works even today - you, for example, are still misled.

Quote: Alexey G

And here it is somehow strange, but after the issuance of the order and measures to comply with it, the enemy began to slow down the offensive?

And why did the offensive begin to slow down near Moscow? There was no trace of "your order" at that time. The offensive was choked up thanks to the heroic efforts of our ancestors, not your piece of paper. Both in the first and in the second case.

Quote: Alexey G

Coincidence???

Of course not. The moment was chosen based on the situation at the front - when the troops clung to the Volga borders, it was necessary to relieve themselves of responsibility for the series of previous defeats, transferring it to the shoulders of soldiers and officers, who, once again, filled the miscalculations of the country's leadership related to the Kharkov operation of 1942 , the defeat of our troops in which, in fact, the Germans opened the way to the Volga.

[Alexey G]

Yes! But Stalingrad was not given up! And they wanted to evacuate and quit! And the offensive near Moscow was slowed down thanks to the victims of Kiev, Vyazma and Bryansk, where our ancestors were surrounded but did not give up and won time before the autumn slut! It’s not me who is mistaken, but you! Apparently did not serve anywhere! And you don’t know what happens with discipline! But the fact is that units surrendered, threw weapons! It's just not customary to talk about it! But the words from Directive 227 clearly say that cowards and alarmists should be shot on the spot! In your opinion this is nonsense of a sick head? But it was signed by Joseph Stalin! He probably knew better than you? After all, he won the war! Or do you also disagree with this?

[xax]

Quote: Alexey G

Joseph Stalin! ... After all, he won the war!

The war was won by two of my great-grandfathers and their brothers in arms. That Joseph defended or took the city - they did not see.

[Alexey G]

Yes, you are very young! My grandfather took Berlin and what is the role of Stalin in this in your opinion is negligible? The USSR is the country that Koba built. These are his people, his army, his marshals, his designers. He created them, guided them and defeated them.

[xax]

Quote: Alexey G

He created them

My great-grandfathers were created by my great-great-grandfathers, along with great-great-grandmothers.

[Alexey G]

Great-great-grandfathers served the Tsar and the Russian Empire! And the USSR was created by Lenin and Stalin! And your great-grandfather, like my grandfather, received education, weapons and work in the USSR led by Comrade Stalin! And in the 91m the USSR fell apart when I was in 10th grade! And my classmates died in the first Chechen in Russia, which was led by Eltsin, because the war was bloody and shameful, although my guys were classmates good and not stupid, but Putin came and we won the war! This is the question of the role of personality in history! We are all not created with our fingers, but one is lucky that their country leader is smart and far-sighted, and the other does not! That would be led by your great-grandfathers such an unwise person as Hitler, and what would they do then?

[su25]

Quote: senima56

"Airplanes - coffins!", "Tanks - gasoline"

From the report of the Commander of the 1st Air Army Khudyakov in the summer of 1942:
"In combat operations ... our aviation suffered heavy losses from enemy fighters ... It is indisputable that among the reasons there were shortcomings in organization, training of flight personnel, tactical techniques, etc., but it would be a mistake to believe that everyone is to blame, except for our aircraft, which supposedly have excellent data superior to German fighter jets and the pilots are not able to use them properly. Such an accusation can be brought against individual pilots, subunits and even units, but not all fighters without exception, as it is now accepted in our country. ... The pilots complain about the insufficient flight data of our fighters and many express a desire to fly the I-16, which is on our modern fighter, "Messer" you will not catch up, but in a defensive battle the probability of shooting down the enemy is greater, and being shot down yourself is less. "

[iouris]

The reasons for the devastating defeats of the Red Army in 1941/42 were not associated with technical shortcomings. Their reasons are associated with gross miscalculations of the political and military leadership of the state, including those who later became the "architects of Victory". In his speech at a reception after the Victory Parade, Stalin said this (the only time), proclaiming a toast "to the Russian people." How are these people doing today?

[Geo⁣]

Quote: iouris

the reasons are associated with gross miscalculations of the political and military leadership of the state

Of course, in the first place. But the drawbacks of technology have contributed, albeit far from being paramount.

Quote: iouris

How is this people doing today?

Poisons the life of another magnificent power.

[Nikolai Redko]

He was not bad, but simply stupid. And he was stupid, because he suggested some kind of outdated tactics of warfare. A kind of land battleship against disparate infantry units without strong anti-tank support. For the times of the Civil War, this was acceptable, but not for 41g. Therefore instantly faded away

[Ugolek]

Manstein's book "Lost Victories" describes an episode of the meeting of German troops with the T-35. They could not do anything with it until they transferred artillery to that sector of the front and destroyed it with direct fire. This example makes us understand that it was not at all anti-tank weapons that could destroy it. Consequently, the competent tactical use of these tanks could be successful, provided that the crews were well trained and the generals were properly guided.

[Alf]

Quote: Nikolay Redko

And he was stupid, because he suggested some kind of outdated tactics of warfare.

