Military Review

"French Thirty Four." Medium Infantry Tank G1

78
"French Thirty Four." Medium Infantry Tank G1

Layout tank Renault G1R


In France, as in other European countries, before the start of World War II, work in the field of tank building intensified. French designers, like their colleagues from the USSR and Germany, worked on creating a tank that would satisfy the demands of a future war. Unlike the Germans, who could not part with the box-shaped form of the hull, which had both its obvious advantages and its equally obvious disadvantages, the French designed tanks with a rational arrangement of armored vehicles. The medium infantry tank G1 with anti-shell armor and adequate armament could become for the French army a kind of analogue of the Soviet thirty-four.

The beginning of the design of the tank G1


In the mid-1930s, France was in the process of forming mechanized units. Five mechanized infantry divisions were created in the country, the armament of which had to put 250 new tanks. Moreover, the military samples at their disposal were not enough and not all of them met changing requirements. The first assignment for the design of a new medium infantry tank was issued in December 1935. Initially, it was a 20-ton combat vehicle. At the same time, in May 1936, the requirements for the new tank were revised. According to the new specification, it was planned to create a combat vehicle with anti-shell armor and main armament, which would allow fighting enemy tanks. But the combat mass of the tank was planned to be kept at the same level.

In the future, the new tank was supposed to replace all medium tanks Char D1 and Char D2 in the army. The first of them was created in the early 1930s, and the second was a modernized version of 1934. Five French companies were engaged in the development of a new project, which received the Char G1 designation, for a long time, that is, almost all the major engineering companies of those years, including Lorraine-Dietrich and Renault, were connected to the project. And two other major manufacturers FCM and SOMUA withdrew from participation in the project at an early stage.

It is clear that the French military was impressed by the civil war that began in Spain. Already in October 1936, the design of the new tank was adjusted in favor of increasing the reservation. The forehead, sides and feed of the tank body were supposed to get armored plates up to 60 mm thick. Another important condition for the French military was that the new combat vehicle fit into the dimensions of the railway platforms. At the same time, the armament was supposed to provide an opportunity to combat tanks of a similar type; in addition, two machine guns were planned to be installed on the tank.


The abandoned Char D2 tank, which was to be replaced by G1 tanks

Specifically, the implementation of the new project began in the winter of 1936-1937, five participating companies: Baudet-Donon-Roussel, SEAM, Fouga, Lorraine de Dietrich, Renault. As we wrote above, two more companies quickly got out of the process of developing a new combat vehicle. Consideration of project applications by companies took place in February 1937, at the same time the main leaders were identified, which were the companies SEAM and Renault, which already had ready projects of tanks weighing 20 tons by that time. At the same time, SEAM even managed to assemble a prototype of a new combat vehicle.

Project Features and Renault G1R Tank


Much of the design of the new tank was aimed at improving the visibility of both the driver and the commander of the combat vehicle. In particular, it was planned to install new lateral observation devices to the left and to the right of the driver so that he could see the dimensions of the tank. At the same time, it was assumed that the commander of the car would still have a better view, so voice communication was necessary between the driver and the commander. The commander initially received at his disposal a commander’s cupola, which, incidentally, was not available to Soviet tankers on the T-34.

In the commander’s cupola, which provided good all-round visibility, it was planned, in addition to the machine gun, from which the tank commander himself could fire, to establish a range finder. An optical rangefinder would provide accurate target designation for firing at moving objects located at a distance of up to two kilometers. This innovative solution by French designers was aimed at making full use of the capabilities of a 75-mm gun with a barrel length of 32 caliber. In addition to the optical rangefinder, the G1 tanks were supposed to get a new telescopic sight with a 4-fold increase, which together would make it possible to use the gun effectively over the entire practical range.


Model of the tank Renault G1R

At the same time, the appetites of the Infantry Administration, which was the customer of the new tank, were not limited to one rangefinder. The developers of the new medium tank were required to provide the combat vehicle with the possibility of firing at a speed of up to 10 km / h while driving over rough terrain. The French borrowed this idea from the British, and the latter, in turn, were seriously impressed by the demonstrative Kiev maneuvers of 1935. In relation to the G1 project, the new requirements of the military assumed serious work and a change in the chassis of the tank, or work in the most promising direction at that time - the development and installation of an arms stabilizer on the tank.

The French military most relied on the success of Renault. Not without reason, given that this company was one of the leaders in French tank construction. It was this company that gave the world the Renault FT-17 - the first in stories tank classic layout. The model, which was developed by Renault engineers, received the designation G1R. The tank of this project outwardly looked the most aesthetically pleasing, distinguished by smooth contours of the hull and turret. The armor plates were located at rational angles of inclination and provided very good protection for the crew, components and assemblies of the combat vehicle. The hemispherical tower was located in the middle of the hull. Initially, it was planned to put a 47-mm SA35 gun inside. Also considered was the option of installing another of the same guns in the hull, but over time they abandoned this idea.