The tank was created in 1933. For that time it was a normal tactic. And answer the question, did anti-tank artillery exist as a class in the first half of the 30s?

[Geo⁣]

Quote: Alf

1933

The theory of deep operation was created by Triandafillov long before that. So - yes, in the 33rd tank it no longer corresponded to the requirements of the modern, at that time, theory of war

[Alf]

Quote: Geo⁣

Quote: Alf

1933

The theory of deep operation was created by Triandafillov long before that. So - yes, in the 33rd tank it no longer corresponded to the requirements of the modern, at that time, theory of war

And where does the theory of Soviet blitzkrieg and T-35. It was created as a machine of high-quality reinforcement during the breakthrough of fortified lines. He does not need to run anywhere, but to fire in all directions is just the thing.

[Geo⁣]

Quote: Alf

It was created as a machine of high-quality reinforcement during the breakthrough of fortified lines. He doesn’t need to run anywhere

After breaking through the front line of defense, it was required to develop the operation to the full depth as quickly as possible, going to the rear and cutting off the enemy troops from their supply routes - that was the whole point. And this, in turn, meant a quick exit (before the enemy's reserves approached) to the defense nodes located in the depths and their capture, as well as the fight against counterattacking (or even simply retreating) enemy forces on the march, right away, until they occupied new prepared lines defense. All these tasks assumed the fastest possible movement forward, which the T-35 was not able to provide. In addition, it must be borne in mind that the defense was often built on the basis of settlements turned into "fortresses", where the T-35, with its dimensions and "excellent" visibility, was generally a heap of scrap metal.
Thus, this not at all cheap machine could help the infantry only at the very beginning of the operation, and then more mobile and maneuverable means of support were required. To build a separate car only to participate in the first operations is an impermissible luxury. A similar machine was justified for the tactics of the 1st World War, but not for the 33rd year.

[Alexey G]

IS2 and HF 1 also do not according to your theory of deep operation ??

[Alexey G]

That's it! Manstein is not lying! It was hard for them with the T35. And our tanker writes the same thing! After the caterpillar was lost, the German 37 mm gun could not really do anything with the tank, and the tankers left the tank when there was nothing to shoot. Judging by the description of the battle, the tank lacked a review review! The tankers did not see the targets and beat at random. All our tanks of that time did not have a commander’s turret! But the correction of such a flaw was not something fundamental, which made our tanks weak.

[Alexey G]

It’s just that the Germans had decent combat experience and modernized both tactics and equipment, but we don’t, because we are a peaceful country! When used correctly, the T35 tank could benefit both in defense and in the offensive when breaking through to a shallow depth, and then BT and T26 should go into the breakthrough.

[Alexey G]

Our tankman correctly speaks of how the command threw tanks in all directions without knowing what to do with them! This situation was on all fronts.

[Alexey G]

The main thing is that two German guns could penetrate two 45mm cannons and 75 mm cannon fire infantry both in open and in closed positions! Yes, conceptually it was outdated, but with the right skill it could help!

[Alexey G]

As a result of the battle described by the tanker, the standing T35 was blown up with boxes of tol! There you have the armor! Such firepower as he couldn’t be useless, but both commanders and tankers themselves could uselessly use weapons!

[toha124]

Today they talk about this car unless with a laugh

It is known to us today that the concept of a multi-tower tank did not take off. And then, in 1931, it was oh how not obvious ...

[Alf]

Quote: Geo⁣

After breaking through the front line of defense, it was required to develop the operation to the full depth as soon as possible, going to the rear and cutting off enemy troops from their supply routes - this is the whole point.

And why was the BT-5, 7 created?
Nobody threw IS-2 with similar tasks into a breakthrough.

[Geo⁣]

Quote: Alf

Nobody threw IS-2 with similar tasks into a breakthrough.

Just threw it. In the 42nd year, the formation of the so-called heavy breakout tank regiments, consisting of KV, and later from IS-s, began. Their tasks included not just an attack on fortified bands, but a breakthrough of the defense to its entire depth. It was a homogeneous tank heavy regiment that met these tasks to the best extent, since supplying a uniform unit that had advanced ahead was much easier in terms of nomenclature than supplying a heterogeneous tank corps, and for joint operations with infantry (when the tank, at the time of the attack, was constrained in maneuvers and limited in speed) reliable armor was required. At the same time, the KV minus was the weak reliability of the materiel. With the arrival of the ISov in the troops, they got rid of this minus.
Thus, in addition to the T-35 minuses already discussed above, which made it completely inconsistent with the theories of war available at that time:
- Weak visibility;
- slowness;
- Slowness;

actual application also added:
- Weak security;
- The heterogeneity of the materiel (especially if this tank is tried on along with the BT);
- Weak resource / unreliability.

[Alf]

Quote: Geo⁣

Just threw it.

You know better...

[Geo⁣]

Quote: Alf

You know better...

I gave you an example of heavy tank regiments of a breakthrough. In my opinion, I can’t be accused of unfoundedness here.

[Alexey G]

IS-2 is a breakthrough tank and not a pursuit tank! His gun was not effective at fighting retreating infantry! It was slowly charging! He has a cross-country speed of 10 km per hour !!! And at T34- 36km per hour !! You do not see the difference between a breakthrough tank and a pursuit tank! And all of our tanks at the beginning of the war had poor visibility! It was fixed only in 1943 it seems!

[Geo⁣]

Quote: Alexey G

breakthrough tank

What?

[Alf]

Quote: Geo⁣

Quote: Alexey G

breakthrough tank

What?

the main use of heavy tanks was the breakthrough of heavily fortified enemy defenses, saturated with long-term and field fortifications

[xax]

Quote: Alf

breakthrough of heavily fortified enemy defense lines

I will try on the other hand. To what depth do you think these breakthrough tasks were carried out?

[Alexey G]

Both the Germans and ours used tanks in the war to break through to break through a powerful defense! The Germans used their Tiger as such the point of impact of tanks. The so-called theory of Spietze! The tank division going on the offensive received a battalion of such vehicles for a short strike and introduction of medium tanks into the breakthrough, also the Tigers had to wage an anti-tank battle against the enemy’s moving reserves! IS-2 is our answer to this powerful tool and we used it similarly to the Germans, that is, to break into the defense and fight against enemy tanks. Isa used together with Isami without mixing with T34, that is, separate battalions of reinforcement tanks as the Germans with their Tigers. Hence the term breakthrough tank, that is, a tank with powerful armor and a gun, it is insensitive to anti-tank artillery and has a powerful weapon, but worse in maneuverability and rate of fire! In general, this is an old military theory! I don’t know what surprised you so much ??

[Rasskazov Sergey Ivanovich]

For a tank where there is no enemy artillery, a good tank. And who needs him so much? They knocked out a caterpillar and all five towers with scrap metal. The engine stalled, also not better. The silhouette is big, you’ll miss the hell. And something the tankman does not remember about the crew, because this is a close-knit team, and moreover, the military. Leaving the tank without an order is a tribunal. If everyone died, then why not a word about comrades? Then, who let the tanks dangle under their own power, their tracks are calculated within 400 km, then change the tracks that the fathers commanders did not know? And then, the tank has neither maneuver, nor speed, one projectile in ammunition and all five towers with a mechanic, gunners, loaders and commanders I don’t remember, I will not peek at a crew of 12 or more people. And how to carry this colossus by rail. The Germans for their TIGERS carried two sets of tracks (wide and narrow). On the narrow ground, he did not hold it, but the platform could be loaded onto the railway. A bunch of rollers, the failure of one of the systems is already a problem, and the more there are, the more problems. I do not argue that it was possible to fight on it, but not for long. And its cost is many times greater and the problems in maintenance are even greater, not to mention cross-country ability.

[tanks555]

Good, only slow.

[Charlie]

Quote: svp67

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

The tank was not very bad, the tank was not at all.

I do not agree. Any technique has its own strengths and weaknesses, long marches were clearly contraindicated for this tank, but in defense it could play the role of a mobile bunker

It would be if there was an umbrella on top. And in the conditions of the domination of enemy aircraft in the air, this mobile pillbox would be peeled from above. It hurts too bulky target. Yu-87 just dropped bombs.

[Kostadinov]

Quote: xax

However, the total number of armed forces of the Soviet Union (not deployed on the western border, but in general all) - could allow our country to meet the enemy much more worthily. But the introduction of these forces into the battle in parts did not allow this advantage to be used. What is one of the criminal miscalculations of the military-political leadership of the USSR.

There was no miscalculation of the leadership of the USSR. The entry of Soviet forces in parts was absolutely inevitable in 1941 because:
1. The German transport infrastructure was more than two times higher than the Soviet in terms of carrying capacity and the average transport distance for the USSR was more than two times higher. So, under all scenarios, Germany significantly outstrips the USSR in mobilizing and concentrating troops, and for the USSR there is no other way out than putting its forces in parts. Russia had the same problem in World War I.
2. Even worse in 1941 — Germany had already fought since 1939, and its army and economy had beaten up mobilization. For the USSR, complete and open mobilization meant an immediate war and again the deployment of troops in parts in much worse conditions. Therefore, they did everything possible to delay the beginning of the war and to partially mobilize, and did everything they could.
3. By the summer of 1941 (5 million), the total strength of the Red Army’s world-time, after all partial mobilization, nevertheless retreated by the German and its satellites by about half.

[Gorbunov Artem]

Enough stupid defiramb. The tank was raw. His shortcomings are indicated by the fact that the tank was heavy thereby losing maneuverability. On the cross. the area finally didn’t show itself. In soils of different densities just buried. In battle, he proved himself to be a pillbox. The chassis is also full of seams. You can minus, this is not my opinion, but the opinion of specialists from the Second World War. If someone needs a source. Refer to the chronicles. And the battle logs of those events.