The chassis of the medium infantry tank G1R included 6 dual track rollers for each side, the guides were the front wheels, the rear ones were the leading ones. To improve the patency of the tank on the ground, the designers decided to use a double caterpillar track. This “tricky” move of the developers had a completely prosaic explanation - it allowed avoiding the design of a new wide track. The suspension of the rollers on the G1R tank was originally developed by the torsion bar. At the same time, all open tank suspension elements, as well as track rollers, had additional protection in the form of bulwarks.


Model of the tank Renault G1R

An important feature of the G1R was the initially wide body, which made it easy to fit into constantly changing specifications. So in 1938, a proposal was made to establish a new tower with more powerful weapons. The wide body made it possible to place any tower of the options already proposed by different companies. Therefore, by the summer of 1938, Renault became a clear favorite. It was believed that mass production of the G1R tank could be deployed in 1,5-2 years.

Along with the installation of a new turret with a 75-mm gun, the mass of the combat vehicle grew. Given the fact that the tank had a crew of four and a minimum ammunition load, its combat weight still could not be less than 28 tons. Over time, the French military brought the specification to 30 tons. But Renault itself believed that the combat weight of the tank would be up to 32 tons. According to this indicator, the tank seriously circumvented both the T-34 and the German PzKpfw IV early series. In this case, the engine became a problem, since back in 1938 the French military hoped to get a car with a maximum speed on the highway up to 40 km / h. And this is with the requirements for a circular reservation of 60 mm. In the end, the work on creating the tank slowed down significantly and almost completely stopped over time. Before the war itself, financial support from the military almost completely stopped and the project remained forever paper.

The fate of the project of the medium tank G1


By 1939, four companies left the design race at once. So the company SEAM by that time already had a ready-made prototype without a tower and, accordingly, weapons. The project was considered one of the closest to completion, but was stopped in 1939 due to lack of funding. Three BDR companies (Baudet-Donon-Roussel), Lorraine de Dietrich and Fouga also left the project in 1939. At the same time, the companies BDR and Lorraine de Dietrich had by that time only wooden and metal models, respectively. All three companies stopped development in favor of programs from other designers.


Model tank Renault G1R from the game World of Tanks

By the end of 1939, the only company that continued to work on the medium infantry tank was Renault. The development of a combat vehicle was carried out with the direct participation of Louis Renault and continued until 1940 until the complete military defeat of France after the attack of Nazi Germany. Moreover, by that time only a wooden model was ready.

It is worth noting that, despite the fact that the G1 medium tank project has remained unrealized, it is still of historical interest. At the time of the work, the G1 tank was by far the most advanced and advanced development of the French tank industry. In terms of armament and mobility, the new medium tank was comparable to the best medium tanks of the Allies - the Soviet T-34 and the American M4 Sherman. Like the Soviet thirty-four, the tank was distinguished by good ballistic armor with armor plates at rational angles of inclination. In some respects, the unrealized French project even surpassed the best Allied tanks. The installation of an optical rangefinder, a gun stabilization system and the implementation of a semi-automatic tank gun loading mechanism were considered innovative solutions.

Unfortunately, the French military did not receive a new tank. There were several explanations for this. Firstly, the representatives of the Infantry Administration, who almost every year changed the specification and performance characteristics of the new machine, can be blamed for the fact that the project was never implemented. This was largely due to an understandable desire to get the best tank in the world, but there is a limit to everything. At the same time, the desire of the French military to get an average tank in the best way combining protection, weapons and mass drove all the designers into an almost deadlock situation. A separate problem was the technical equipment of the new tank. And if the French companies could cope with the transmission and the design of the chassis, then the French industry was able to design a sufficiently powerful diesel engine only after the war. Another problem of the project could be too many participating firms. It was already some kind of excessive competition, perhaps if two or three companies worked on the project, the design would go faster.


Model tank BDR G1B from the game World of Tanks

It so happened that none of the projects of the medium tank G1 was not built in finished form and did not get to mass production. The tank, which was supposed to be a serious competitor to Hitler’s cars and tanks of the Allies, remained an unrealized project, whose only life was possible only in computer games. Such developments in 1940, French engineers and designers just could not imagine. The World of Tanks game, popular in the territory of the former USSR and in the world, was reached by two tanks created under this program: the Renault G1 medium tank and the BDR G1B heavy tank.
Author:
Photos used:
wiki.wargaming.net
78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 17 May 2020 05: 30 New
    10
    ... you can blame the representatives of the Infantry Administration, who almost every year changed the specification and performance characteristics for a new machine. In many ways it was due to an understandable desire to get the best tank in the world, but there is a limit to everything. Duc, it's not for nothing that they say that "the best is the enemy of the good!" ... yes
    1. iouris
      iouris 17 May 2020 12: 53 New
      +3
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      This was largely due to an understandable desire to get the best tank in the world.

      This is an impossible goal. Weapons should be made for a specific task within the framework of time and budget constraints. In 1937 and September 1939, the French could have taken Berlin if the democratically elected president of the Republic had set such a task. There was no such task. And then why tanks?
      1. Andrei Nikolaevich
        Andrei Nikolaevich 18 May 2020 11: 45 New
        +1
        the French could take Berlin, "
        Do not make me laugh. The French and Berlin. ) It was not for nothing that the Germans, when signing the surrender, laughed at the presence of the French general, on behalf of the "victorious country." The maximum that the French were capable of was to get away from France and continue the "battles" with fascism in Africa. Not forgetting to surrender Paris and show the way to the Germans. About their "resistance" in general, I am silent. Spoil a couple of electrical outlets in the rooms of the Reich officers. That's all "resistance" Blame. Forgot about the squadron "Normandie_NEman" One squadron ...
        The maximum that the French army is capable of fighting in Africa with the Zulus tribes.
        1. nks
          nks 18 May 2020 14: 45 New
          +1
          https://youtu.be/h2xDLJHLfLk?t=267
          The Germans had no reason to laugh - study the Soviet classics.

          it’s possible to laugh only at you, although this is a sad laugh when instead of at least a basic study of history, fables are spread.
          1. Andrei Nikolaevich
            Andrei Nikolaevich 18 May 2020 15: 26 New
            -1
            Your arguments are ridiculous. Excuse me. What is the battle that the French army won against the Wehrmacht?
            1. nks
              nks 18 May 2020 15: 43 New
              +1
              The arguments of what? I wrote about surrender to you, not about battles. If you retell a fable, the fictitiousness of which is easy to verify, then I see no reason to discuss with you more serious historical issues.
        2. Petrik66
          Petrik66 2 August 2020 18: 17 New
          0
          "Normandie Niemen" - the regiment, otherwise, I completely agree.
    2. Fat
      Fat 17 May 2020 13: 14 New
      -1
      The best enemy of the good ... Duc, why the hell, sorry
  2. Kote Pan Kokhanka
    Kote Pan Kokhanka 17 May 2020 05: 42 New
    10
    Thank you, Sergey!
    I'd add on my own that the Word of Tanks cardboard tanks are good, but the real and paper characteristics are not comparable in life !!!
    One thing is the aspirations of the designers, another serial iron, which is one third worse than stated in the drawings !!!
    Assuming a French reservation scheme, cast armored parts are mounted on the body of the structure with bolts or welding! So 32 tons is at least, if not all 34 !!!
    Thanks again, repair company IN a good day !!!
    1. mark1
      mark1 17 May 2020 06: 03 New
      0
      Based on the experience of creating MT-TB (T-111) and KV-13, adjusted for the French project, 32 tons is completely unrealistic - 36-40 tons.
      1. Kuroneko
        Kuroneko 17 May 2020 06: 21 New
        +6
        Quote: mark1
        Based on the experience of creating MT-TB (T-111) and KV-13, adjusted for the French project, 32 tons is completely unrealistic - 36-40 tons.

        Why is it unrealistic? In many ways, it was embodied by the British with their Mk.III "Valentine". They also managed to fit a 75-mm long-barreled cannon into the Mk XI, while practically maintaining the weight of a light tank (and the armor of the "Valentine" was quite cannon-proof at the time of its creation).
        1. mark1
          mark1 17 May 2020 06: 31 New
          +2
          Make adjustments for dimensions (reserved volume), molded case (+ 15%), a more powerful engine and transmission, respectively, and study the Soviet experience (our experts are some of the best and then the rest of the British)
          1. Kuroneko
            Kuroneko 17 May 2020 07: 06 New
            +3
            Quote: mark1
            and study all the same Soviet experience

            Oh, thank you, Sensei.
            I’ll go to study what kind of tanks the USSR did. And then, in addition to the tanks of Porokhovschikov, Lebedenko and Mendeleev, I don’t remember and don’t know anything. = _ =
            But seriously, let me remind you that Valentine turned out to be so successful and in demand in the realities of our Eastern Front that its production was extended for several years until the 44th year - solely for the purpose of supplying the USSR under Lend-Lease. It is unlikely that the commanders would ask for a bad tank for the army - so this representative of the "English experience" for some reason more than satisfied them.
            PS Well, I will also note that without the M.1940 tank there would be no BT or T-34. So don't talk about "here we are, how smart!" Smart people were born not only in the USSR. Our specialists adopted foreign experience in the same way - precisely in those aspects where the bourgeoisie were really better at that time.
            1. Mavrikiy
              Mavrikiy 17 May 2020 10: 29 New
              0
              Quote: Kuroneko
              extended for several years right up to the 44th year - solely for the purpose of supplying the USSR under Lend-Lease.
              As always crap ally. repeat
              1. Bormanxnumx
                Bormanxnumx 17 May 2020 16: 13 New
                +5
                Quote: Mavrikiy
                As always crap ally.

                The list of "goods" supplied under Lend-Lease was agreed with the USSR. Therefore, if "Valentines" were so bad, they would not have just been abandoned like the "Tetrarchs".
                1. mark1
                  mark1 18 May 2020 13: 28 New
                  +2
                  Quote: BORMAN82
                  Therefore, if "Valentines" were so bad, they would not have just been abandoned like the "Tetrarchs".

                  This is not the point, just this type was the most acceptable of the proposed British nomenclature, this is what it means "... what are rich ..." "Valentine" (and "Matilda") went as an infantry escort tank and of course was better than the ersatz T-70 , so he replaced him. ("Matilda" and "Churchill" were also used as infantry, and in this they were better than the KV-1 (in terms of reliability), but as tanks of breakthrough and development of operational success, they are not suitable. It is not correct to refer to the quality of performance given the conditions in which our tank industry found itself
                  1. Alexey RA
                    Alexey RA 18 May 2020 16: 40 New
                    0
                    Quote: mark1
                    "Valentine" (and "Matilda") went like an infantry escort tank and, of course, was better than the ersatz T-70, so he replaced him.

                    He-he-he ... and also "Valentine" was registered in the reconnaissance battalions of the cavalry formations, where this infantry the tank managed to overtake enemy mechanized columns (I read a report where the "Valentines" overtook the departing column of German vehicles and tanks and set up an ambush).
            2. mark1
              mark1 17 May 2020 11: 01 New
              0
              Quote: Kuroneko
              I’ll go to study what kind of tanks the USSR did.

              A very commendable intention, I approve. For example, I regularly learn something new in those places where everything seems to be "trampled down" so go for it!
              Quote: Kuroneko
              Let me remind you that Valentine turned out to be so successful and in demand in the realities of our Eastern Front that its production was extended for several years until the 44th year - solely for the purpose of supplying the USSR under Lend-Lease.

              As the saying goes - "... what they are rich in ..." and "... without fish and ..."
              Yes, ours, like everyone else, adopted the experience of others (and adopted), but by the end of the 30s they had gone far from dumb copying and created their own (very strong) school
            3. Fat
              Fat 17 May 2020 13: 25 New
              +2
              Father! The concept of France taxied, they had very good products. And ideas at the level .... I will not develop.
            4. Fat
              Fat 18 May 2020 10: 09 New
              0
              Mdya really were the best .... Yeah, all the designers writhed in horror at the tank of the future
            5. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 18 May 2020 11: 55 New
              +1
              Quote: Kuroneko
              It is unlikely that the commanders would ask for a bad tank for the army - so this representative of the "English experience" for some reason more than satisfied them.

              Mk III, as an infantry (or, adhering to the weight classification, light), the tank, of course, has the most dense overall layout and among this type of tanks is, undoubtedly, the most successful, although the removal of brake drums outside the hull is certainly incorrect. The experience with the Mk III tank ends the discussion about the feasibility of the use of automotive components for tank building.

              Of all the existing light tanks, the Mk III tank is the most successful. We can say that in the conditions of 1940-1943. it was the British who created the type of infantry tank.

              © Major General of the Tank Engineering Service, Doctor of Technical Sciences N.I. Gruzdev. 1945
              And here is the assessment of "Valentine" by the head of the GABTU and the commander of the armored and mechanized forces of the Ground Forces:
              Of the currently available armaments of the Red Army, tank equipment should be the American medium tank Sherman M4A2 with artillery. armament in the form of a 76,2 mm cannon of high power and the Canadian light tank "Valentine" MK-9 with a 57-mm tank gun limited rollback ...
              The indicated tank models compare favorably with the domestic ones in terms of ease of operation, significantly increased overhaul life, ease of maintenance and current repair, and at the same time their armament, armor and mobility make it possible to solve the whole range of tasks put forward by armored forces ...
              According to numerous reviews from tank units, these types of tanks can be considered the best for serving in peacetime, mastering military equipment ...
              1. Alf
                Alf 18 May 2020 18: 47 New
                0
                Quote: Alexey RA
                And here is the assessment of "Valentine" by the head of the GABTU and the commander of the armored and mechanized forces of the Ground Forces:

                The mark is excellent, but everything spoils the last paragraph ... But what if the war?
                1. Alexey RA
                  Alexey RA 18 May 2020 19: 16 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Alf
                  The mark is excellent, but everything spoils the last paragraph ... But what if the war?

                  And if war, then you need to read the previous paragraph:
                  ... and at the same time their armament, armor and mobility make it possible to solve the whole set of tasks put forward by the armored forces ...

                  That is, "Sherman" and "Valentine" in combat performance characteristics are quite satisfied with the GABTU, but at the same time they also allow them to be successfully operated in peacetime. And further Fedorenko demands to bring the operational characteristics of domestic tanks to the level of "foreign cars".
                  1. Alf
                    Alf 18 May 2020 19: 18 New
                    0
                    these types of tanks can be considered the best for service in peacetime,

                    Well, if you understand this phrase so, then arguing with you is useless ...
                  2. Kuroneko
                    Kuroneko 19 May 2020 09: 13 New
                    0
                    Quote: Alexey RA
                    And further Fedorenko demands to bring the operational characteristics of domestic tanks to the level of "foreign cars".

                    Thank you, Alex. You, as usual, speak out on the case, correctly grasping the thought.
                    Sobsno, I hinted at this, mentioning Valentine with a counterargument "our specialists are one of the best and then other Englishmen" in response to a friend mark1.
      2. mark1
        mark1 17 May 2020 06: 21 New
        +1
        I wonder how the French planned to aim the gun, especially in the vertical plane
        1. Fat
          Fat 18 May 2020 10: 32 New
          0
          Because the tank is not a tank. Ae floodlight hochuhov. ...
          1. Alf
            Alf 18 May 2020 18: 48 New
            0
            Quote: Thick
            Because the tank is not a tank. Ae floodlight hochuhov. ...

            Is it possible in Russian?
  3. Kuroneko
    Kuroneko 17 May 2020 06: 06 New
    +7
    that is, almost all the major engineering companies of those years were connected to the project, including Lorraine-dietrich and Renault.

    Repair was crowned by painting the car in lizard green. The breed of the car was unknown, but Adam Kazimirovich claimed that it was "Loren-Dietrich." As evidence, he pinned a copper plaque with the Lorenditrih brand name to the car radiator. It remained to proceed to the private rental, which Kozlevich had long dreamed of.
  4. Ros 56
    Ros 56 17 May 2020 06: 56 New
    -12
    Regardless of the technical part of the article. Thirty-four was one, one will remain and no Western pseudo-historians should sing along in their opuses about the role of WWII participants and their technique. stop
    1. Stas1973
      Stas1973 17 May 2020 13: 28 New
      -7
      There was one type of medium tank that was used throughout the war, despite all its flaws. There was simply no other. And no more. And therefore - legendary. Not to a tank like a sabzh, but to those who fought on this product. Died, but won. They bow and legend, and not the wagon, which was written off as scrap in 1940 and only the war did not allow replacing it with a more suitable model, which was produced in five copies by the beginning of the Second World War. And yes, I took part in the battles.
      1. Fat
        Fat 18 May 2020 11: 13 New
        0
        Many times I read the message even .. I thought. Event.....
  5. Eug
    Eug 17 May 2020 07: 03 New
    11
    The article once again confirms that a competent technical specification largely determines the success of the development, and irrational requirements can "kill" any prospect.
  6. geologist
    geologist 17 May 2020 08: 25 New
    +1
    Greatness of France! My father read de Gaulle's memoirs in the original, and in a feast of mood he generally lost his way from his native Tambov to the Gascon. After all, they could have made a miracle tank, but they were late and spent time, money on super links and super fortresses, and not very useful against panzerdivisions.
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex 17 May 2020 10: 01 New
      +8
      I think your dad (emphasis, as usual on the last syllable) has been telling quite a lot of flattering and good things during the periods of Gascon eloquence about the English. Indeed, in fact, it’s on their conscience that the programs of the rearmament of aviation and ground forces frustrated by France After all, when the Britons removed from the Germans part-time restrictions on the development of the fleet, the French were forced to throw a significant part of their funds into the fleet, which without this British setup was quite suitable for France. The Maginot Line, of course, is also a megaproject, and France itself, having allowed the remilitarization of the Rhine zone, has planted a pretty pig for itself, but you won’t be able to ignore the British’s participation in the disruption of French weapons programs in the mid-late 30s.
      1. geologist
        geologist 17 May 2020 10: 48 New
        +1
        He adored his French friends and refused to shake hands with a German at the club. The French shouted "Bravo!" in this episode. The defeat of France was painful. My jokes about de Gaulle in the role of the cadet Sir Winston were suppressed with rage.
        1. Stas1973
          Stas1973 17 May 2020 14: 37 New
          -4
          We can also add that the first tanks with a rational tilt of armor are not with us and not with the T34, but with the French. And the first tank with a diesel engine is also not with us, but among the Japanese. And with us, this is again not T34, but BT7M, created for the NKVD troops and produced in very large quantities
          1. Alf
            Alf 17 May 2020 20: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: Stas1973
            and BT7M, created for the NKVD troops and released in very large quantities

            This covered my colleague!
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 17 May 2020 14: 45 New
          +4
          De Gaulle landed on the coast of his native France only two weeks later
          after the start of the Allied operation. When in France was already
          half a million American and English soldiers.
          Further, its parts only interfered with the general offensive. They drank
          in towns along with the liberated people, disrupting the offensive schedule.
          De Gaulle's memoirs are a lie. Like the whole "history of the liberation of France",
          which he came up with when he became president.
          1. iouris
            iouris 17 May 2020 18: 13 New
            +3
            Quote: voyaka uh
            landed on the coast of his native France

            For him, France was rather "non-native". In his "native" France, he was declared a traitor and deserter. According to the laws of wartime, collaborators could shoot him. "Native" France during the war fought on the side of Hitler. And she worked for the glory of the Nazi (and European) Reich (after the war, the factories of Renault, a big fan of Hitler, were nationalized, and he himself was simply beaten in a slammer). Exupery wrote about this: he tried to imagine how the future meeting with these "fans" would go, and could not ...
            1. abc_alex
              abc_alex 18 May 2020 01: 45 New
              0
              Quote: voyaka uh
              De Gaulle landed on the coast of his native France only two weeks later
              after the start of the Allied operation. When in France was already
              half a million American and English soldiers.
              Further, its parts only interfered with the general offensive. They drank
              in towns along with the liberated people, disrupting the offensive schedule.
              De Gaulle's memoirs are a lie. Like the whole "history of the liberation of France",
              which he came up with when he became president.


              In all fairness, the prospect of a war side by side with the British could hardly have aroused any particular enthusiasm in any of the French military. There was a lot of "debt" behind the brits.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 18 May 2020 11: 56 New
                +1
                The British and French fought side-by-side throughout the First World War.
                And together they retreated to Normandy in 1940. Everything was fine.
                The question was Da Gaulle's incredible egoism. He would rather be strangled
                (which would be more useful in 1944) than it fought under the leadership of the Americans.
                ---
                De Gaulle, in fairness, cannot be denied personal courage.
                Which he proved in 1940. But tyranny was pressing in his decisions.
                1. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 18 May 2020 15: 38 New
                  0
                  Quote: voyaka uh
                  The British and French fought side-by-side throughout the First World War.
                  And together they retreated to Normandy in 1940. Everything was fine.
                  The question was Da Gaulle's incredible egoism. He would rather be strangled
                  (which would be more useful in 1944) than it fought under the leadership of the Americans.
                  ---
                  De Gaulle, in fairness, cannot be denied personal courage.
                  Which he proved in 1940. But tyranny was pressing in his decisions.


                  This "tyranny and selfishness" of De Gaulle, incidentally, led France to the camp of victorious countries. And as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. So I would ask :)

                  And the British have so deceived the French since 1935 that the French pilots quite peacefully fought in the Luftwaffe, without any remorse. The mere execution of the French fleet by the British was worth any retreat.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 18 May 2020 16: 01 New
                    0
                    "French pilots fought quite calmly as part of
                    Luftwaffe without any remorse. "///
                    ----
                    Remorse is not peculiar to the French at all.
                    I drank good red wine, ate delicious seafood ...
                    and it all went away. I like to relax in France. Beautiful country.
                    But I would definitely prefer to fight in the English army,
                    if you choose from two.
                    1. abc_alex
                      abc_alex 18 May 2020 21: 46 New
                      0
                      Quote: voyaka uh

                      Remorse is not peculiar to the French at all.
                      I drank good red wine, ate delicious seafood ...
                      and it all went away. I like to relax in France. Beautiful country.
                      But I would definitely prefer to fight in the English army,
                      if you choose from two.


                      It’s interesting, would I write something like this about the Jews, would I be sent to an eternal ban right away, or would I be put on a blackboard for a start? Warrior, do not be like. Do not paint.

                      The British army in WW2 covered itself with more shame than glory. The French at least tried. The British didn't even try. Until 1944 they sat under a bench on the islands and did not show their nose from there. If the eastern front did not divert most of the resources from the Germans, Rommel would have expelled them from Africa. They would stick around in the "main theater of military operations of WW2" - in Burma. If the USSR had not gone to Eastern Europe and Germany, the British army would have remained on the islands.
                      1. voyaka uh
                        voyaka uh 18 May 2020 23: 09 New
                        +1
                        "The English army in WW2 covered itself more with shame than glory" ///
                        ----
                        Here are those hello! The British army managed to defend their country from foreign invasion.
                        German soldiers did not set foot on British soil (except for the islet of Jersey).
                        This is the main task of ANY army.
                  2. nks
                    nks 18 May 2020 16: 08 New
                    -1
                    Quote: abc_alex
                    French pilots quite calmly fought in the Luftwaffe

                    Which ones?



                    Quote: abc_alex
                    The mere execution of the French fleet by the British was worth any retreat

                    The execution is fleet - this is a pretty exaggeration. In principle, shaving can be understood, but it turned out really stupid and ugly.
                    1. Alexey RA
                      Alexey RA 18 May 2020 17: 00 New
                      0
                      Quote: nks
                      The shooting of the fleet is a pretty exaggeration.

                      Taking into account the Dakar, no exaggeration. All the new "big pots" of the French fleet - "Dunkirk", "Strasbourg" and "Richelieu", came under lime fire.
                      1. nks
                        nks 18 May 2020 17: 47 New
                        0
                        In general, ~ 10% of the French fleet was attacked in Dakar and Mers-el-Kebir, so talking about even the potential neutralization of the French fleet as such is hardly possible. As a result, the Britons were able to sink (completely disable) one of the oldest FR battleships and 1-2 two submarines, while killing a couple of thousand Frenchmen (as you know, having opened fire in Mers al-Kebir before the time indicated by them - therefore, in Dakar they did not even talk to them), but at the same time several hundred of them + material damage RN. That is, the military effect is practically zero, and the diplomatic one is negative.
                      2. Alexey RA
                        Alexey RA 18 May 2020 19: 21 New
                        0
                        Quote: nks
                        As a result, the Britons were able to sink (completely disable) one of the oldest FR battleships and 1-2 two submarines

                        What about Dunkirk? wink
                        Half running new LCs in the red.
                      3. nks
                        nks 19 May 2020 14: 06 New
                        0
                        Keywords sink (completely disable) In particular, Dunkirk was repaired - if someone really needed it, then it would be done faster. And so it was already clear then that the war would not last six months.
                        You see, the military usually perform specific tasks of different levels, and not just beat wall to wall.
                        I can’t say 100%, but the Britons probably had the task of neutralizing the French fleet.
                        In general, he was neutral at that moment - by agreement with the Germans, he remained French and remained neutral.
                        France emerged from the war and ceased to be an ally of the UK, but did not become an ally of Germany. But what about the Britons before the Franco-German treaties -
                        they reasonably fear the appearance of French ships as an adversary. Before the war, RN did not have a significant advantage over the French,
                        Italian, remaining a serious force, was frankly third. Britain and France completely dominated Italy in the Mediterranean
                        and the Atlantic, Britain vs. Italy + France was already just weaker. Britain needed to pull the French fleet to its maximum and
                        at least confirm its neutrality. As a result, the Britons actually started a war against France, without declaring it. British attacks on French territory,
                        occupied by the Germans, are quite legitimate, but the attack of the French ships in neutral status - no. That is, the Britons got themselves in opposition to the FR fleet,
                        having sunk one large and old pennant. I repeat, I understand the promise of the Britons themselves, but what was done was done clumsily and they were just lucky.
                2. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 18 May 2020 21: 24 New
                  0
                  Quote: nks
                  Which ones?

                  Which were unlucky to serve in the colonies.

                  Quote: nks
                  The shooting of the fleet is a pretty exaggeration. In principle, shaving can be understood, but it turned out really stupid and ugly.

                  You can understand anyone. The question is to evaluate the justification of actions within the framework of historicism. After all, the French did not resist even where the British did not show elephant stubbornness, the matter was the disarmament of ships and the transfer of critical gun sites to the British Deep. representation. And where the admirals did not want to show sophistication of the mind, people died. The French, too, were in a difficult situation, the sailors and officers in France remained in the occupation of the family and it was not that happy to give them to the occupation administration. The Germans then set an ultimatum very explicit.
                  1. nks
                    nks 19 May 2020 14: 14 New
                    0
                    Quote: abc_alex
                    Which were unlucky to serve in the colonies.

                    You want to say that all the pilots who served in the colonies joined the Luftwaffe service together? Where did you read that?

                    Quote: abc_alex
                    The French didn’t resist

                    There was no such thing - everywhere they resisted, they have the oath. Just in Alexandria, the Britons were smart enough to agree and confirm a neutral status, and then they already passed under the command of De Gaulle

                    Quote: abc_alex

                    . The French, too, were in a difficult situation, the sailors and officers in France remained in the occupation of the family and it was not that happy to give them to the occupation administration. The Germans then set an ultimatum very explicit

                    mmm. What is the ultimatum? The French in this case had a very simple unpleasant situation - they were attacked by ships of another state.
      2. Fat
        Fat 18 May 2020 11: 50 New
        -1
        Umlaut Aha.
      3. nks
        nks 18 May 2020 14: 43 New
        0
        Wow, couch warrior - again you are talking about what you do not know. The sofa was better repaired. First, De Gaulle himself writes little directly about the hostilities (the details are practically only about the capture of Paris). For this, there are historians who work with primary documents. Do not believe De Gaulle - read Churchill, who, by the way, is difficult to suspect of sympathy for him. In particular, in a letter to Roosevelt dated November 24, 1944, he writes "The Brilliant Success of the French in the South." Churchill's memoirs contain details about the actions of the FR units in Italy. By the way, it was Churchill who insisted on the postponement of the landing in southern France, which was carried out for the most part by French forces and which was originally planned before or simultaneously with Overlord - the British needed these parts in Italy.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 18 May 2020 17: 15 New
          0
          Quote: nks
          Churchill's memoirs contain details about the actions of French units in Italy.

          Here recently they just wrote about successful operations of French units in Italy - against civilians (Marocchinate). smile
          1. nks
            nks 18 May 2020 17: 53 New
            0
            AND? I haven’t read it, but I suspect that it is a fake, as usual. The French do not deny that there were disgusting cases of violence (it does not matter that they were Moroccans - the French are responsible for them), but in the form in which pseudo-patriots like to represent them here - this is nothing more than likening to Nazi propagandists.
  7. Fat
    Fat 17 May 2020 13: 38 New
    0
    Mdya ... Well said, right. Little taken into account. Well now it doesn’t matter.
    France has a special place.
    They were the ones who designed the bomb. Even before the war .... It's good that the Germans merged them, otherwise it was not in Japan; would be "atomic house" ....
    1. shinobi
      shinobi 18 May 2020 10: 37 New
      0
      Uh, but more about the bomb?
      1. Fat
        Fat 18 May 2020 12: 43 New
        0
        Impossible, Friend. This is a long story in more detail. It is possible for Olegich with an archive and to prove
        And the bomb, forgive the Almighty, was invented in Kharkov
  • Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 17 May 2020 10: 33 New
    0
    Quote: geologist
    Could they make a miracle tank?

    We could and did "Eclair", though it was already in another life. repeat
    1. Free wind
      Free wind 17 May 2020 12: 06 New
      +2
      So after the war they raced, at a gallop in tank building. The first-born for experiments ARL-44, with a powerful ship’s cannon, then actually the Royal Tiger, ELK, AMX with automatic loader, this is in the early 50's, and of course Leclerc-eclair.
      1. Fat
        Fat 18 May 2020 14: 13 New
        -1
        To you Le clerk was called, well, damn it.
    2. Fat
      Fat 18 May 2020 13: 00 New
      0
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Quote: geologist
      Could they make a miracle tank?

      We could and did "Eclair", though it was already in another life. repeat

      Yes
    3. Fat
      Fat 18 May 2020 14: 23 New
      0
      Interesting let me look through !!!
  • Mavrikiy
    Mavrikiy 17 May 2020 10: 24 New
    +3
    The author, where is the performance characteristics, even if the initial ones? request
    In terms of armament and mobility, the new medium tank was comparable to the best medium tanks of the Allies - the Soviet T-34 and the American M4 Sherman.
    Well, it's to school ... Maybe they’ll explain that the French 75 mm gun with a barrel length of 32 caliber. not an identity since March 1941, a 34-mm F-76,2 gun (34 model) with a barrel length of 1941 caliber began to be installed on the T-41,5 and the more so 75 mm "Sherman"
    1. Alf
      Alf 17 May 2020 21: 01 New
      +1
      Yes, and shoot from 32 calibers at two thousand ... Well, if only on the T-1.
    2. Fat
      Fat 18 May 2020 12: 05 New
      0
      Friendly, well, it doesn’t matter in bulk. 34-85 survived a hundred years ..
      Something like this...
    3. Fat
      Fat 18 May 2020 18: 48 New
      0
      Sorry, brother ... Everything was not good
      1. Fat
        Fat 18 May 2020 18: 50 New
        0
        What could .....
  • Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 17 May 2020 13: 34 New
    +1
    Normal make the tank, albeit not super perfect, and then upgrade. First you need to get a certain number of tanks in case of the current war, and only then think about how to get perfection. The French seized greed and faith that Hitler would first trample on the USSR.
    1. Fat
      Fat 18 May 2020 22: 09 New
      0
      I hate the French - contempt for their military meant a lot. They did not want to respect their army and despised officers. For which they were justly punished by the "Teutonic genius" Quickly))))
  • PilotS37
    PilotS37 17 May 2020 13: 42 New
    +7
    Firstly, the representatives of the Infantry Administration, who almost every year changed the specification and performance characteristics of the new machine, can be blamed for the fact that the project was never implemented. This was largely due to an understandable desire to get the best tank in the world, but there is a limit to everything.

    In the USSR at that time they followed a fundamentally different path: "the main thing is to get at least something serial by a strictly defined deadline. "The deadlines, of course, were often not met, but on the whole the picture was exactly this: before the War, and then during it, new modern equipment was supplied to the troops in large quantities. This technique was often" raw " , with a lot of problems, but she was ...
    Today this principle is actively criticized. At the same time, quite weighty (from the position of afterthought) evidence is presented that it would be possible to stretch with the terms of launching the same T-34 into production, but get a "full-fledged" T-34M, and not suffering from a bunch of congenital defects of the T-34 76]. It is difficult to object here, since all the shortcomings of the technique obviously worsened the conditions for the "work" of its direct users and - ultimately - led to more (than could be in theory) the number of deaths on the battlefield.
    But here we see what the inability to draw in time "the red line" leads to: on the one hand - a problematic, but massive and advanced in many respects tank, and on the other - a bare seat ...
  • strannik1985
    strannik1985 17 May 2020 18: 51 New
    +1
    In the commander's cupola, which provided a good

    The crew - 4 people, two in the tower, the commander - the gunner and loader. The meaning of the turret in a separate commander, he simply does not have time to command the tank and direct the gun.
  • Ethnarchist
    Ethnarchist 18 May 2020 10: 25 New
    +1
    The article is not complete, you need to add the comments of experienced wot players, and add the characteristics of the whole French branch: laughing
  • Fat
    Fat 18 May 2020 13: 03 New
    +1
    [quote = Tolstoy] [quote = Mavrikiy] [quote = geologist] Could they make a miracle tank [/ quote]
    We could and did "Eclair", though it was already in another life. repeat[/ Quote]
    Good car
  • deddem
    deddem 17 June 2020 21: 32 New
    0
    If you believe the memorandum of the inspector of tank troops Keller dated May 1940, more was done on the Renault tank than a wooden mockup - the prototype was made of armored steel, a gearbox, and two engines were on bench tests.
    This information is in principle beaten according to other documents: in the act of offsetting between Renault and Schneider for materials confiscated by the Germans, a set of hull armor for G1 is mentioned (at a book value approximately corresponds to the set for one B1bis tank after cutting, but before final processing); there are also a number of letters from the state design bureau ARL, where Renault is required to give them three motors (two from G1 and one experimental) to equip the pre-production B1ter cords, as a more urgent and urgent work.
    So in September 1940, the G1 from Renault could well go on sea trials (without armament, of course, this was all very bad).
  • Dedok
    Dedok 19 June 2020 10: 20 New
    0
    "...A separate problem was the technical equipment of the new tank. And if the French companies could cope with the transmission and chassis design, then the French industry was able to design a sufficiently powerful diesel engine only after the war ... "

    I want to once again stop here at this place:
    so that they do not write here (VO) - there are no documents confirming the nature of the appearance of V-2, and it appeared - "out of the blue", but this does not happen in mechanical engineering.
    At the same time, I would like to note the role of the state (USSR) in the formation of our technology: promising samples were purchased, during the Great Depression - designers were invited, the latest equipment was bought ... when private companies are developing, then this cannot be done we see what the article is about.